Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jared Mondschein, Senior Research Fellow, US Studies Centre, University of Sydney

When colonial Americans declared their independence on July 4 1776, they rejected more than British rule. They explicitly denounced the British form of government and the unlegislated norms, traditions and conventions a royal head of government entailed.

The recent hearings of the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6 2021 attack on the US Capitol has made clear that efforts to resist the monarchical model remain unfinished.

The central question at hand: is the nation’s democracy ensured by allegiance to its constitution or to its leaders?

Read more:
Jan. 6 hearing gives primetime exposure to violent footage and dramatic evidence – the question is, to what end?

Competing allegiances

The sixth and most recent hearing by the Select Committee into the January 6 Capitol riots got to the heart of the matter on allegiances.

Liz Cheney, the committee’s lead Republican lawmaker, said that among the more than 1,000 witnesses who testified before their committee, some have faced intimidation to remain “loyal” to former President Trump.

US citizens don’t swear oaths of loyalty to any monarch, individual or party – they swear allegiance to a constitution treated by most Americans with a level of reverence otherwise reserved for religious entities.

To this day, practically every single US government official vows to support and defend the US Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic.

Nearly 20 hours’ worth of public hearings by the committee has demonstrated that for many members of the Trump administration – most notably Vice President Mike Pence, the White House Counsel’s Office, and Attorney General Bill Barr – swearing allegiance to the constitution was foundational to their public service.

However, for a crucial and powerful minority – most notably Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, President Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, former legal advisor John Eastman, and President Trump himself – it seemingly was not.

Political violence and dissatisfaction with democracy

Recent polling found only half of US citizens are satisfied with their democracy. Two-thirds said the US system of government needs major changes, if not a complete reform.

Such pessimistic attitudes are an outlier when compared, for example, to the 80% of Australians who remain satisfied with their democracy.

Dissatisfaction with democracy and its institutions isn’t new in modern US life.

What’s new, however, is these trends coincide with a marked increase in the number of US citizens who support political violence. This ultimately resulted in the first ever attempted hostile takeover of Congress on January 6.

In May 1995, fewer than 10% of Americans said it was “justified for citizens to take violent action against the government”.

In October 2015, 23% agreed with that statement. In December 2021, almost a year after the January 6 riots, 34% agreed with that statement.

John Eastman, the renowned and once-respected lawyer who advised the Trump re-election campaign, reportedly accepted and anticipated such violence, saying:

there’s been violence in the history of our country in order to protect the democracy, or to protect the republic.

The prevailing view among those seeking to overturn the election results was that the well-being of American democracy depended on the continued reign of President Trump.

Indeed, according to the testimony of Cassidy Hutchinson, former assistant to Trump’s Chief of Staff, rioting was expected and deemed necessary by many in Trump’s inner circle.

Hutchinson’s testimony gave a compelling account indicating that Trump and several others understood the undemocratic and potentially violent nature of their intended actions – planned many weeks in advance – but pursued them undeterred.

To save US democracy, they undermined it.

What has the Jan 6 committee taught us?

The January 6 Committee has shown that US democracy remains reliant on the actions of individuals. As Rep. Bennie Thompson, chair of the House committee, put it:

A handful of election officials in several key states stood between Donald Trump and the upending of democracy.

At the conclusion of the most recent and arguably the most consequential public hearings of the January 6 committee thus far, Cheney reaffirmed the importance of such individuals:

Our nation is preserved by those who abide by their oath to our constitution. Our nation is preserved by those who know the fundamental difference between right and wrong.

When faced with the question of laws versus leaders, the founding fathers chose laws. But many of the people now under investigation by the committee will come under intense scrutiny as to whether they chose loyalty to Trump over laws.

Will Trump be indicted?

Many people would say an obvious path forward now lies with Attorney General Merrick Garland. He must decide whether he will take the unprecedented step of indicting a former president on charges ranging from sedition and inciting a riot to breaking campaign finance laws.

Although an estimated two-thirds of US citizens support prosecuting Trump for his alleged efforts to overturn the election, even some Democrats have expressed concern about the potential pitfalls involved.

There’s the danger of the Department of Justice appearing overly partisan, and also potentially setting a precedent in which opposing political parties indict former presidents as soon as they leave power.

But, perhaps more importantly, one former US federal prosecutor argued there’s also the high likelihood the former president would never be convicted by a jury:

Despite a mountain of evidence that would convict most people many times over, Trump would not be convicted. Criminal convictions require a unanimous verdict. On a 12-person jury, there are going to be Trump supporters.

The US continues to grapple with the anti-royal concept of no individual being above the law.

Where to from here?

The US has a history of reinventing itself in unique and unprecedented ways, most notably by founding a new nation based on laws instead of kings.

This critical moment, in which a former holder of the nation’s most powerful office is under investigation, gives the world’s oldest democracy an opportunity to embrace its revolutionary roots and finally reject monarchy in all its forms.

Read more:
Canada should be preparing for the end of American democracy

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

– ref. The United States was founded on allegiance to laws, not leaders. The Jan 6 rioters turned that on its head – https://theconversation.com/the-united-states-was-founded-on-allegiance-to-laws-not-leaders-the-jan-6-rioters-turned-that-on-its-head-185687

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

University of Canberra Professorial Fellow Michelle Grattan and Emma Larouche, from the University of Canberra’s Media and Communications team discuss the week in politics.

They canvass the crossbenchers’ stoush with the Prime Minister over staff, which is in a holding pattern while Anthony Albanese is overseas.

In Europe, Albanese has joined NATO leaders in calling out China’s behaviour and received blowback from Beijing in return. Has the reset in China-Australia relations come to an end before it really began?

Meanwhile Health Minister Mark Butler has announced an inquiry into Australia’s stocks of COVID vaccines and anti-viral drugs, and purchasing plans. We don’t hear so much about the pandemic these days but deaths remain high.

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. VIDEO: Health Minister Mark Butler’s audit of Australia’s COVID vaccine supplies – https://theconversation.com/video-health-minister-mark-butlers-audit-of-australias-covid-vaccine-supplies-186198

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sara Tolbert, Associate Professor of Science and Environmental Education, University of Canterbury

Plastic Free July has rolled around again and we’ll all be hearing about reducing plastic use in our daily lives. Much of the messaging is targeted toward young people through school and youth-focused messaging. As a science and environmental educator and parent, I often think about what it means to teach young people about environmental action.

A couple of years ago, one of my children came home from school, concerned about pretty much all the world’s biggest environmental problems. She had been learning about sustainability; I asked her to tell me more about it.

Included in her notes about global warming, poaching, deforestation and other grand challenges, were two points about plastics: “Plastic is bad for the environment. I need to recycle more.”

We’re proposing individual solutions to big problems

On the one hand, I was thrilled to see her engaged in a unit on sustainability – a topic teachers often struggle to fit into a densely packed curriculum.

Yet, I worried that the list of actions she identified as solutions to these big problems seemed inconsequential for someone of her age, or outside her realm of power (“don’t poach animals”, for example).

Nearly all were focused on individual behaviour change.

Read more:
We organised a conference for 570 people without using plastic. Here’s how it went

Fortunately, we live in a city in which our waste management system includes a kerbside recycling program. But only certain types of plastic (numbered 1, 2 or 5) can be recycled.

Not all cities and towns in Aotearoa have this infrastructure – though there is a proposal to require councils in towns of more than 1,000 residents to provide this service to urban households.

Globally, only 9% of the 15% of plastic waste collected for recycling is actually recycled.

While there are no readily available figures on how much is recycled in Aotearoa New Zealand, we produce over 17 million tonnes of waste each year, 13 million tonnes of which ends up in landfills.

New Zealand’s rate of recycling is also estimated to be lower than many other developed countries.

Another big part of the problem is New Zealand has limited infrastructure to recycle plastic waste, so gets exported for recycling to economically marginalised countries.

As advocate Tina Ngata has pointed out, this is waste colonialism. That is, we can’t cope with our waste, so we send it off to countries with even fewer resources to cope with it.

We should be encouraging children to discuss the ways in which recycling is a complicated and, at best, partial solution to plastic pollution.

Good intentions don’t always equal good policy

Litterless lunchbox efforts are increasingly common in schools. Such initiatives can help raise children’s awareness of plastic waste.

However, they can easily become a top-down school policy rather than an opportunity for children to deliberate about the ethical and political complexities of plastic waste.

Read more:
COVID-19 has resurrected single-use plastics – are they back to stay?

They can also create conditions through which children may be shamed or singled out for bringing plastic wrapping to school, including disabled children, or children with disabled caregivers, whose well-being depends on their use of some single-use plastics. Anecdotally, many students simply resort to hiding their plastic waste from the teachers.

While social shaming has been used in environmental behaviour modification, it’s not great as an educational tool. Children and youth can feel disempowered when solutions to environmental problems are just outside their reach, or just don’t add up.

According to plastics campaigner for Greenpeace Aotearoa, Juressa Lee, litterless lunches and similar programs are:

“a great start to build the awareness of plastic litter and its impacts and wanting a clean environment at school. But plastic waste is not the same as plastic pollution, and leaving your plastic at home doesn’t put an end to either of those at all, does it?”

Lee believed children were able to grasp the importance of prevention of plastic waste over trying to find solutions after it has been produced and used.

Deflection was intentional

Just 20 companies are responsible for over half of the 130 million metric tonnes of plastic waste produced globally. Fossil fuel companies are doubling down on single-use plastic production as their other markets are being decarbonised.

According to Massey University’s Tricia Farrelly, it is time to “move away from language like littering which is individual responsibility. We need to move onto commercial responsibility”.

The framing of plastic waste reduction as a matter of individual responsibility can be attributed in large part to a “massive deflection campaign” launched in the 1960s by the beverage industry.

This deflection campaign diverted attention away from efforts to regulate plastic producers. People, not corporations, became framed as the polluters. Still today, the same corporations continue to delay and derail regulatory efforts, “all while promoting recycling as a convenient excuse to produce ever more plastic.”

Read more:
Will China’s crackdown on ‘foreign garbage’ force wealthy countries to recycle more of their own waste?

Packaging accounts for 46% of the world’s plastic waste. Currently, some of the world’s top single-use plastic polluters are the same corporations who led the “people as polluters” deflection campaign decades ago.

Environmental education can be a tool for real change

Environmental education, according to Professor Bronwyn Hayward:

“is too often dominated by a moralistic and instrumental view of teaching that aims to modify learners’ lifestyle behaviours, for example, encouraging children to recycle and reduce their energy consumption rather than think critically about political power or asking questions like who has what and why.”

Under public pressure, one of the worst producers of single-use plastic, Coca-Cola, recently pledged to transition 25% of its packaging to reusable packaging by 2030. This is a beginning, but rather than wait for corporations to do the right thing, we can work to build reusable and refillable packaging infrastructure and demand that polluters pay.

Children can learn that holding corporations responsible and demanding regulatory change can have an impact. Let’s commit to helping children collaborate with whānau, iwi, communities and organisations working to make a difference to reduce plastic pollution at the source.

In the end, children and educators feel empowered when they are active participants within intergenerational communities organising for change – rather than being made to feel they are the problem.

Sara Tolbert receives funding from NZCER TLRI.

– ref. Plastic Free July: recycling is the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff. It’s time to teach kids to demand real change from the worst plastic producers – https://theconversation.com/plastic-free-july-recycling-is-the-ambulance-at-the-bottom-of-the-cliff-its-time-to-teach-kids-to-demand-real-change-from-the-worst-plastic-producers-185573

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Roderick Neilsen, Associate Professor TESOL/Languages Education, Deakin University

Burned-out teachers in Australian primary and secondary schools are quitting in droves, while the majority of surveyed teachers are thinking about it.

There are similar fears about Australia’s early childhood educators. However, there is another group of teachers to consider in the teacher shortage crisis: teachers of English as an additional language.

This group was one of the hardest-hit education sectors during the pandemic.
When former Prime Minister Scott Morrison told international students to go home if they could not support themselves, many did.

With migration to Australia on hold, there were no new school students arriving. Virtually the entire workforce of English language schools, TAFE and university language centres found itself out of work.

But even before COVID, the pool of specialist English as an additional language teachers was shrinking due to attrition, retirements and fewer training opportunities. Why is this a problem, and how do we fix it?

Ignoring a key group

Australia has more than 600,000 students who are learners of English as an additional language in government and Catholic schools.

The diversity of learners includes refugees and migrants to Australia and Indigenous learners.

Over the past two decades, the federal government has handed responsibility for teaching English as an additional language to the states and territories. This has seen support for English language learning either reduced or abolished. Recent Gonski funding reforms have not seen any concrete improvements.

Learners in this group have effectively been written out of education priorities and reforms. They were not even mentioned as an equity cohort in the 2019 Mparntwe (Alice Springs) education declaration.

Once heralded as a world leader in English as an additional language education – with a history dating back to the 1950s – this teaching expertise in Australia has been lost. Supports have also been lost, including targeted education programs to teach students from Indigenous, migrant and refugee backgrounds.

The borders reopen

As pandemic restrictions have lifted, international students are starting to return. At the same time, significant numbers of refugees have once again entered the community, boosting student enrolments in schools.

So, English as an additional language teaching is now back in high demand.

Read more:
More diversity can help solve twin problems of early childhood staff shortages and families missing out

But schools are struggling to employ English as an additional language teachers (along with other teachers). The Victorian education department has introduced new initiatives to address the critical teacher shortage. Under these new guidelines, education students in their final year of study can be employed as part-time English as an additional language specialists, if they have completed at least one specialisation subject.

To qualify to teach English as an additional language in Australian schools, teachers must have expertise in a range of areas, including English language, second language acquisition, and teaching in different social and cultural contexts.

What needs to change

The Australian Council for TESOL (Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages) Associations has proposed a a range of measures to improve the quality of English as an additional language education in Australia.

In its recently released roadmap, it warns Australia’s education system is failing both students and teachers. Its key proposals include:

• restoring adequate needs-based funding. At the moment, the loading for support per student fails to cover the cost of a single day’s English teaching at current teacher salary rates
• reintroducing bilingual programs to support Australia’s multilingual Indigenous student population
• upgrading curriculum resources so they provide comprehensive planning advice and best practice examples of how to support English as an additional language across the curriculum.

Significantly, the roadmap recommends that teaching English as an additional language should be compulsory in initial teaching degrees. This would mean all teachers have the skills to cater to the needs of students whose first language is not English.

This can help all students

Being able to speak, read and write English is key to success in education, employment and full participation in Australian society. While those learning English as an additional language may develop social communication skills reasonably quickly, their academic language skills may not develop enough without specific ongoing teaching.

Read more:
New Education Minister Jason Clare can fix the teacher shortage crisis – but not with Labor’s election plan

This focus actually benefits all students. Research shows teaching that responds to individual language levels and different language needs in different subjects, improves learning for all students.

If Australia wants to reclaim its reputation as a world-class education provider, we must boost the resources, skills and commitment to teaching English as an additional language.

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

– ref. When we talk about the teacher shortage, don’t forget those who teach English as an additional language – https://theconversation.com/when-we-talk-about-the-teacher-shortage-dont-forget-those-who-teach-english-as-an-additional-language-185134

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrew Lavender, Senior Lecturer, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, Federation University Australia

I am sure you’ve been told you should stand up and move away from your work stations or use a standing desk where possible. One of the major benefits of doing this is to activate and stretch the hip flexor area.

But what are the hip flexors, and why are they so important – and what happens if we let them get weak and stiff?

Read more:
Why do I grunt when I bend over?

What are hip flexors?

Hip flexors are the powerful muscles located at the front of your hip. They include:

• the psoas major and psoas minor, which connect the femur to the spine, and

• the iliacus, which runs from the pelvis to the femur.

Hip flexors are activated when you draw your knee towards your chest. They are important for walking and running.

They’re also very important in sport, as they flex the hip, and work with the quadraceps to extend your knee when you need to sprint or kick.

An athlete with an injured hip flexor will have great difficulty running or kicking.

The hip flexors also work with the glutes and other muscles of the torso to stabilise the spine – which makes them important for posture.

What happens when they’re weak or stiff?

Weak hip flexors may make climbing stairs, running or even walking on a flat surface difficult or painful. It can also can cause other muscles in the area to work hard to compensate. This changes your gait (the way you walk).

Tight hip flexors can make walking and standing difficult because they pull your spine down. This makes you lean forward, which puts strain on your lower back muscles (which work in opposition to keep you upright).

An imbalance between the hip flexors and the opposing muscles pulling your torso in the opposite direction can lead to lower back pain.

Tight hip flexors can reduce the range of motion of the knee. This can result in a stiff knee gait, where the knee doesn’t bend as much as it should. After some time, it can lead to knee pain.

All in all, weak or tight hip flexors can cause your joints or muscles to function in an abnormal way and this can lead to injury.

How can I keep my hip flexors in good shape?

As with all muscles, hip flexors lose strength and mass through lack of exercise.

Another contributing factor is sitting for long periods, which keeps the psoas muscles relaxed in a shortened position for a long time.

This is particularly important for those of us who spend long periods seated at a work desk, and is why many health-care professionals advise taking a break from sitting or opting for a standing desk.

Hip flexors should be kept both flexible and strong.

Stretching exercises to improve flexibility of the hip flexors include:

• lying on your side and pulling one foot to your butt, while keeping your knees close together

• stepping forward into a lunge, going as low as you can while keeping your torso upright.

Both should cause you to feel the stretch along the front of your upper thigh.

Stretches should be held for about 30 seconds and repeated two to three times each side. They can be done daily or at least three times weekly to gradually improve flexibility.

If you work at a desk for long periods, try to do some stretching in short breaks during the day.

To strengthen the hip flexors you can lie face up on the floor and do straight leg raises (one leg at a time), while keeping your arms on the floor alongside your torso.

This takes the strain off your lower back and is easier to do one at a time to start with.

Another great hip flexor exercise is called mountain climbers. For this exercise, take the push-up position and bring one leg at a time to your chest. This can be done slowly to begin with, or quickly as you gain strength and fitness.

Strong and flexible hip flexors

So, hip flexors are relatively easy to train. If you are doing any exercise at all you are likely already keeping your hip flexors strong and flexible.

If you are not exercising, the exercises mentioned earlier will give you a place to start.

Combine these with gentle stretches of other muscle groups and some aerobic exercise like walking, jogging, cycling or swimming.

Remember to start gently and gradually increase the intensity, duration and frequency of sessions.

Failure to look after your hip flexors can lead to an altered gait, posture problems, injury and back pain.

Read more:
Core strength: why is it important and how do you maintain it?

Andrew Lavender works for the Institute of Health and Wellbeing, Federation University Australia.

– ref. Hip flexors get weak when we sit too much – but simple stretches and strengthening exercises can leave you less stiff – https://theconversation.com/hip-flexors-get-weak-when-we-sit-too-much-but-simple-stretches-and-strengthening-exercises-can-leave-you-less-stiff-183132

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hugh White, Emeritus Professor of Strategic Studies at the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, Australian National University

How can Australia navigate the tough and dangerous strategic environment in Asia today with America and China competing to be the leading regional power? The consensus in Canberra – on both sides of politics – is that we should stick as close as we can to America, in the hope it will win the contest.

But the choice is not that simple. We can see why when we look at a couple of incidents on the same day in late May.

In two widely separated locations, Chinese fighters intercepted maritime patrol aircraft – Australian and Canadian respectively – in the Western Pacific. Both were undertaking routine surveillance operations in international waters close to Chinese-claimed territory. China has long been touchy about US and allied maritime surveillance operations close to its shores, and it frequently warns them off.

But this might be more than routine Chinese belligerence. It could be the start of a new campaign to turn up the military pressure on America’s leadership in Asia by eroding the credibility of its regional strategic posture and alliances – and it would put Australia right in the firing line.

It is a fair bet that eventually China will bring its challenge to America to a head in a military confrontation over Taiwan. But that might not be its next move. It would make sense for China to look for other opportunities to test America’s resolve and undermine its credibility before risking that ultimate showdown. Targeting the maritime surveillance operations of US allies in waters around China’s coasts would seem an obvious and effective way to do this.

No easy choices

Let’s look at it from Australia’s perspective. China could simply undertake increasingly frequent and aggressive interceptions of Australian regular maritime patrol flights over the South China Sea, creating real concerns about the safety of our aircraft and crews. We would begin to fear the Chinese might force one of our aircraft to land, or that a mishap would lead to a crash.

Australia would be left with a very difficult choice. We’d have to decide either to abandon the operations or reinforce them by sending our own fighters to escort our maritime patrol planes.

The second of those options would be difficult, expensive and dangerous. It would be difficult and expensive because using short-range fighters to escort long-range patrol aircraft would require a massive commitment of resources. And it would be dangerous because confrontations between our fighters and Chinese intercepting aircraft could lead to an air-to-air battle that could swiftly escalate into full-scale war.

But the alternative – abandoning the operations – would be a very significant step with big strategic consequences. It would be seen as conceding important principles of international law by allowing China to compel us to abandon our clear right to operate in international airspace, and would weaken our defence of the Law of the Sea against the Chinese claims over the South China Sea that we see as plainly illegal. That is not something we should lightly do.

Even bigger stakes are involved. A Chinese campaign of interception and intimidation against Australia’s maritime patrol operations would be a direct challenge to America as well. We would naturally expect Washington to step in and support us by sending its own fighters to escort our maritime patrol planes, and so would America’s other allies and friends in Asia.

Read more:
Friday essay: if growing US-China rivalry leads to ‘the worst war ever’, what should Australia do?

This would not be an easy choice for Washington. Failing to support us would weaken its defence of international law, undermine its credibility as an ally, and vividly demonstrate to all the world how China’s power in the Western Pacific has grown. It would be a major blow to America’s claims to primary strategic power in our region.

But sending US fighters to escort Australian planes over the South China Sea would risk a direct US-China clash that could easily escalate into a full-scale war. It is the same kind of choice America faced ten years ago when China began aggressively occupying and building bases on islands and features in the South China Sea claimed by the Philippines and other US friends and allies.

In that case, Washington decided not to intervene militarily for fear of sparking a confrontation that could lead to war, despite the damage done to US credibility in Asia. Joe Biden would have to think twice about running the same kind of risks today against a China that’s even more assertive and much better armed.

These are exactly the kind of choices China’s leaders want to force on America and its allies. They hope and expect that we, and America, will back off. They would thereby show the US and its allies no longer call the shots in East Asia and the Western Pacific, and thus assert their claims to take over regional leadership.

Of course it would be a gamble, because America might not back off. But it is a gamble Beijing might well be willing to take, because they do believe the all-important balance of resolve lies in their favour.

Least-worst option?

So what should Australia do if China launches an escalating campaign against our maritime surveillance operations? The obvious and instinctive answer is to stand firm and continue the flights in the face of Beijing’s intimidation. But the stakes are too high to act on instinct alone, and the more carefully we think about it, the less clear the choice becomes. What, after all, is really at stake?

Our maritime patrol operations in the South China Sea have no direct significance for Australia’s own defence. We do them primarily to show support for some rules of international law. The rules are important, of course, but are they important enough to justify the risks of a military confrontation with China in its front yard?

Read more:
Marles shifts tone on China at defence summit – but the early days of government are easiest

More broadly, we perform those operations to support America as the leading military power in Asia. But do our gestures make much difference to that? Is the US position in Asia going to be sustainable against China’s challenge, given China’s economic, diplomatic and military power has grown so great, and will grow further in the decades ahead?

Stepping back from conducting maritime patrols in the waters close to China may be one of the concessions we will find ourselves choosing to make as we learn to live with the realities of China’s power. It is not what we’d like to do, but it may be better than the alternative, because it makes no sense for us to bet our future on America’s capacity to win a war with China for primacy in East Asia. Quite simply, it is a war America has little chance of winning.

This article draws on High White’s latest Quarterly Essay, Sleepwalk to War:
Australia’s Unthinking Alliance with America, released this week.

Hugh White 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. Is Australia in the firing line of a new Chinese campaign against the US? – https://theconversation.com/is-australia-in-the-firing-line-of-a-new-chinese-campaign-against-the-us-185696

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jessica Kaufman, Research Fellow, Vaccine Uptake Group, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute

The federal government has released a new A$11 million ad campaign urging Australians to “take on winter” by getting COVID boosters and influenza vaccines, as well as promoting COVID vaccination for children.

The ads come at a crucial time. COVID booster vaccination rates have plateaued at 70% and only about 40% of children aged 5-11 have had two doses.

Yet COVID boosters – a third dose for most adults, or fourth dose for people over 65 years and in high risk groups – are critical. They increase protection against severe disease, which wanes within three months of the second COVID vaccine dose.

While most children experience relatively mild COVID symptoms, some children, including those who were previously healthy, can get very sick and need to be admitted to hospital. We don’t want kids to get COVID and vaccination can help to protect them.

On top of COVID, we’re also experiencing our biggest flu season since 2019, which has hit hard and early.

Older adults and children six months to five years are among the groups at the highest risk from flu. And since we’ve had no flu season during the pandemic, children under two years have never been exposed and have no immunity.

But while the government’s new ads get some things right, they miss the mark in other areas: they don’t connect on an emotional level by highlighting meaningful benefits of vaccination and they don’t address most people’s main concerns.

What makes a good campaign?

A well-designed campaign can raise awareness about vaccine availability and eligibility, shape social norms by emphasising shared values, and generate vaccine demand by highlighting the individual and collective benefits of vaccination.

Last year, we studied what people from the initial vaccine priority groups (health-care workers, people aged over 65 years and those with underlying health conditions) thought and felt about COVID vaccines, and what they wanted from communication campaigns and materials.

Based on what they told us, effective communication should:

• provide information about vaccine safety and effectiveness
• address people’s concerns about side effects
• highlight the broader benefits of vaccination, not just those related to personal health
• discuss the severity of COVID infection
• communicate about vaccine availability
• personalise information, to account for people’s underlying medical conditions and treatments
• use real, diverse spokespeople
• use clear and simple language, and build trust through transparency.

Read more:
Diverse spokespeople and humour: how the government’s next ad campaign could boost COVID vaccine uptake

We also recommend using humour and emotion to generate engagement and enhance motivation to vaccinate, while avoiding fear-based messaging which can backfire or cause unintended harms.

What’s in the new campaign?

The Take on Winter ad meets some of our recommended criteria but falls short in other areas.

It makes clear the important message that it’s safe to get your COVID and flu shots at the same time.

It has a clear call to action – “book today” – and notes the vaccines are available at GPs and pharmacies.

However, its creators made the disappointing decision to recycle the unengaging, faceless arms of last year’s A$41 million Arm Yourself campaign, which fell flat and didn’t resonate with viewers.

Read more:
Australia’s new vaccination campaign is another wasted opportunity

In the child COVID vaccination ad, Kids will be kids, which was also released last week, the cast is diverse, but there’s no real link made between vaccination and the kids doing generic kid things.

What’s missing?

While a TV ad can’t do everything to address vaccine hesitancy, these ads have some notable gaps.

Neither of the government’s ads do much to address concerns about side effects. The most common reason parents cite for not vaccinating their children is concern about vaccine safety and side effects, even though children experience fewer side effects than adults. But the Kids will be Kids ad just uses a relatively simplistic motherhood statement about vaccine safety.

Adults are also concerned about side effects. Some people who had unpleasant, short-term side effects after dose two are reluctant to get a booster dose – though side effects after the booster are reported less frequently than after dose two. Communicating about how well vaccine safety is monitored in Australia and the low occurrence of common and expected side effects can reassure people.

The ads are also unlikely to generate an emotional response from viewers, which is an important part of motivating behaviour change. The Take on Winter ad fails to link COVID vaccine boosters or the flu shot with any meaningful personal benefits or motivators, such as being able to go to work, travel, socialise or see elderly grandparents. There is no emotional resonance.

And while we agree with the decision to avoid a fear-based message in Kids will be kids, one of the primary factors driving vaccine intention and uptake is perceived susceptibility to COVID. Many parents feel their kids aren’t at risk of serious disease, or they’ve already had COVID, so they don’t see the urgency or value in vaccinating them.

A more specific message about the importance of vaccination, even for people who have already had COVID, or personal stories from real parents of previously healthy kids who got very sick from COVID, would likely resonate more strongly.

Read more:
Just the facts, or more detail? To battle vaccine hesitancy, the messaging has to be just right

We need to respect how discerning people are, especially as vaccine vaccine fatigue is high. For all the dollars spent, evidence from social and behavioural science should be reflected in the messaging to ensure the ads are as effective as they can be.

Jessica Kaufman receives funding from the Victorian Department of Health. She is Deputy Chair of the Collaboration on Social Science and Immunisation.

Margie Danchin receives funding from the Victorian and Commonwealth Governments, NHMRC, DFAT and WHO. She is Group Leader, Vaccine Uptake, MCRI.

– ref. New ad urges us to ‘take on winter’ by getting COVID and flu vaccines. But it misses some key things – https://theconversation.com/new-ad-urges-us-to-take-on-winter-by-getting-covid-and-flu-vaccines-but-it-misses-some-key-things-185600

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrew Macintosh, Professor and Director of Research, ANU Law School, Australian National University

Climate Change Minister Chris Bowen is today expected to announce a much anticipated review of Australia’s carbon credit scheme, known as the Emissions Reduction Fund.

In March, we exposed serious integrity issues with the scheme, labelling it a fraud on taxpayers and the environment. We welcome the federal government’s review. Labor has promised a 43% cut in Australia’s emissions by 2030, and a high-integrity carbon credit market is vital to reaching this goal.

The fund was established by the Abbott government in 2014 and is now worth A$4.5 billion. It provides carbon credits to projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions. For the past decade, it has been the centrepiece of Australia’s climate policy.

In this and subsequent articles, we seek to simplify the issues for the Australian public, the new parliament and whoever is appointed to review the Emissions Reduction Fund.

The background

We are experts in environmental law, markets and policy. The lead author of this article, Andrew Macintosh, is the former chair of the Emissions Reduction Assurance Committee (ERAC), the government-appointed watchdog that oversees the Emissions Reduction Fund’s methods.

Our analysis suggests up to 80% of credits issued under three of the fund’s most popular emissions reduction methods do not represent genuine emissions cuts that wouldn’t have happened otherwise.

Our decision to call the scheme a “fraud” was deliberate and considered. In our view, a process that systematically pays for a service that’s not actually provided is fraudulent.

The Clean Energy Regulator (which administers the fund) and the current ERAC reviewed our claims and, earlier this month, dismissed them. We have expressed serious concerns with that review process, which we believe was not transparent and showed a fundamental lack of understanding of the issues.

This week, Bowen said our concerns were “substantial and real” and he took them “very seriously”.

The Conversation contacted the Clean Energy Regulator regarding the authors’ claims. The regulator pointed to its “comprehensive response” to the issues raised and also rejected allegations of fraud. The full statement is included at the end of this article.

The 3 biggest problems

Under the fund, projects that reduce emissions are rewarded with carbon credits. These credits can be sold on the carbon market to entities that want to offset their emissions. Each credit is supposed to represent one tonne of carbon abatement.

Buyers include the federal government (using taxpayer funds) and private entities that are required to, or voluntarily choose to, offset their emissions.

Under the scheme, a range of methods lay out the rules for emissions abatement activities. Concerns have been raised about these methods for years.

Our initial criticism focuses on the scheme’s most popular methods, which account for about 75% of carbon credits issued:

• human-induced regeneration: projects supposed to regenerate native forests through changes in land management practices, particularly reduced grazing by livestock and feral animals

• avoided deforestation: projects supposed to protect native forests in western New South Wales that would otherwise be cleared

• landfill gas: projects supposed to capture and destroy methane emitted from solid waste landfills using a flare or electricity generator.

Our analysis found credits have been issued for emissions reductions that were not real or additional, such as:

• protecting forests that were never going to be cleared
• growing trees that were already there
• growing forests in places that will never sustain them permanently
• large landfills operating electricity generators that would have operated anyway.

Read more:
Australia’s Emissions Reduction Fund is almost empty. It shouldn’t be refilled

In forthcoming articles, we will detail the problems with these methods.

However, at a high level, the issues have arisen because the scheme has focused on maximising the number of carbon credits issued, to put downward pressure on carbon credit prices. This has resulted in attempts to use carbon offsets in inappropriate situations.

A tricky policy lever

Designing high integrity methods for calculating carbon credits is hard because it involves:

• trying to determine what would happen in the absence of the incentive provided by the carbon credit. For example, would a farmer have cleared a paddock of trees if they weren’t given carbon credits to retain it?

• activities where it’s not always clear if carbon abatement was the result of human activity or natural variability. For instance, soil carbon levels can be increased by changing land management practices, but can also happen naturally due to rainfall

• activities where it can be hard to measure the emissions outcome. For example, carbon sequestration in vegetation is often measured using models that can be inaccurate when applied at the project scale

• dynamic carbon markets with fast-evolving technologies.

These complexities mean mistakes are inevitable; no functional carbon offset scheme can ever get it 100% right. A degree of error must be accepted.

But decisions regarding risk tolerance must consider the consequences of issuing low-integrity credits, including contributing to worsening climate change.

The dangers of sham credits

The safeguard mechanism places caps on the emissions of major polluters and was originally intended to protect gains achieved through the Emissions Reduction Fund. It applies to about 200 large industrial polluters and requires them to buy carbon credits if their emissions exceed these caps.

When carbon credits used by polluters do not represent real and additional abatement, Australia’s emissions will be higher than they otherwise would be.

To avoid such risks, the legislation governing the Emissions Reduction Fund requires the methods to be “conservative” and supported by “clear and convincing evidence”.

The fund’s main methods do not meet these standards.

Read more:
No, Mr Morrison – the safeguard mechanism is not a ‘sneaky carbon tax’

An open and transparent process

Carbon credit schemes are, by nature, complex and involve a high risk of error. To maintain integrity, systems to promote transparency are needed.

This includes requiring administrators to not just expect, but actively seek out errors and move quickly to correct them.

To this end, rules are needed to:

• force the disclosure of information by the Clean Energy Regulator and ERAC

• guarantee disinterested third parties the right to be involved in rule-making

• give anybody the right to seek judicial review of decisions made by the Clean Energy Regulator and ERAC

• require proponents to move off methods found to contain material errors.

The Emissions Reduction Fund has none of these features and needs urgent reform.

We hope the federal government review will be comprehensive and independent, with the power to compel people to give evidence. Because Australians deserve assurance that our national climate policy operates with the utmost integrity.

Read more:
US scheme used by Australian farmers reveals the dangers of trading soil carbon to tackle climate change

The Clean Energy Regulator provided the following statement in response to this article.

The comments made regarding the Emissions Reduction Fund (ERF) repeat generalised claims that ‘fraud’ is occurring and are rejected. No substantial evidence for claims of fraud has ever been provided. These are serious allegations and the CER is dismayed at the statement that attributes these alleged outcomes to the work done by the CER. We understand that ERAC has the same view.

The claims about lack of additionality and over-crediting are also not new. Prof Macintosh and his colleagues have not engaged with the substance of the ERAC’s comprehensive response papers on human induced regeneration and landfill gas and the CER’s response to the claims on avoided deforestation.

The government has said it will undertake a review of the ERF and details will be announced shortly. We do not wish to pre-empt the scope of the review or its findings. We welcome the review and look forward to engaging substantively with the review process once it commences.

Andrew Macintosh receives funding from the federal Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment. He is also a Director of Paraway Pastoral Company Ltd, which has projects registered under the Emissions Reduction Fund.

Don Butler receives funding from the federal Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment. He also works with the Queensland Department of Environment and Science as a science advisor for natural capital programs.

Megan C Evans receives funding from the Australian Research Council through a Discovery Early Career Research Award and has previously been funded by the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment, WWF Australia, and the National Environmental Science Program’s Threatened Species Recovery Hub.

– ref. We blew the whistle on Australia’s central climate policy. Here’s what a new federal government probe must fix – https://theconversation.com/we-blew-the-whistle-on-australias-central-climate-policy-heres-what-a-new-federal-government-probe-must-fix-185894

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ken Purnell, Professor of Education, CQUniversity Australia

On Thursday, thousands of teachers went on strike in New South Wales, over pay and “unsustainable” workloads.

This comes amid increasing concerns about teacher shortages around Australia.

The federal government has suggested enticing high-performing students into teaching degrees with extra payments, while education experts say teachers need more time, more pay and more support to do their jobs.

Read more:
Read the room, Premier. Performance pay for teachers will make the crisis worse

One option that could free up teacher time, and ensure students are getting the education they need, is “blended” learning, in which some learning is done online and some face-to-face. We know this can work in other settings – at the university level, I have three decades of expertise in remote and blended learning, with many thousands of students across several subjects at the undergraduate and postgraduate levels.

The crisis

The established norm in Australian schools is one teacher for every 25 students, with learning done face-to-face in a classroom, five days a week.

But a growing shortage in teacher numbers means we may no longer be able to accept this as the norm. According to a recent Monash University study, 59% of surveyed primary and secondary teachers said they intended to leave the profession. Heavy workloads, and health and well-being issues, were among the key reasons given for their responses.

Blended learning involves a mix of traditional face-to-face learning with remote learning. That online element may be done anywhere, such as at school, at home, or in small groups.

COVID meant remote learning hit the headlines worldwide, but it has already been happening behind the scenes for some time, particularly in remote areas in Australia through distance schools.

When learning is done remotely it still needs quality teachers. Unlike university students, school students need significant support to help them learn. Teachers need to know their students and design lessons specific to their context, whether it be in inner-city Sydney or remote Arnhem Land.

The COVID silver lining

Any teacher or parent will tell you COVID rapidly changed the way school was structured and learning was delivered.

Despite the stress of this time, the pandemic showed us it was possible to teach students online, and that despite the well-publicised challenges of home learning, there were some advantages. This was the case when when remote learning is planned and delivered to a high standard, enabling students to use technologies they like.

Read more:
Remote learning was even tougher for migrant parents. Here’s what they want schools to know in case lockdowns return

As the World Bank recently found, COVID created many opportunities for “reimagining how education can be offered and enriched”.

One of my education colleagues likes to cite the example of a Rockhampton 12-year-old, who had four people who helped her learn in March 2020 when the pandemic began in Australia. This included teachers and friends.

That group became 35 during the next year, with other classmates, parents, grandparents, and other similar-aged students in her school. Her literacy, numeracy, technology and social skills skyrocketed, along with her well-being. This was a direct result of the required remote learning, as the student sought assistance from others and it soon became a snowballing effect.

This can work for all year levels

Senior educators in Queensland have told me up to a quarter of the curriculum content may be best taught online. That is for all year levels and especially from year 4 onwards, and includes basic knowledge and skills in most subject areas.

Teachers reported that students’ learning could be more personalised online. Students who have the capability to go quickly can do so – and not be bored. Students who need more time can take it.

It can also be used to facilitate peer-to-peer learning and group-based activities in ways not easily done in traditional classroom settings. This includes collaborative projects using things such as shared Google docs and educational video games.

Achievements in that learning can be assessed in the online environment using high-quality techniques that involve automated marking as well as some teacher judgements.

That has the added benefit of freeing up some teacher time with fewer face-to-face contact hours but not adding to the work of parents.

However, it does mean all students doing part of their school work by remote learning will have to have good access to a computer or tablet with good internet connection. And while that is generally the case already, some students did not have that during lockdowns and some schools need to ensure such access as they did in the online NAPLAN tests in May.

Lets re-imagine schools

A hybrid model will only benefit students and teachers if it set up properly.

In its assessment of COVID learning at home, the World Bank found remote learning needed to have suitable technology, targeted professional development for teachers and make sure students are engaged.

Under a new, hybrid model, Australian schools would still use face-to-face when most appropriate and remote networked learning when that is most appropriate. That can free up teaching and physical resources (such as classroom space) and potentially improve student learning and teacher well-being.

As the teacher shortage continues, we need to think creatively and use existing models we have already seen work.

Ken Purnell 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. Could more online learning help fix Australia’s teacher shortage? – https://theconversation.com/could-more-online-learning-help-fix-australias-teacher-shortage-185877

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Esmé Louise James, Doctor of Philosophy, The University of Melbourne

After a month of waiting, the season finale of Stranger Things season 4 has almost arrived on Netflix. This season, along with the nightmarish arch-villain Vecna, we have been introduced to “the Hellfire Club” – the Dungeons and Dragons club of Hawkins high school.

The club is primarily made up of the school’s “losers” and outcasts – none of whom could have anticipated being framed by their small town as an evil cult responsible for the murders taking place.

While the fate of the Hawkins Hellfire leader and members still hangs in the balance, we can look to its origins in history – the Hellfire Club of the 18th century – for clues of what to expect in this finale.

The OG Hellfire Club

Phillip, Duke of Wharton, founded the first official Hellfire Club in 1718. The club was primarily a parodic take on the popular trend of gentleman clubs across London at the time – admission was open to both men and women.

However, rather than meeting to discuss poetry and politics, the main aim of the Hellfire Club was to mock religion and its inherent hypocrisies – the club leader was called “The Devil” and members were encouraged to come dressed as biblical characters. As well as partaking in satirical religious ceremonies, the club would enjoy festive meals of Holy Ghost Pie, Breast of Venus, and Devil’s Loin.

Read more:
By naming ‘Pennhurst’, Stranger Things uses disability trauma for entertainment. Dark tourism and asylum tours do too

The notorious Hellfire Club

While Wharton’s club was reluctantly disbanded in 1721, it would go on to be replaced by the most notorious Hellfire Club in history.

Indeed, the Hellfire Club is often synonymous with Sir Francis Dashwood’s club. This club was originally named the Order of the Friars of St Francis of Wycombe, and the members known as “the monks” – however, that it not the name that history would remember it by. Dashwood was himself a scandalous figure, known as a man with a true “genius for obscenity.” His love for promiscuity was matched with his flair for the dramatic.

In 1751, Dashwood leased the remarkable Medmenham Abbey and had this medieval ruin entirely renovated in Gothic style for the purpose of this club. Written into a stained glass window on the doorway was the club’s motto, “Fais ce que tu voudras” — Do what thou wilt.

Artwork by William Hogarth is believed to have once decorated the walls, depicting club members in a range of erotic activities. The library was stocked with the most infamous pornographic works of the time, such as John Cleland’s Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure (1749).

Club members consisted of some of the most influential figures of the time: including Thomas Potter, John Wilkes, John Montagu, William Hogarth, George Dodington, Benjamin Bates II, and many more. Even Benjamin Franklin is thought to have been a member, as he is recorded to have stayed at Medmenham Abbey at the time a meeting was taking place – a privilege only allowed to Hellfire members.

What happened at the Hellfire Club?

The club met only twice a year, with an AGM which lasted more than a week in September or June. Each member encouraged to bring female guests of “a cheerful, lively disposition.”

As written in Nocturnal Revels (1779), a book which claimed to have been authored by one of these “monk[s] of the Order of St Francis,”

no vows of celibacy were required either by the ladies or the Monks, the former considering themselves as the lawful wives of the brethren during their stay within the monastic walls, every Monk being religiously scrupulous not to infringe upon the nuptial alliance of any other brother.

Under the cover of darkness, adorned in masks and cloaks, the club members would make their way across the river Thames in gondolas to the Abbey. They were greeted with a concoction made of brandy and brimstone and would drink to the Gods of Darkness. The group kept the same parodic religious rituals which had been performed by Wharton’s group.

As Horace Walpole, an English writer of the time, describes,

the members’ practice was rigorously pagan: Bacchus and Venus were the deities to whom they almost publicly sacrificed; and the nymphs and the hogsheads that were laid in against the festivals of this new church, sufficiently informed the neighborhood of the complexion of those hermits.

Throughout the night, they would gradually make their way through the Abbey – and the activities reportedly became more and more obscene. One reported (if unconfirmed) story goes that a baboon dressed as a devil was once in attendance, and gave John Wilkes such a fright when it was released from a chest that he begged the devil to spare him and proclaimed he was “but half a sinner”.

Notoriety and the underground

In 1760, a publication appeared (Chrysal, or the Adventures of a Guinea) which made the Hellfire Club’s activities known to the general public – identifying Medmenham Abbey and even making reference to this infamous baboon story. Rumours had spread about the activities of the club, and while few had access particulars, the general perception was that it was a blasphemous and bawdy club that partook in sinful, libertine behaviour.

It is believed the tourists would flock around the island to try and catch a glimpse of this notorious club, made up of such prominent members. It was around this time that Dashwood moved the club activities underground (literally) into a series of elaborate caves and tunnels built under Dashwood’s garden at West Wycombe.

Farewell Hellfire Club

The club was finally abandoned in 1766. Records and reports of membership to this Hellfire Club were used to bring about the political ruin of many of its members — a witch-hunt which bears reflection within Stranger Things own Hellfire Club.

While Dashwood and Franklin faced a baboon rather than Vecna, we can draw some comparisons from this historical example. Both clubs were formed by figures disillusioned by polite society, and were met with outrage from the society they so condemned. And, ultimately, this condemnation was stronger.

Esmé Louise James 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. Pornography, the devil and baboons in fancy dress: what went on at the infamous historical Hellfire Club – https://theconversation.com/pornography-the-devil-and-baboons-in-fancy-dress-what-went-on-at-the-infamous-historical-hellfire-club-185869

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

David Pocock, the progressive independent who broke the Liberals’ stranglehold on one of the two ACT Senate seats, wouldn’t have expected to find himself allied with Pauline Hanson before even being sworn in.

But, as they say, politics makes strange bedfellows and the two have already discussed trying to get Anthony Albanese to compromise on his decision to slash crossbench staff numbers.

The staff cut will just be the start of Labor’s search for general savings, culminating in the October budget. Some of those will have the public much more agitated than will trimming politicians’ entitlements.

But Albanese’s action, without prior consultation, has come as a rude shock to the “teal” independents who, together with other new members, arrived at Parliament House this week for their orientation.

The teals have been feted in the media and seen by many voters as part of a new breed of politician. They probably didn’t expect such rough treatment, delivered in a letter from the new PM.

Existing crossbenchers, with years of experience of how politics works, may have been less surprised, but they were also dismayed.

In the last parliament crossbenchers had four extra staff, above those allocated to government and opposition backbenchers. With a much-expanded crossbench, Albanese has brought that back to one extra (two for those in larger electorates).

Apart from expense, he’s arguing fairness with other backbenchers. He’s also saying plans to beef up the parliamentary library will provide more resources for crossbenchers.

The crossbenchers say they don’t have the backup a major party gives its own MPs, and that the library can’t provide the sort of tailored advice a staffer does, let alone be as fast with assistance, or available around the clock.

Crossbench senators make a further case. In a chamber where the government is in a minority, their votes matter more than those of crossbenchers in the lower house, where Labor will have the numbers.

This applies particularly to someone like Pocock who, with the Greens, is expected to assure the government of its majority on various pieces of legislation. (The Greens, treated as a party, haven’t had their staff reduced but the same number will service a total party room that has increased from 10 to 16.)

Read more:
Cutting crossbench MPs’ staffing would be a setback for democracy

When he returns from overseas, Albanese will address the complaints. His choice is staying tough (the public wouldn’t care) or buying some crossbench goodwill with a conciliatory gesture.

The staffing dispute has provided immediate controversy but in this new parliament, which first meets July 26, there’ll be more fundamental issues around the crossbenchers.

The crossbench is, of course, diverse. In the lower house, there are Greens, the new teals (obviously individuals in their own right) and other independents, as well as the idiosyncratic Bob Katter, from the deep north.

In the Senate, the crossbench ranges from Greens to the two Hansonites and Ralph Babet, elected from Victoria for the UAP.

The teals have a lot to live up to, after their high-profile campaigns. They are different from many other MPs. They haven’t been political staffers or come up through the rugged internals of parties (although a couple hail from well-known political families). They talk about doing politics differently. But without the balance of power in the House of Representatives, will they be able to drive meaningful changes in how things are done?

And what of policy substance can the lower house teals achieve? They need to demonstrate they’re relevant.

Lacking hard power, they can only operate through influence and advocacy. This is possible, though difficult. For example, in the last parliament independent Helen Haines’ release of a private member’s bill for an integrity commission added to the public pressure. She (and others) will be anxious to have a voice on the issue as the government presses ahead with its legislation.

One problem for the teals is that the Albanese government will address core issues they campaigned on, notably climate change and integrity. It was easy enough for them to rail against the Coalition before the election, but things are more challenging when they are (essentially) aligned with the government on these matters.

They can say Labor should go further (although there mightn’t be mileage in that), and there will be some scope for suggesting amendments to legislation.

Read more:
Word from The Hill: Parliamentary ‘newbies’ inspect their workplace, with some complaints

Recent history indicates once crossbenchers are elected they dig in, but they aren’t invulnerable (as Kerryn Phelps found in Wentworth). The teals will have to show over the next three years they represent what we might describe as “value for votes”. And if the government delivers on climate, integrity and women’s issues, the teals will need to refresh their own agendas for the 2025 election.

The government has some interest in teals surviving, because they provide a firewall. They keep seats Labor can’t itself win out of Liberal hands. So it may look to give them a few modest policy wins.

The Greens-Labor relationship will be more potent and scratchy. The two parties are fierce competitors and there’s no love lost.

But Labor will require the Greens (plus one more vote) to get contested legislation through the Senate. The Greens will push for changes. It will likely often be a game of bluff and counter bluff.

The Greens party room is politically diverse – witness the radicalism of Victorian senator Lidia Thorpe who questions the legitimacy of parliament itself – so there could be some robust internal battles.

The Greens say their position on Labor’s climate legislation will be to improve, not to block. The first test will come early, when the government presents a bill to put into law its emissions reduction targets.

Given the Greens can’t get a more ambitious position they would, if they follow their own maxim, support the legislation.

Lastly, Pocock’s position is interesting. He won’t be the only go-to person for the government to obtain that additional Senate vote. Jacqui Lambie and her newly elected Senate colleague would be candidates.

But Pocock will be often in the spotlight. For his part, while reflecting his progressive views, he’ll need to remember he’s sitting in a traditionally Liberal seat. He won largely because the former incumbent, the deeply conservative Zed Seselja, was so unpopular. So if he wants to hold onto his place in the longer term, Pocock might have to perform a balancing act.

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: Election delivered bonanza of crossbenchers but what impact will they make? – https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-election-delivered-bonanza-of-crossbenchers-but-what-impact-will-they-make-186134

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dennis B Desmond, Lecturer, Cyberintelligence and Cybercrime Investigations, University of the Sunshine Coast

The art of concealing or misrepresenting one’s identity in the physical world has long been practised by spies engaged in espionage. In response, intelligence agencies designed techniques and technologies to identify people attempting to hide behind aliases.

Now, following the US Supreme Court ruling overturning Roe v Wade, women in the United States seeking assistance with unwanted pregnancies have joined the ranks of spies.

The ruling has resulted in several trigger laws coming into effect in conservative states to outlaw abortions in those states. These laws, coupled with groups targeting women’s reproductive rights protests, have raised fear among women of all ages about their data being used against them.

Thousands have engaged with online posts calling on women to delete their period tracking apps, on the premise that data fed to these apps could be used to prosecute them in states where abortion is illegal. At the same time, abortion clinics in New Mexico (where abortion remains legal) are reportedly bracing for an influx of women from US states.

As someone who has served as a special agent for the United States Army and Federal Bureau of Investigation, and as a Senior Intelligence Officer with the US Defense Intelligence Agency, I can tell you deleting period tracking apps may not be enough for vulnerable women now.

But there are some tools women can use to conceal their identities, should this be necessary – the same tools once reserved for professional spies.

The privacy myth

Apart from espionage, the emergence of the internet created a new impetus for widespread data collection by data aggregators and marketers. The modern surveillance economy grew out of a desire to target products and services to us as effectively as possible.

Today, massive swathes of personal information are extracted from users, 24/7 – making it increasingly difficult to remain unmasked.

Data aggregation is used to assess our purchasing habits, track our movements, find our favourite locations and obtain detailed demographic information about us, our families, our co-workers and friends.

Read more:
Post Roe, women in America are right to be concerned about digital surveillance – and it’s not just period-tracking apps

Recent events have demonstrated how tenuous our privacy is. Protests in Hong Kong have seen Chinese authorities use cameras to identify and arrest protesters, while police in the US deployed various technologies to identify Black Lives Matter protesters.

Articles appeared in Australian media outlets with advice on how to avoid being surveilled. And people were directed to websites, such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation, dedicated to informing readers about how to avoid surveillance and personal data collection.

What we’ve learned from both spy history and more recent events is that data collection is not always overt and obvious; it’s often unseen and opaque. Surveillance may come in the form of cameras, drones, automated number plate readers (ANPR/ALPR), toll payment devices, acoustic collectors and of course any internet-connected device.

In some cases when your fellow protesters upload images or videos, crowd-sourced intelligence becomes your enemy.

Data deleted, not destroyed

Recently, a lot of the focus has been on phones and apps. But deleting mobile apps will not prevent the identification of an individual, nor will turning off location services.

Law enforcement and even commercial companies have the ability to access or track certain metrics including:

• international mobile subscriber identity (IMSI), which is related to a user’s mobile number and connected to their SIM card
• international mobile equipment identity (IMEI), which is directly related to their device itself.

Ad servers may also exploit device locations. Private companies can create advertisements targeting devices that are specific to a location, such as a women’s health clinic. And such “geofenced” ad servers can identify a user’s location regardless of whether their location settings are disabled.

Further, anonymised phone track data (like call signals pinging off nearby towers) can be purchased from telecommunications providers and de-anonymised.

Law enforcement can use this data to trace paths from, say, a fertility clinic to a person’s home or “bed down” location (the spy term for someone’s residence).

The bottom line is your phone is a marker for you. A temporary cell phone with an overseas SIM card has been the choice for some people wishing to avoid such tracking.

Adding to that, we recently saw headlines about facial recognition technology being used in Australian retail stores – and America is no different. For anyone trying to evade detection, it’s better to swap bank cards for cash, stored value cards or gift cards when making purchases.

Read more:
Bunnings, Kmart and The Good Guys say they use facial recognition for ‘loss prevention’. An expert explains what it might mean for you

And rather than using a personal vehicle, or even a rental, using public transport paid with cash or a ride-share service provides better anonymity.

In the spy world, paying attention to one’s dress is critical. Spies change up their appearance, using what they call “polish”, with the help of reversible clothing, hats, different styles of glasses, scarves and even masks (which are ideally not that conspicuous these days). In extreme cases, they may even use “appliances” to alter their facial characteristics.

Then again, while these measures help in the physical world, they do little to stop online detection.

Digital stealth

Online, the use of a virtual private network (VPN) and/or the onion browser, Tor, will help improve anonymity, including from internet service providers.

Online you can create and use multiple personas, each with a different email address and “personal data” linked to it. Aliases can be further coupled with software that removes cookies and browser history, which will help conceal one’s online identity.

One example is CCleaner. This program removes privacy-violating cookies and internet history from your device, while improving your device’s privacy.

There are also plenty of online applications that allow the use of temporary email addresses and phone numbers, and even temporary accommodation addresses for package deliveries.

To some, these may seem like extreme privacy measures. However, given the widespread collection of identity data by commercial companies and governments – and the resultant collaboration between the two – there’s reason to be concerned for anyone wanting to fly under the radar.

And for women seeking abortions in the US, these measures may be necessary to avoid prosecution.

Dennis B Desmond received funding from the US government and the Australian government

– ref. After Roe v Wade, here’s how women could adopt ‘spycraft’ to avoid tracking and prosecution – https://theconversation.com/after-roe-v-wade-heres-how-women-could-adopt-spycraft-to-avoid-tracking-and-prosecution-186046

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Martin, Visiting Fellow, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University

Homeowners will face mortgage rates near 5.5% in a little over a year, according to a survey of 22 leading Australian economists.

The Conversation’s 2022-23 forecasting survey predicts an increase in the Reserve Bank’s cash rate from its present 0.85% to a peak of 3.1% by next August.

If fully passed on, the series of rate hikes would lift the cost of payments on a variable $500,000 mortgage by about $600 per month and the cost of payments on a $800,000 mortgage by about $1,000 per month.

Sydney and Melbourne home prices would slide 6-7%.

The panel believes the Reserve Bank will push its cash rate to its highest point since the 2010-2012 resources boom in an effort to contain inflation, which it expects to jump from its present 5.1% to a peak of 7.1% before the end of the year.

Panel members put the risk of an overreaction by authorities bringing on a recession at a 40% chance in the United States, and a lower 20% probability in Australia.

Now in its fourth year, The Conversation’s survey draws on the expertise of leading forecasters in 20 Australian universities and financial institutions, among them economic modellers, former Treasury, International Monetary Fund and Reserve Bank officials, and a former member of the Reserve Bank board.

Inflation

The panel expects the next inflation figure to be released later this month to show prices climbed 6.7% in the year to June – the most since the early 1990s.

Panelist Saul Eslake says it hard to be confident about when inflation will peak without being confident about when and how the conflict in Ukraine will end, although he says it is difficult to see energy prices climbing higher, and there is some evidence COVID-related supply disruptions are beginning to ease.

On balance the panel expects inflation to peak at 7.1% towards the end of this year before declining next year.

Interest rate rises

The panel expects the equivalent of five 0.25 point increases in the Reserve Bank’s cash rate in the next six months, and just short of another two 0.25 point increases in the six months that follow.

On balance, the panel expects the cash rate to stop climbing when it gets to 3.1% next August, but some members expect much steeper increases.

Warwick Mckibbin, a former member of the Reserve Bank board, expects a cash rate of 4.5% (implying mortgage rates of 6.75%) by March, and he says that is less than required.

He says the cash rate needs to climb above the 3.5% that would normally be thought of as neutral, and stay there for a sustained period to bring inflation back to the Reserve Bank’s target.

Read more:
RBA Governor Philip Lowe is hiking interest rates. It’ll add hundreds per month to mortgage payments

Former Commonwealth Treasury and financial markets economist Warren Hogan sees rates climbing for as many as five years, although his forecast is for four.

RBC Capital Markets head of economics Su-Lin Ong believes that won’t be needed to cool the economy, as the expiry of the ultra-cheap three-year fixed rate mortgages taken out during COVID will deliver a “market-induced tightening”.

Recession risk in the US and Australia

The panel believes the United States is at a much greater risk than Australia of a miscalculation in which rates are pushed so high to contain inflation that they bring on a recession.

The US economy has already turned down in the first three months of this year, and the panel expects it to finish the year just 2.2% larger than when the year began. The panel expects unusually low economic growth of 2.6% in China.

In the United States, the task of defining the start and end of recessions is assigned to the National Bureau of Economic Research’s business cycle dating committee.

The panel believes there is a 40% chance it will call a recession in the next two years, with the most likely start being March 2023.

The panel assigns a lower 20% probability to a recession in Australia (commonly defined as two consecutive quarters of negative economic growth) and believes the most likely start date is August 2023.

Economic growth

Absent recession, the panel expects economic growth to decline in line with forecasts in the March budget from year-on-year growth of 4.25% in 2021-22 to 2.5% over the coming five years.

Living standards

The substantial increase in wage growth the panel expects from 2.4% in the year to March to 3.6% by June next year will be nowhere near enough to prevent real wages sliding.

Even with inflation down to 4.8% by then as forecast, real wages would go backwards by a further 1.2%.

Weighing on further increases in wages growth will be a forecast nudge up in the rate of unemployment, from 3.9% to 4.2%.

ANZ chief economist Richard Yetsenga says while reopening Australia to skilled migrants, temporary visa holders, students and backpackers will add to the supply of workers, it should also boost already very strong consumer spending, limiting any increase in unemployment.

The panel expects outsized real growth in household spending of 4.5% in 2022-23 boosted by what Barrenjoey Capital’s chief economist Jo Masters describes as elevated household savings, combined with continuing fixed rate mortgages and the low and middle income tax offset payments due to hit accounts from July.

The broadest measure of living standards, real net disposable income per capita, should continue to advance, although modestly.

Home prices

The panel expects mortgage rate driven falls in home prices to reach 6-7% in Sydney and Melbourne over the coming year.

Julie Toth of Swinburne University and Nous Group expects the biggest impact in low and medium income suburbs, where buyers are more vulnerable to mortgage increases.

Markets

The panel nonetheless expects solid growth in non-mining business investment of 6.4% (and mining investment of 7.6%), and an iron ore price above US$100 an ounce but sliding down from its present US$130 to US$108.

It expects the Australian share market to end the financial year 2% lower.

After a year in which the 10-year bond rate that determines the government’s cost of borrowing soared from 1.5% to 3.7%, panelists expect only a small further increase in 2022-23, to 3.9%.

After sliding from 75 US cents to 69 US cents, they expect the Australian dollar to climb modestly to 72 cents during 2022-23, putting some downward pressure on inflation.

The Conversation Economic Panel

Click on economist to see full profile.

Download the 2022-23 economic survey

Peter Martin 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. Sky-high mortgages, 7.1% inflation, and a 20% chance of recession. How the Conversation’s panel sees the year ahead – https://theconversation.com/sky-high-mortgages-7-1-inflation-and-a-20-chance-of-recession-how-the-conversations-panel-sees-the-year-ahead-185411

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mona Nikidehaghani, Lecturer in Accounting, University of Wollongong

From Monday July 4 2022, Australian job seekers face a new social security system to police eligibility for support payments.

It replaces the “Jobactive” system that required the “mutual obligation” of applying for 20 jobs a month for payments to continue.

You must now instead earn 100 points a month through a variety of activities, including applying for jobs, attending courses and even working.

This “point-based activation system” was designed under the Morrison government, with some alterations made by the Albanese government. It reflects recommendations made in 2019 by a Senate select committee inquiry that found the existing “jobactive” program to be punitive and “not fit for purpose”.

The inquiry recommended a broader range of activities should count towards mutual obligation requirements, and that those activities better promote work readiness.

The new system – now called Workforce Australia – does this with a list of more than 30 tasks or activities.

Making a job plan

When you apply for income support, you will need to create a “job plan”, recording everything you must do to meet your mutual obligations requirements.

An assessment will be made of how well you can self-manage this job plan. You will be assigned to either an “online employment service” or to a service provider for personal assistance.

Providers have the power to customise plans by reducing the number of points a job seeker needs each month, or increasing the value of points for activities.

How to get to 100 points

A job application (or what the system calls a “job search”) earns five points. You are generally expected to do at least five job searches a month (with some exceptions, such as if you are attending an adult migrant English course).

The balance of the activities involve looking for work, training courses to improve skills, or activities that contribute to your employability. The following tables summarises these activities and their point values.

A full breakdown of the points system can be found here.

What if you don’t earn 100 points?

If you fail to reach 100 points without a good reason, you will receive a demerit point – a formal warning. This will move you from the “green zone” to the “warning zone”.

Each demerit points expires after six months.

If you accrue three demerit points at any one time, you will be required to attend a “capabilities interview” – an “informal” interview with your service provider to review if your job plan is right for you.

If you accrue five demerit points, you must attend a “capabilities assessment” – a formal interview with Centrelink. This meeting will have direct implications on payments. For examples, if it is decided your job plan is not fit for purpose, you return to the green zone with a new plan. If not, you will be moved to the “penalty zone” – putting you at risk of losing payments.

If you fail to comply with any part of your job plan while in the “penalty zone”, you will be penalised one week’s payment. If it happens again, you will lose two week’s payment. If it happens a third time, your payments will be cancelled, and you will have to wait four weeks before you can reapply.

Essentially, three strikes in the penalty zone and you are out.

What if you earn more than 100 points?

A beneficial feature of the new system is the ability to bank excess points. So if you accrue more than 100 points in one month, you can use those extra points (up to a total of 50 points) the next month.

Is this system better?

Welfare advocates are worried the system could prove just as punitive as the the old system.

There are certainly anomalies, such as the differing time commitments per point values. The greater discretion given to employment service providers over job plans could also contribute to inequalities, particularly for those who cannot advocate for themselves.

But in most respects the points-based activation system is an improvement over what it replaces. It provides greater flexibility and emphasises activities that contributes to employability, not just activity involving applying for jobs.

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

– ref. JobSeeker eligibility changes: what you must do under the new ‘points-based activation’ system – https://theconversation.com/jobseeker-eligibility-changes-what-you-must-do-under-the-new-points-based-activation-system-185759

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Robyn Gulliver, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, The University of Queensland

A man who drove through a climate protest blocking the Harbour Tunnel this week has copped a A$469 fine, while multiple members of the activist group were arrested. The protest was among a series of peak hour rallies in Sydney by Blockade Australia, in an effort to stop “the cogs in the machine that is destroying life on earth”.

Disruptive protests like these make an impact. They form the iconic images of social movements that have delivered many of the rights and freedoms we enjoy today.

They attract extensive media coverage that propel issues onto the national agenda. And, despite media coverage to the contrary, research suggests they don’t reduce public support for climate action.

But disruptive protest also consistently generates one negative response: attempts to criminalise it.

Tasmania, Victoria and New South Wales have all recently proposed or introduced anti-protest bills targeting environmental and climate activists. This wave of anti-protest legislation has been described as draconian and undemocratic.

Let’s take a look at how these laws suppress environmental protesters – and whether criminalisation actually works.

How do governments criminalise protest?

The criminalisation of environmental protest in Australia isn’t new.

Tasmania provides a compelling example. The Tasmania Workplaces (Protection from Protestors) Act 2014 sought to fine demonstrators up to $10,000 if they “prevent, hinder, or obstruct the carrying out of a business activity”. Described as a breach of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, it was subsequently voted down by the Tasmanian Legislative Council.

The bill was resurrected in 2019, but also voted down, an outcome described by the Human Rights Law Centre as a “win for democracy”.

Read more:
‘Disappointment and disbelief’ after Morrison government vetoes research into student climate activism’

But yet again in 2022, the freedom to protest in Tasmania is under threat. The Police Offences Amendment (Workplace Protection) Bill 2022 proposes fines of up to $21,625 and 18 months jail for peaceful protest.

Activities such as handing out flyers, holding a placard or sharing a petition could fall within the offences.

Tasmania is not an outlier. After the Port of Botany and Sydney climate blockades in March this year, NSW passed the Roads and Crimes Legislation Amendment Bill 2022.

Almost 40 civil society groups called to scrap the bill, which used vague and broad wording to expand offences with up to two years in jail and a $22,000 fine.

Similarly, the Andrews government in Victoria is introducing the Sustainable Forests Timber Amendment (Timber Harvesting Safety Zones) Bill 2022, which raises penalties on anti-logging protest offences to $21,000 or 12 months imprisonment.

Other ways Australia criminalise protest

Legislation isn’t the only tool in the toolbox of protest criminalisation. The expansion of police and government discretionary powers is also often used. Examples include:

• “move-on” orders restricting protesters’ access to public spaces or engagement in particular behaviours

• on-the-spot fines, such as for the use of specific lock-on devices defined in Queensland legislation

• surveillance, pre-emptive arrests and infiltration of landowners and anti-coal groups, including Blockade Australia

• onerous bail conditions, such as restricting travel to CBD areas, banning journalists from mine sites, and unprecedented non-association orders preventing interaction with family

• persistent attempts to silence environmental NGOs engaging in advocacy.

Corporations also use discretionary powers. Adani/Bravus coal mining company reportedly used private investigators to restrict Wangan and Jagalingou Traditional Owners’ access to their ceremonial camp.

It also reportedly bankrupted senior spokesperson Adrian Burragubba in 2019, sued one climate activist for intimidation, conspiracy and breaches of contract, surveilled his family, and is pursuing him for $600 million (now reduced to $17m) in damages.

In statements to the ABC and the Guardian, Adani says it is exercising its rights under the law to be protected from individuals and groups who act “unlawfully”.

Read more:
How Australia’s expanding environmental movement is breaking the climate action deadlock in politics

Another tool for suppressing protest is the use of “othering” language. This language seeks to stigmatise activists, de-legitimise their concerns and frame them as threats to national security or the economy.

We see it frequently after disruptive protest. For example, ministers have recently described Blockade Australia protesters as “bloody idiots”, who should “get a real job”.

The Queensland Premier has described protesters as “extremists”, who were “dangerous, reckless, irresponsible, selfish and stupid”.

Why do governments feel the need to implement harsher penalties?

Some politicians have argued that anti-protest laws act as a “deterrent” to disruptive protest. Critics have also argued that government powers are used as a shield to protect corporate interests.

In its new report, for example, the Australian Democracy Network shows how corporations can manipulate government powers to harass and punish opponents through a process called “state capture”.

Non-profit organisations have also demonstrated the powerful influence of the fossil fuel industry, particularly in weakening Australian environmentalists’ protest rights.

But it’s not only civil sector groups and protesters sounding the alarm. Increased repression of our rights to engage in non-violent protest have also been voiced by lawyers, scholars and observers such as the United Nations Special Rapporteur.

Does criminalisation reduce protest?

Numerous organisations have highlighted how criminalising protest and silencing charities threaten democratic freedoms that are fundamental to a vibrant, inclusive and innovative society.

But more than that, these strategies don’t appear to work.

Courts have used anti-protest legislation to instead highlight the importance of peaceful protest as a legitimate form of political communication. They have struck down legislation, released activists from remand, overturned unreasonable bail conditions and reduced excessive fines.

Police, too, have refused to remove cultural custodians from their ceremonial grounds.

Read more:
When native title fails: First Nations people are turning to human rights law to keep access to cultural sites

And in general, research shows the public does not support repressive protest policing.

Indeed, rates of disruptive protest are escalating, while protesters vow to continue despite the risk.

The majority of Australians support more ambitious climate action. Many agree with Blockade Australia’s statement that “urgent broad-scale change” is necessary to address the climate crisis.

Politicians may be better served by focusing their efforts on this message, rather than attacking the messengers.

Robyn Gulliver is affiliated with The Commons Social Change Library.

– ref. ‘Draconian and undemocratic’: why criminalising climate protesters in Australia doesn’t actually work – https://theconversation.com/draconian-and-undemocratic-why-criminalising-climate-protesters-in-australia-doesnt-actually-work-185961

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ritesh Chugh, Associate Professor – Information and Communications Technology, CQUniversity Australia

While manufacturers have successfully increased the water-repelling nature of smartphones, they are still far from “waterproof”. A water-resistant product can usually resist water penetration to some extent, but a waterproof product is (meant to be) totally impervious to water.

Last week, Samsung Australia was fined A$14 million by the Australian Federal Court over false representations in ads of the water resistance of its Galaxy phones. The tech giant admitted that submerging Galaxy phones in pool or sea water could corrode the charging ports and stop the phones from working, if charged while still wet.

Similarly, in 2020, Apple was fined €10 million (about A$15.3 million) in Italy for misleading claims about the water resistance of iPhones.

It’s very common for phones to become damaged as a result of being dropped in water. In a 2018 survey in the US, 39% of respondents said they’d dropped their phones in water. Other surveys have had similar results.

So why is it in 2022 – a time where technological marvels surround us – we still don’t have waterproof phones?

Waterproof vs water-resistant

There’s a rating system used to measure devices’ resistance against solids (such as dust) and liquids (namely water). It’s called the Ingress Protection (IP) rating.

An IP rating will have two numbers. In a rating of IP68, the 6 refers to protection against solids on a scale of 0 (no protection) to 6 (high protection), and 8 refers to protection against water on a scale of 0 (no protection) to 9 (high protection).

Interestingly, the benchmark for the water-resistance rating varies between manufacturers. For example, Samsung’s IP68-certified phones are water-resistant to a maximum depth of 1.5m in freshwater for up to 30 minutes, and the company cautions against beach or pool use. Some of Apple’s iPhones with an IP68 rating can be used at a maximum depth of 6m for up to 30 minutes.

Yet both Samsung and Apple are unlikely to consider repairing your water-damaged phone under their warranties.

Moreover, IP rating testing is done under controlled laboratory conditions. In real-life scenarios such as boating, swimming or snorkelling, factors including speed, movement, water pressure and alkalinity all vary. So, gauging a phone’s level of water resistance becomes complicated.

How are phones made water-resistant?

Making a phone water-resistant requires several components and techniques. Typically, the first point of protection is to form a physical barrier around all ingress (entry) points where dust or water could enter. These include the buttons and switches, speakers and microphone outlets, the camera, flash, screen, phone enclosure, USB port and SIM card tray.

These points are covered and sealed using glue, adhesive strips and tapes, silicone seals, rubber rings, gaskets, plastic and metal meshes and water-resistant membranes. After this, a layer of ultra-thin polymer nanocoating is applied to the phone’s circuit board to help repel water.

Nevertheless, a phone’s water resistance will still decrease with time as components age and deteriorate. Apple admits water- and dust-resistance are not permanent features of its phones.

Cameras are not entirely impervious to water, but some can tolerate submersion a lot better than smartphones. Often that’s because they’re relatively simpler devices.

A smartphone has much more functionality, which means internal components are more sensitive, fragile, and must be built into a smaller casing. All of these factors make it doubly difficult to afford phones a similar level of water resistance.

Adding water resistance to phones also increases their price for consumers (by 20% to 30%, according to Xiaomi’s co-founder). This is a major consideration for manufacturers – especially since even a small crack can render any waterproofing void.

Keeping devices dry

Apart from nanocoating on the internal circuit boards, applying water-repellent coating to the exterior of a phone could boost protection. Some companies are working on this technology for manufacturers.

Future phones might also have circuitry that’s fabricated directly onto (waterproof) silicone material using laser writing techniques, and further coated with water-repellant technologies.

For now, however, there’s no such thing as a waterproof phone. If your phone does find itself at the bottom of a pool or toilet and isn’t turning on, make sure you take the best steps to ensure it dries out properly (and isn’t further damaged).

You can also buy a waterproof case or dry pouch if you want to completely waterproof your phone for water activities.

Read more:
Phone wet and won’t turn on? Here’s how to deal with water damage (hint: soaking it in rice won’t work)

Ritesh Chugh 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. It’s 2022. Why do we still not have waterproof phones? – https://theconversation.com/its-2022-why-do-we-still-not-have-waterproof-phones-185775

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Suze Wilson, Senior Lecturer, School of Management, Massey University

The US Supreme Court’s recent ruling to throw out Roe v Wade is an issue of relevance to political leaders in Aotearoa New Zealand.

The decision was met with enthusiasm by those opposed to abortion here, including opposition National MP for Tāmaki Simon O’Connor.

Pro-choice groups such as Abortion Rights Aotearoa (ALRANZ) expressed alarm, not only for American women but for what this might signal for our country.

This has left Opposition Leader Christopher Luxon with a dilemma. He found himself caught up in questions that put a spotlight on his pro-life values, politics and integrity.

Luxon’s anti-abortion beliefs are not news. In the days following his election as party leader late last year, when asked to confirm if, from his point of view, abortion was tantamount to murder, he clarified “that’s what a pro-life position is”.

Yet, in recent days, Luxon has repeatedly and emphatically sought to reassure voters National would not pursue a change to this country’s abortion laws should it win government.

Abortion is legal in Aotearoa, decriminalised in 2020 within the framework of the Abortion Legislation Act. It’s clear Luxon hopes his assurances will appease those of a pro-choice view, the position of most New Zealanders according to polling in 2019.

Read more:
The end of Roe v. Wade would likely embolden global anti-abortion activists and politicians

Principle and pragmatism in leadership

It has long been argued good leadership is underpinned by strength of character, a clear moral compass and integrity – in other words, consistency between one’s words and actions.

Whether a leader possesses the prudence to gauge what is a practically wise course of action in a given situation that upholds important values, or simply panders to what is politically safe and expedient, offers insights into their character.

Over time, we can discern if they lean more strongly toward being values-based or if they tend to align with what Machiavelli controversially advised: that to retain power a leader must appear to look good but be willing to do whatever it takes to maintain their position.

Of course both considerations have some role to play as no one is perfect. We should look for a matter of degree or emphasis. A more strongly Machiavellian orientation is associated with toxic leadership.

Read more:
Roe v Wade overturned: what abortion access and reproductive rights look like around the world

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has characterised herself as a “pragmatic idealist”. Her track record indicates a willingness to accept considerable political heat in defence of key values. This is seen, for example, in her sustained advocacy of COVID-related health measures such as vaccine mandates and managed isolation, even when doing so was not the politically expedient path to follow.

Luxon’s leadership track record in the public domain is far less extensive. Much remains unknown or untested as to what kind of leader he is. Being leader of the opposition is, of course, a very different role to that of prime minister.

However, in his maiden speech Luxon described his Christian faith as something that anchors him and shapes his values, while also arguing politicians should not seek to force their beliefs on others.

His response to this week’s controversy proves he is willing to set aside his personal values for what is politically expedient. This suggests he is less of an idealist and more a pragmatist.

This may be a relief to the pro-choice lobby, given his anti-abortion beliefs. But if the political calculus changes, what might then happen?

The matter is not settled

New Zealand’s constitutional and legal systems differ from those of the US, but the Supreme Court decision proves it’s possible to wind back access to abortion.

Even if Luxon’s current assurance is sincerely intended, it may not sustain should the broader political acceptability of his personal beliefs change. And on that front, there are grounds for concern.

The National Council of Women’s 2021 gender attitudes survey revealed a clear increase in more conservative, anti-egalitarian attitudes. Researchers at the disinformation project also found sexist and misogynistic themes feature strongly in the conspiracy-laden disinformation gaining influence in New Zealand.

If these kinds of shifts in public opinion continue to gather steam, it may become more politically tenable for Luxon to shift gear regarding New Zealand’s abortion laws.

In such a situation, the right to abortion may not be the only one imperilled. A 2019 survey in the US showed a strong connection between an anti-abortion or “pro-life” stance and more general anti-egalitarian views.

It’s clear Luxon is aiming to reassure the public he has no intentions to advance changes to our abortion laws. But his seeming readiness to set aside personal beliefs in favour of what is politically viable also suggests that, if the political landscape changes, so too might his stance.

A broader question arises from this: if a leader is prepared to give up a presumably sincerely held conviction to secure more votes, what other values that matter to voters might they be willing to abandon in pursuit of political power?

Suze Wilson 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. Luxon’s dilemma: when politics and morals don’t match in response to the overturning of Roe v Wade – https://theconversation.com/luxons-dilemma-when-politics-and-morals-dont-match-in-response-to-the-overturning-of-roe-v-wade-186032

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anna Price, Team Leader / Senior Research Officer, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute

Most new parents and caregivers will know the phrase “put your baby down when drowsy but awake”. But some parents may find this just doesn’t work for them. As soon as the baby goes into the cot, they start screaming!

Talking with other parents about how to get a baby to sleep can be as divisive as talking religion or politics. It can feel as though there is only one “right” way of doing things.

But as researchers and clinicians supporting families with child and baby sleep, we can reassure you no one way suits all babies or families.

A baby’s natural temperament, age and feeding pattern are among many factors that influence its sleep. Babies often change their sleep patterns as they get older, and it can take time for them to learn how to settle into sleep.

A baby’s environment also influences how it sleeps – siblings, noise, what the family did that day and stress may all play a role. In turn, family circumstances can affect how a baby’s sleep is perceived.

Read more:
1 in 3 new mums struggle to get their baby to sleep, but some women have a tougher time

Understanding normal baby sleep

Sleep happens in cycles. We start out awake, then fall into light sleep and then deep sleep, before moving into wakefulness and so on. For adults, one of these cycles lasts around 90 minutes. For babies and children, it is around half this time.

Every time we go into a light sleep cycle, we may wake briefly. A baby must learn to link sleep cycles to sleep longer. If a baby learns to self-settle, they can link their sleep cycles on their own. If not, they may need help after every light sleep cycle.

Before about six months of age, babies typically wake regularly during the night to feed and get enough nutrients to grow.

After the first few months of life, falling asleep will involve associations – things that are familiar to us – and these associations are learned. If a baby’s sleep associations are with feeding or being in a carer’s arms, they may need this association to fall back to sleep.

It’s the same for us as grown-ups; if we wake, it can be hard for some of us to get back to sleep if we are missing our usual pillow or blanket, or if a light gets turned on or we can hear a noise.

When thinking about babies and sleep, it’s important to differentiate between the first and the second half of the first year of life. The reason is a key milestone in the baby’s development sometime beyond around four months of age: the understanding of object permanence.

Read more:
Controlled crying is helpful, not harmful

This is when the baby knows a caregiver is still around even when they are not visible or in the room with them. This means that if the baby wakes up at the end of a light sleep cycle and cannot go back to sleep by themselves, they will cry or call out.

Does the ‘drowsy but awake’ advice work?

Some babies will find it harder to self-settle than other babies. The “drowsy but awake” technique is often recommended as a way to help babies develop self-settling techniques.

The idea is to get them used to feeling drowsy when in bed to set up the association between bed and sleep.

Parents can use responsive settling techniques (such as holding or patting) to help their babies and children get ready for sleep.

While the “drowsy but awake” technique hasn’t been rigorously studied on its own, it has been well studied in the context of sleep training.

So what’s the evidence for sleep training?

Sleep training methods that reduce the level of support (incorporating the “drowsy but awake” technique) can help babies build independence in self-settling. The evidence is based on healthy babies, who are typically six months and older.

One of the most widely known sleep training methods is called “controlled comforting” (also known as “controlled crying”). Parents put their baby to bed tired but awake, and leave them to settle for short, increasing periods of time, even if they cry. Parents choose which time intervals are best for their family – for example, two minutes, then four minutes, six minutes, then eight minutes; or two, five, ten minutes; or two, five, five, five minutes.

A more gradual method is called “camping out”. A caregiver lies on a camp bed or sits in a chair next to their baby’s cot to settle the baby when they cry. Over a couple of weeks, the caregiver gradually moves the chair or bed away from the cot and out the door, until the baby is falling asleep without the parent in the room.

Studies show these techniques help parents with their child’s sleep and their own well-being. However, the research is lacking when it comes to cross-cultural context, understanding the perspective of fathers, in children below six months of age, and in families experiencing higher social and economic adversity.

Not every technique works for every baby or every family. If caregivers want to try a new sleep approach, it’s important to have a plan A and plan B. Try plan A with the “ideal” situation but escalate to plan B quickly if plan A doesn’t work. Parents can decide whether to try again another time.

What can I do to establish healthy sleep habits?

Babies and children thrive on routines. Positive bedtime routines can help children get ready for sleep. This means doing the same things every time before bed, so the baby knows it is sleep time. These may include things that help the baby calm down, like a warm bath or reading a story while keeping the environment calm and soothing to promote sleep.

Learning new routines is often easier for babies and children when they have more energy (typically earlier in the day) and harder when they are more tired.

Read more:
Should I roll my baby back over if she rolls onto her stomach in her sleep?

For more information about children’s sleep and how to manage it:

• the Raising Children Network website gives all the current evidence on children’s development and sleep by age group and is government-funded and non-profit

• the Sleep with Kip website offers a range of clinically validated, evidence-informed resources to help understand and support families with sleep. It includes a 90-second “sleep quiz”, which once completed will provide recommendations for simple, actionable sleep strategies to support your child’s sleep, plus information on sleep cycles and the science of normal sleep.

Billy Garvey receives funding from the NHMRC.

Nothing to disclose.

Anna Price, Ashikin Mohd Nordin, and Valerie Sung do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Why are parents told to put their baby to bed ‘drowsy but awake’? Does it work? – https://theconversation.com/why-are-parents-told-to-put-their-baby-to-bed-drowsy-but-awake-does-it-work-183368

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Helen Stavrou, English Language Instructor, University of Cyprus, and PhD Graduate, Charles Sturt University

Traditional approaches to adult language teaching often use resources such as textbooks and generic learning materials that are less than inspiring for learners. New research shows using popular song, as well as films and TV series, for language learning can help connect with people’s interests and motivate them. Based on this research, we have developed six tips for using popular songs to learn a language.

Learning a second language can be challenging at the best of times. It takes time and effort to learn a language.

Read more:
Australian students say they understand global issues, but few are learning another language compared to the OECD average

Better ways to promote enjoyment of long-term learning are needed. Enjoyment helps sustain engagement with a language, which in turn can help improve learners’ confidence in their skills.

This is where songs come into play. Songs are a common source of daily inspiration and relaxation, and they also have many qualities that aid learning. The lyrics repeat words, are simple, “conversation-like” and generate personal associations.

It’s important for both learners and teachers to be able to relate to their language-learning resources. Different people will have different backgrounds, interests and cultural contexts. Adult learners in particular often require greater choice in how they engage with language learning prompts.

What did the research find?

Newly released doctoral research on university students shows the benefits of using popular songs, films and TV series as prompts for learning a language. In online surveys, weekly diary entries and focus groups, these young adults unanimously reported they paid greater attention to the language and themes of popular songs beyond their scheduled classes.

Read more:
Want to learn a language? Try TikTok

Students preferred popular songs due to their real-world authenticity, the personalised choices available in streaming libraries, and relatable topics embedded within them. Learners were likely to encounter these songs outside the classroom, increasing their engagement with their studies.

One student noted in her diary:

Using songs really helps me to participate more in class because it is something more familiar to me, because I listen to songs every day.

A focus group participant said:

Especially in recent years, with technology, a film, a series or a song are much closer to us. We use them much more than a text or a book. After so many years with texts and books, this is much more interesting.

One class task used Rudimental’s These Days, a song well known to students. They enjoyed this exercise in comprehension, making inferences as well as identifying tone and central themes of this song about a relationship break-up.

Towards the end of the semester, another student noted in their diary:

It is the most fun way of learning and generally the most entertaining way of learning a foreign language.

Another benefit relates to the mental health challenges young people are facing, especially during the pandemic. There is evidence to suggest the use of song can help reduce anxiety about learning.

6 tips for using songs to learn a language

The new research resulted in the SMILLE Model shown below, as well as six recommendations to guide teachers on using popular song in the classroom.

1. Ensure teachers and learners (including learning groups) can self-select the songs and other media when designing learning tasks and for cross-cultural activities.

2. Bridge language learning tasks and songs, ensuring selections match the learning objectives.

3. Encourage the use of popular song and media outside the classroom to extend learning beyond school.

4. Avoid using textbooks or sources that don’t interest learners or they are less able to relate to.

5. Discuss with the learners how they relate to the popular song, film or TV series. Use these discussions as a springboard for learning tasks in and out of class.

6. Have a range of prompts prepared to help teachers determine students’ understanding of what is going on, the level of involvement, why the event is happening, the topics and messages being portrayed, cultural similarities or differences, and why the source was chosen.

How do music and songs help with learning?

Research shows music stimulates higher-level thinking and helps learners with both right-brain strengths and hearing abilities. Music has also been shown to strengthen connections to language.

Read more:
Music can help lift our kids out of the literacy rut, but schools in some states are still missing out

In literature classes, music has been used as an emotional “hook” to engage students’ interest in the works being studied.

Learning resources linked to popular culture also help motivate students who see textbook-type resources as uninteresting or less relevant to their lives outside the classroom.

Evidence of the benefits from around the world

Research has shown embedding songs in language lessons has benefited younger learners across the world:

• in the United States, it improved kindergarten students’ motivation, excitement and enthusiasm about learning, increasing their desire to attend kinder

• in China, kindergarten students’ vocabulary increased as a result of repeating targeted words in song lyrics

• in Singapore, reserved and shy students became more confident and comfortable when attempting English pronunciations and were better able to recall difficult language instructions

• in Germany, students improved their ability to form and identify plurals and vowels for unknown words in songs

• in Scotland, students in a singing-learning group showed greater improvements in a second language than a non-singing group

• in England, students were able to learn targeted phrases better in song-focused lessons than those who didn’t use song.

Read more:
‘Just as important as English or maths’: how mentoring is bringing music alive for primary school students

Previous studies of university students have also shown the benefits of using songs for adult language learning:

• Finnish students improved their writing fluency

• in Colombia, students’ listening skills, motivation and engagement in discussions all improved

• in Bangladesh, using songs as audio prompts generated richer content in students’ writing and more positive and pleasant learning experiences

• Spanish students’ recall of text improved.

Our research adds to the evidence that popular songs and media are strong resources to kick-start and sustain adult motivation when learning a second language.

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

– ref. Struggling to learn a language? 6 tips on how pop songs can help – https://theconversation.com/struggling-to-learn-a-language-6-tips-on-how-pop-songs-can-help-184642

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kate Fitz-Gibbon, Director, Monash Gender and Family Violence Prevention Centre; Associate Professor of Criminology, Faculty of Arts, Monash University

In 2020 the killing of Hannah Clarke and her three children – Aaliyah, 6, Laianah, 4, and Trey, 3 – by her former partner Rowan Baxter, horrified the nation. It prompted significant calls for urgent action on violence against women and improved recognition of coercive control as a leading precursor to intimate partner femicide.

Advocates, including Hannah Clarke’s parents, have campaigned for the introduction of coercive control as a stand-alone criminal offence.

Yesterday, the findings of the coronial inquest into these deaths were released. They are a clear reminder that men’s violence against women is a national crisis and system reform is urgent.

Here’s what the inquest found, and what systemic changes are needed.

We must not accept the killing of women as inevitable

Describing Baxter (who subsequently killed himself) as “a master of manipulation”, Deputy State Coroner Jane Bentley said:

I find it unlikely that any further actions taken by police officers, service providers, friends or family members could have stopped Baxter from ultimately executing his murderous plans.

This endorses a key message from recent inquiries at state and national levels of the need to increase perpetrator accountability at all points of the system.

However, we cannot accept as inevitable the status quo that one woman in Australia is killed every nine days by a current or former partner.

Violence against women is preventable. Baxter’s actions reaffirm the well evidenced fact that men who commit intimate partner femicide rarely do so “out of the blue”.

Rowan Baxter had a history of violence. The inquest findings document how, in the period prior to his “final act of cowardice”, Baxter:

• had been the subject of a domestic violence order application

• had breached the conditions of a domestic violence order, an act for which he was not charged

• had been the subject of an assault complaint

• had a history of coercive controlling behaviours, details of which were provided by a friend of Hannah’s in an affidavit to Queensland police prior to her death.

The inquest also revealed that in his relationship with Hannah, Baxter had used reproductive coercion, technology-facilitated and image-based abuse among other forms of intimate partner violence.

Numerous Australian death reviews have found the period of relationship separation, histories of coercive and controlling behaviours, and interactions with the family court system are well recognised precursors to intimate partner femicide.

Victim survivor advocates have repeatedly said they are best placed to assess their risk.

The inquest showed Hannah Baxter had been in contact with police and had expressed her concerns to family and friends.

It exposed a system not built to effectively deal with men’s violence against women, or to contextualise every system interaction in a broader pattern in order to reveal the real risk to women and children.

Read more:
‘All these people with lived experience are not being heard’: what family violence survivors want policy makers to know

The need for whole of system reform

The coroner made recommendations to improve policing, child safety, and service system responses, including:

• a trial of a specialist domestic violence police station

• increased training for all specialist domestic violence police officers

• increased funding for men’s behaviour change programs both in prisons and in the community.

The recommendations stress the importance of multidisciplinary responses and show working in silos is ineffective.

There has been considerable recent reform in Queensland and across other states and territories.

This includes legislation designed to enhance domestic violence risk assessment and management practices, and to introduce information-sharing schemes essential to a whole-of-system response to domestic violence.

Victoria’s information-sharing system seeks to ensure risks are kept in full view across all parts of the system.

This aims to ensure that when women interact with various agencies, their experiences of an abuser’s violence are shared among professionals tasked with assessing and managing risk.

The inquest findings provide a clear reminder as to why effective risk assessment and information sharing are essential components of an effective whole-of-system response to domestic violence.

Read more:
There’s $1.3 billion for women’s safety in the budget and it’s nowhere near enough

We must recognise children as victim-survivors in their own right

The inquest found:

there was no real assessment of risk of harm to the children by QPS [Queensland Police Service] or Child Safety Officers – the only assessment was that Hannah was able to care for them.

This finding is critical.

Children frequently remain invisible at different points of the family violence system.

Yet in Australia, one child is killed almost every fortnight by a parent.

While children are typically treated as an extension of their primary carer, the risks children face must be identified and addressed in their own right.

Victoria is presently developing a child and young person-specific risk assessment and management framework, as part of reforms stemming from the Victorian royal commission into family violence.

But in most Australian states and territories, the risks specific to children go unaddressed.

Read more:
‘Silent victims’: royal commission recommends better protections for child victims of family violence

An urgent need for sustained national and state action

The inquest findings are a stark reminder of the horrific cost of men’s violence against women in Australia and the need for urgent action.

With a new federal government in place, and the expected imminent release of the next National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children (as the old one is due to expire today), we now need a whole-of-government commitment to addressing all forms of men’s violence.

The draft National Plan (which replaces the one about to end) sets out a commitment to address prevention, intervention, response, and recovery. Encouragingly, this draft plan provided a much-needed commitment to recognising children as victim-survivors in their own right.

As the next National Plan comes into place, we need to focus on delivering the evidence-based recommendations of recent inquiries, commissions and consultations. Critically, we also need a transparent approach to monitoring progress.

As of the end of May, 20 women in Australia had been killed by men in 2022.

We must not wait for the inevitable findings of the next inquest.

A bold national commitment is needed now. We sorely need a new national plan, matched by a resourcing commitment at the state and national level that befits the depth of the crisis.

Kate currently receives funding for family violence related research from the Australian Research Council, Australian Institute of Criminology, Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety, the Victorian Government and the Department of Social Services. This piece is written by Kate Fitz-Gibbon in her capacity as Director of the Monash Gender and Family Violence Prevention Centre and are wholly independent of Kate Fitz-Gibbon’s role as Chair of Respect Victoria.

Marie Segrave receives funding for gender and family violence related research from the Australian Research Council, Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety and Respect Victoria.

Sandra Walklate receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Australian Institute of Criminology for research into violence against women. She is also in receipt of funding from the N8PRP in the UK for police related work on violence against women.

Ellen Reeves 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. The Hannah Clarke inquest reveals, yet again, significant system failures. Here’s what’s urgently needed for women’s safety – https://theconversation.com/the-hannah-clarke-inquest-reveals-yet-again-significant-system-failures-heres-whats-urgently-needed-for-womens-safety-186050

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mary Anne Kenny, Associate Professor, School of Law, Murdoch University

The election of the Albanese Labor government brings an opportunity to end one of the most detrimental elements of Australian refugee law and policy in the past decade: the use of temporary visas.

Temporary protection has been the only option available for asylum seekers who arrived by boat a decade ago and were recognised as refugees. Known as the “legacy caseload”, these people are caught in a system of law and policy that keeps them in a state of perpetual limbo.

As the new government committed to end temporary protection, we have just published a policy brief with the Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law outlining how this could be achieved.

Our report sets out practical reforms that can be implemented relatively simply, within existing legislative provisions and with only minimal changes to policy and regulations.

The 17 recommendations were produced in consultation with refugees and asylum seekers living on temporary protection visas and bridging visas. We also consulted civil society, including former and current temporary protection visa holders and legal groups working with refugees.

The impact of temporary protection and the fast-track system on refugees and
asylum seekers has left many depressed and suicidal. Expectations from those living on temporary visas and the wider refugee advocates are high and there is significant apprehension about the transition.

The new government understands it will need to approach reforms carefully. Our recommendations are accompanied by a trauma-informed strategy to help reduce mental distress, deterioration and retraumatisation of asylum seekers, while also increasing community engagement.

The current system is damaging

Australia’s temporary protection system is unfair, expensive, impractical and inconsistent with our international human rights obligations.

In 2014, the Coalition government reintroduced a Howard-era three-year Temporary Protection Visa (TPV) and a five-year Safe Haven Enterprise Visa (SHEV) for the more than 30,000 people who arrived by boat between August 13 2012 and January 1 2014.

However, unlike the earlier Howard policy, the temporary visas this time provided no realistic prospect of applying for permanent protection.

The number of people in this “legacy caseload” as of May 2022 is 31,256.

They come from many countries. The largest number are from Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. The majority – around 19,500 people – have been found to be refugees and have been granted TPV and SHEV.

The 10,000 who have been refused a visa were assessed through a “fast-track” process that has been neither fair nor fast.

People who have been refused have been living in the Australian community for ten years or more while awaiting the outcome of appeals.

Some (such as the Nadeselingham family) are working or have had children in Australia.

There are also many asylum seekers from Afghanistan who have been refused visas but who cannot return due to the reemergence of the Taliban in August 2021.

In other words, some of those refused visas may well be refugees or have other ties to the Australian community. However, the current legal system does not allow them to apply for other visas without going through cumbersome, expensive appeals and ministerial intervention processes.

People who hold TPVs and SHEVs are allowed to work but not to reunite with family or travel freely overseas.

Others live on precarious short-term bridging visas, some without the right to work. Many are without access to income support. In either situation, the uncertainty is damaging people’s mental health and well-being.

Key recommendations

The focus of the policy brief was to set out reforms either within the current legislative and policy framework, or with minimal changes.

This means changes can occur within a relatively short time frame.

Key recommendations include:

• refugees on TPVs and SHEVs should be moved onto permanent visas known as Resolution of Status visas. People who have not yet been assessed or who have previously been refused protection should also be able to apply for a permanent visa that does not require another assessment of their protection claims

• restrictions on travel for TPV and SHEV holders should be removed, pending the grant of a permanent visa and includes specific recommendations in relation to travel documents. Travel is essential for re-establishing links to separated family

• family reunion, particularly partners and children, should be prioritised. Granting people permanent visas allows them to begin the process of family reunion through the family or humanitarian programs

• the government should establish a specialised team in the Department of Home Affairs to work closely with migration agents, lawyers and refugee communities. This group could identify other options for allowing reunification of close relatives and children who, under current law, may not fall within the definition of “member of a family unit”. Families have been separated for at least 10 years; many left children at home who have now reached ages where they will no longer be considered dependent.

In 2014, the new minister for immigration, citizenship and multicultural affairs Andrew Giles said

Labor has a longstanding policy of opposing TPVs, for good reason. They do not provide a sustainable solution for refugees. The uncertainty exacerbates real mental health issues and denies people the capacity to live full lives. As well as significant international law concerns with these provisions, they put people in limbo. There is no deterrence value here, even if you accept that to be a valid policy objective – they only place vulnerable people in a place of uncertainty.

He now has significant power to put those words into action.

Mary Anne Kenny has previously received funding from the Australian Research Council and sitting fees from the Department of Home Affairs.

Ali Reza Yunespour is a Board Member of Community Refugee Sponsorship Australia (CRSA) and volunteer Partnership Coordinator with Indigo Foundation Australia.

Carol Grech is a board member of the Rosemary Bryant Research Foundation.

Nicholas Procter has previously received grant funding and sitting fees from from Department of Health and Department of Home Affairs.

– ref. Australia’s temporary visa system is unfair, expensive, impractical and inconsistent. Here’s how the new government could fix it – https://theconversation.com/australias-temporary-visa-system-is-unfair-expensive-impractical-and-inconsistent-heres-how-the-new-government-could-fix-it-185870

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ben Swift, Educational Experiences team lead (Senior Lecturer), ANU School of Cybernetics, Australian National University

I love writing code to make things: apps, websites, charts, even
music. It’s a skill I’ve worked hard at for
more than 20 years.

So I must confess last week’s news
about the release of a new “AI assistant” coding helper called GitHub Copilot gave me complicated feelings.

Copilot, which spits out code to order based on “plain English” descriptions, is a remarkable tool. But is it about to put coders like me out of a job?

Trained on billions of lines of human code

GitHub (now owned by Microsoft) is a collaboration platform and social network for coders. You can think of it as something like a cross between Dropbox and Instagram, used by everyone from individual hobbyists through to highly paid software engineers at big tech companies.

Over the past decade or so, GitHub’s users have uploaded tens of billions of lines of code for more than 200 million apps. That’s a lot of ifs and fors and
print("hello world") statements.

The Copilot AI works like many other machine learning tools: it was “trained” by scanning through and looking for patterns in those tens of billions of lines of code written and uploaded by members of GitHub’s coder community.

The training can take many months, hundreds of millions of dollars in computing equipment, and enough electricity to run a house for a decade. Once it’s done, though, human coders can then write a description (in plain English) of what they want their code to do, and the Copilot AI helper will write the code for them.

Based on the Codex “language model”, Copilot is the next step in a long line of “intelligent auto-completion” tools. However, these have been far more limited in the past. Copilot is a significant improvement.

A startlingly effective assistant

I was given early “preview” access to Copilot about a year ago, and I’ve been using it on and off. It takes some practice to learn exactly how to frame your requests in English so the Copilot AI gives the most useful code output, but it can be startlingly effective.

However, we’re still a long way from “Hey Siri, make me a million dollar iPhone app”. It’s still necessary to use my software design skills to figure out what the different bits of code should do in my app.

To understand the level Copilot is working at, imagine writing an essay. You can’t just throw the essay question at it and expect it to produce a useful, well-argued piece. But if you figure out the argument and maybe write the topic sentence for each paragraph, it will often do a pretty good job at filling in the rest of each paragraph automatically.

Depending on the type of coding I’m doing, this can sometimes be a huge time- and brainpower-saver.

Biases and bugs

There are some open questions with these sorts of AI coding helper tools. I’m a bit worried they’ll introduce, and reinforce, winner-takes-all dynamics: very few companies have the data (in this case, the billions of lines of code) to build tools like this, so creating a competitor to Copilot will be challenging.

And will Copilot itself be able to suggest new and better ways to write code and build software? We have seen AI systems innovate before. On the other hand, Copilot may be limited to doing things the way we’ve always done them, as AI systems trained on past data are prone to do.

My experiences with Copilot have also made me very aware my expertise is still needed, to check the “suggested” code is actually what I’m looking for.

Sometimes it’s trivial to see that Copilot has misunderstood my input. Those are the easy cases, and the tool makes it easy to ask for a different suggestion.

The trickier cases are where the code looks right, but it may contain a subtle bug. The bug might be because this AI code generation stuff is hard, or it might be because the billions of lines of human-written code that Copilot was trained on contained bugs of their own.

Another concern is potential issues about licensing and ownership of the code Copilot was trained on. GitHub has said it is trying to address these issues, but we will have to wait and see how it turns out.

More output from the same input

At times, using Copilot has made me feel a little wistful. The skill I often think makes me at least a little bit special (my ability to write code and make things with computers) may be in the process of being “automated away”, like many other jobs have been at different times in human history.

However, I’m not selling my laptop and running off to live a simple
life in the bush just yet. The human coder is still a crucial part of the system, but as curator rather than creator.

Of course, you may be thinking “that’s what a coder would say” … and you may be right.

AI tools like Copilot, OpenAI’s text generator GPT-3, and Google’s Imagen text-to-image engine, have seen huge improvements in the past few years.

Read more:
Robots are creating images and telling jokes. 5 things to know about foundation models and the next generation of AI

Many in white-collar “creative industries” which deal in
text and images are starting to wrestle with their fears of being (at least partially) automated away. Copilot shows some of us in the tech industry are in the same boat.

Still, I’m (cautiously) excited. Copilot is a force multiplier in the most optimistic tool-building tradition: it provides more leverage, to increase the useful output for the same amount of input.

These new tools and the new leverage they provide are embedded in wider systems of people, technology and environmental actors, and I’m really fascinated to see how these systems reconfigure themselves in response.

In the meantime, it might help save my brain juice for the hard parts of my coding work, which can only be a good thing.

Read more:
Artificial intelligence is now part of our everyday lives – and its growing power is a double-edged sword

As mentioned in the article, I was given early beta access to the GitHub copilot AI tool.

– ref. So this is how it feels when the robots come for your job: what GitHub’s Copilot ‘AI assistant’ means for coders – https://theconversation.com/so-this-is-how-it-feels-when-the-robots-come-for-your-job-what-githubs-copilot-ai-assistant-means-for-coders-185957

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Miguel Loyola, PhD Candidate on the Implementation of Sustainable Policies, ITLS, University of Sydney

There are clear economic, environmental, safety and health benefits to getting people cycling more, but research shows would-be cyclists are reluctant to start without good cycle paths.

The problem for planners and policymakers is many Australians oppose cycle lanes, believing they’ll only force drivers to drive more slowly and extend travel times.

But our new study, published in the journal Accident Analysis and Prevention, suggests not everyone around the world sees cycle lanes this way.

We found people in the United Kingdom and Australia typically misunderstand the impact cycle lanes have on speed limits – wrongly believing the addition of a cycle lane means cars would inevitably need to go more slowly.

To be clear, nobody is suggesting you should hit the accelerator and drive aggressively fast near cyclists. But if there is a safe cycle path that affords good distance between cars and bikes, there’s no reason the addition of a cycle path should necessarily slow down traffic.

Misunderstanding around this issue may be fuelling avoidable opposition to cycling infrastructure.

Read more:
3 in 4 people want to ride a bike but are put off by lack of safe lanes

Speed limits: a matter of perception

Our study involved 1,591 participants in the Netherlands, the UK and Australia. These three countries have similar speed limits in urban areas (50km/h), but the Netherlands has lower speed limits of 30km/h in residential areas.

First, we showed the study participants 15 pictures of streets without cycle lanes and asked them to estimate what the speed limit would be in these streets.

Interestingly, participants from the Netherlands always estimated much lower speeds for these pictures than their UK or Australian counterparts did.

This is important because previous research has shown that the higher speed limits are perceived, the faster drivers intend to drive. And higher speeds are the main contributor to road accidents (even more than drugs and fatigue).

Previous research has also shown 30km/h speed limits on local residential streets could reduce the Australian road death toll by 13%.

So, for our study, it was significant the Dutch participants always estimated the speed limit would be lower than the UK and Australian respondents did. It suggests Dutch drivers already view roads in a way that is safer for other road users (including cyclists).

What about when cycle lanes are added into the picture?

We then showed the participants pictures of the very same streets but after cycle lanes had been built on them (but showed them in a way that meant our participants wouldn’t realise these were the same streets).

In other words, we first showed them the streets without the cycle lanes and then the same street with cycle lanes (some of the cycle lanes were separated lanes, featuring a physical barrier dividing cyclists from cars; others were painted-on bike lanes with no physical barrier).

As we showed these new pictures, we asked the participants again to estimate the speed limit in these streets.

Study participants from Australia and the UK tended to believe cycle lanes would necessitate lower speed limits for drivers. In other words; they saw cycle lanes are a symbol of a slow commute, which would presumably therefore drive down support from drivers.

On the other hand, respondents in the Netherlands (where cycling is more common) perceived cycle lanes would not necessitate lower speed limits for drivers.

In fact, these participants tended to think cycle lanes might even suggest traffic could go faster because the cyclists are in a separate lane (and not mixed in with car traffic).

In short, our research found cycle lanes are usually misinterpreted as meaning “drivers, slow down!” in places where they are not common.

Where to from here?

Lower speed limits and cycle lanes are contested issues. Opposition usually comes from drivers who believe lower speed limits will significantly increase their journey times.

But this isn’t always the case. One 2017 study found “the generic impact of introducing 30km/h in urban residential streets is almost negligible in terms of travel time, ie. 48 seconds for a 27-minute trip, or less than 3%”.

In short, lower speed limits and cycle lanes will not necessarily make your driving time longer. Our study shows that people’s support of cycle lanes is influenced by familiarity with cycle lanes and perceptions of how driver speed limits will be affected by cycling infrastructure.

Australia can learn from other cities. Support for the implementation of lower speed limits and cycle lanes will make travelling safer, faster and more sustainable.

Read more:
Cycle lanes blamed for urban congestion – here’s the reality

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

– ref. When driving near a cycle lane, do you speed up or slow down? Where you’re from may influence your answer – https://theconversation.com/when-driving-near-a-cycle-lane-do-you-speed-up-or-slow-down-where-youre-from-may-influence-your-answer-185402

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrew Baillie, Professor of Allied Health, University of Sydney

COVID might be the largest mass casualty event in Australian history. And with one in 20 people with COVID still experiencing symptoms three months later, long COVID might even become Australia’s most significant cause of longer-term disability.

Around eight million Australians are estimated to have been infected with COVID during the pandemic, so a prevalence of 5% means 400,000 people could have long COVID. With more than 30,000 new cases of COVID detected each day in Australia, long COVID is becoming increasingly common.

We’ve known for some time that getting vaccinated reduces your chance of long COVID. Now new data suggests getting boosted further reduces your chance of long COVID.

But it’s still possible to get long COVID after being vaccinated – and Australia needs to be better prepared for this.

Read more:
You’re much less likely to get long COVID if you’ve been vaccinated

Remind me, what’s long COVID?

Long COVID is a potentially debilitating condition which follows the acute or early phase of COVID infection.

Affected people have described many symptoms, the most common being shortness of breath, fatigue, fever, headaches and “brain fog”.

While clinicians are familiar with post-viral or post-infective syndromes, long COVID is new. There is no diagnostic test, and it’s likely it’s really a mixture of different conditions with different underlying causes.

Different time-frames are used to define it. According to the Australian Department of Health, a person experiences long COVID when their symptoms remain four weeks after they first had COVID.

The World Health Organization says long COVID is usually three months from infection, lasts at least two months, and cannot be explained by another diagnosis.

What role does vaccination play?

People who are vaccinated are less likely to get COVID, have less severe COVID, and are less likely to pass it on.

People who are vaccinated are also less likely to get long COVID, with lower rates among those who have had their boosters.

Self-reported data from the United Kingdom compared symptoms in people who received two or three doses of vaccine and between the Delta and Omicron (BA1 or BA2) variants of COVID.

Some 9.5% of people who were likely infected with Delta and were double vaccinated reported long COVID symptoms that limited their activities. The rate for those who were triple vaccinated was less than half: 4.4%.

For Omicron, the rate was 6.2% for those likely to have had BA1 and were double vaccinated, and 5.3% with BA1 who were triple vaccinated.

Read more:
Long COVID: vaccination could reduce symptoms, new research suggests

These results are considered indicators only because the data was self-reported. But although we can’t yet be absolutely sure, triple vaccination looks to be associated with lower rates of long COVID.

Putting it all together, we estimate about 5% of people who had COVID in Australia will develop long COVID.

Children and adolescents appear to be less likely to get long COVID than adults and many will recover with time. But still, up to one in 50 children may get long COVID.

While vaccination protects children and young people from COVID, we don’t yet know if those kids who get breakthrough COVID infections after vaccination will be any more or less likely to develop long COVID.

It’s not yet clear whether vaccination improves symptoms and quality of life for people who already have long COVID. A recent UK review of the evidence suggests it might.

People with long COVID need support

People with long COVID have banded together on social media platforms to support each other, to share information, and to advocate for better care.

The Facebook group Australia Long COVID Community has more than 1,400 members. Many describe severe symptoms with significant disability, and difficulty returning to work.

While most people who are infected with COVID will recover without help, the 5% who get long COVID will often need health care to support them to recover. This support can be intensive and take time.

But Australia’s health, welfare, and disability services are under-prepared. We also have very little information about the number of people with long COVID, as health minister Mark Butler acknowledged last week:

So what do governments need to do?

We need to prepare our health, welfare, and disability services to support the growing number of Australians with long COVID. At a national level, we need:

• surveillance for long COVID to track rates, symptoms and impact on work and quality of life over time
• better support and resources for GPs to treat long COVID in primary care
• more specialist long COVID clinics for those with more complex problems
• disability supports for people whose problems become long-lasting
• research to understand long COVID and how to best treat it.

Current recommendations are to see your GP for help with long COVID. But while GPs have experience managing post viral illnesses and there are guidelines for the care of post-COVID conditions, GPs are likely to need additional support and resources to respond.

Specialist long COVID clinics are opening in capital cities and regional centres to provide additional care. While these efforts are encouraging, they are likely to only be able to respond to a small proportion of the people who need help for long COVID.

In the US, President Joe Biden has pushed for people with long COVID to have access to federal disability supports. We need a similar plan in Australia.

Let’s not repeat the mistakes of stigmatising and dismissing earlier post-viral or post-infective syndromes like chronic fatigue syndrome. The devastating impact on those struggling to get a diagnosis, and adequate treatment and supports is still felt.

Read more:
We need to brace for a tsunami of long COVID. But we’re not quite sure the best way to treat it

Andrew Baillie works for The University of Sydney in a position partially funded by Sydney Local Health District. He receives funding from the National health and Medical Research Council. He is affiliated with the Long-COVID Australia Collaboration.

Maree Teesson is Chair of Australia’s Mental Health Think Tank which is funded by the BHP Foundation. She is Director of The Matilda Centre, The University of Sydney. She is chair of the Million Minds Mission. She receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, the Australian Government, BHP Foundation, Paul Ramsay Foundation and other research organisations. She is co-director of CLIMATESchools PTY LTD a company established in 2015 to distribute evidence resources to education organisations.

Philip Britton receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, the Medical Research Future Fund, the Royal Australasian College of Physicians and the Commonwealth Department of Health

Tania Sorrell receives funding from NHMRC, ARC, MRFF, NSW Office of Health Medical Research

– ref. Triple vaccination seems to reduce the chance of long COVID – but we still need to prepare for a jump in cases – https://theconversation.com/triple-vaccination-seems-to-reduce-the-chance-of-long-covid-but-we-still-need-to-prepare-for-a-jump-in-cases-183428

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Patrick O’Connor, Associate Professor, University of Adelaide

A tiny parasitic mite that lives on the European honeybee (Apis mellifera) has breached Australia’s border quarantine and been detected in managed bee hives in New South Wales.

This is bad news for Australia’s honey industry, with over 300 hives in Newcastle set to be destroyed and biosecurity zones in place. The potential economic impact to the honey industry is estimated at around A$70 million per year, but the broader impacts to agriculture are not yet known.

This is where much of the dialogue on the impact of varroa mite settling in Australia usually stops. But there’s another way to look at this pest: as an effective biocontrol for feral honeybees in Australia’s natural environment.

Honeybees were introduced to Australia almost 200 years ago and out-compete native pollinators, which may have dire flow-on effects for ecosystems. The varroa mite’s arrival in Australia was only a matter of time – and with better planning, we could benefit from one pest fighting another.

Making trade-offs

The varroa mite infests hives, parasitises the bees, and can spread viruses and other pathogens. They mainly feed and breed on honeybee larvae and pupae, causing malformation. If left unmanaged, heavy mite infestation can cause colony collapse in some circumstances.

The mite has spread across the world to colonise almost every known location of European honeybees. It has been kept out of Australia thanks to stringent border quarantine measures, but this tiny mite can easily hitchhike on imports, then establish and spread when it reaches a honeybee colony.

So would Australia benefit more from treating the varroa mite as a pest, or an environmental biocontrol? More research is needed to resolutely answer this question, but let’s look at a the potential trade-offs of either option.

Read more:
Explainer: Varroa mite, the tiny killer threatening Australia’s bees

Treating the mite as a pest

Treating the mite as a pest would mean chasing down known outbreaks and destroying hives, beefing up border quarantine measures and supporting the beekeeping industry to tide them over the impact and adjustment period.

Beekeepers can stop the mite in its tracks in managed hives with chemical controls, but this comes at a cost, including some loss of productivity. And a loss of productivity in managed hives can have a knock-on effect on the pollination industry, as beekeepers are paid to take their bees to pollinate crops.

Thirty-five agricultural industries in Australia rely entirely or in part on bee pollination, including almonds, apples and cherries. Indeed, the total contribution of honeybees to Australia’s economy is estimated at $14.2 billion.

The potential consequences for industrial beekeeping and agriculture, and increased costs of production, can have unwelcome effects on food prices.

Treating the mite as a biocontrol

Treating the mite as an environmental biocontrol would mean diverting money for eradication and control measures to help industries live with varroa. This could be by, for instance, increasing the use of native pollinators for Australian agriculture.

It could also involve releasing the mite into feral honeybee hives, where we believe a rapid recovery of native pollinators is needed, such as in areas recovering from bushfires. The varroa mite has little impact on native bees because it’s specific to the Apis genus of the introduced bee, though the usual rules for biocontrol release would need to be followed.

Read more:
Buzz off honey industry, our national parks shouldn’t be milked for money

Feral European honeybee populations are recognised as a key threatening process to Australia’s native biodiversity, with impacts felt across the country. Feral bees are abundant and efficient pollinators, and compete with native birds, insects and mammals (such as pygmy possums) for nectar from flowers.

Honeybees avoid, or only partially pollinate, some native plants. This means a high concentration of honeybees could shift the make-up of native vegetation in a region. They also pollinate invasive weeds such as gorse, lantana and scotch broom, which are particularly expensive to control in the wake of bushfires.

When the varroa mite breached New Zealand, feral honeybees declined by about 90% within a few years. However, there’s limited information about the ecological benefits of this, because the data was not collected while the focus was on agricultural industry impact.

It’s also worth noting that knocking down feral honeybees could also be good for the honeybee industry, as feral honeybees are a recognised competitor with commercial ones.

Making the best decision

Questions about trading-off potential agricultural costs for environmental benefits are difficult to answer. This is, in part, because any environmental benefits gained from reducing a widespread threat are usually indirect, such as flow-on effects of increased ecosystem health.

Another reason is because markets are well established for agricultural products and services, but they’re usually missing or only just forming for ecosystem services (such as flood control, water supply and quality, and cultural values).

To calculate the economic benefit of reducing feral honeybees, we first must put a value on the services natural ecosystems provide.

While some steps have been made, progress on implementation has been slow for the last decade. So far, we’ve predominately put values on ecosystem services from discrete natural assets, such as the Great Barrier Reef, which contributed an estimated $6.4 billion in 2015-2016 to Australia’s economy.

Read more:
Pest plants and animals cost Australia around $25 billion a year – and it will get worse

In the case of the varroa mite, we have known the potential for opportunities and costs from a likely invasion for more than a decade. But the focus has been on preventing the invasion to protect agriculture, because we’re mostly concerned about the industry’s direct benefits and impacts.

There have been no estimations of the economic benefits of using the mite as an environmental biocontrol to lower feral honeybee populations, even though our New Zealand friends did suggest, in a paper, we prepare ourselves.

We may successfully eradicate the varroa mite’s recent incursion to the relief of agriculture and beekeepers. But given the near inevitability of the mite establishing in Australia, we must invest in better understanding the holistic economics of keeping a potentially very important biocontrol out of the country.

Patrick O’Connor receives funding from the Australian Research Council, Agrifutures Australia and State Governments.

– ref. Hear me out – we could use the varroa mite to wipe out feral honey bees, and help Australia’s environment – https://theconversation.com/hear-me-out-we-could-use-the-varroa-mite-to-wipe-out-feral-honey-bees-and-help-australias-environment-185959

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michael Main, Visiting Scholar, Australian National University

The COVID pandemic slowed mining activity across the Pacific. But as economic activity returns, an Australia-based company is poised to pursue what would be the largest mine in Papua New Guinea’s history.

The vast gold and copper project, known as the Frieda River mine, would also include a hydroelectric plant and a dam with a storage capacity for around 4.6 billion tonnes of mine tailings and waste rock.

The project is awaiting approval by the PNG government. However, locals, conservationists and experts say it could cause catastrophic harm to one of the world’s most important river systems and should not proceed as proposed.

Australia is PNG’s largest development partner. As resource extraction expands across the Pacific, the new Labor government is well placed to help our neighbours ensure mining activity doesn’t harm people or the environment.

Remote, unstable terrain

The Frieda River mine is proposed by Brisbane-based, Chinese-owned company Pan Aust.

The project centres on the Frieda River copper-gold deposit located in the tropical mountain ranges of northwest PNG.

The river flows into the Sepik River Basin, one of the world’s great river systems. It’s the largest unpolluted freshwater system in New Guinea and among the largest freshwater basins in the Asia-Pacific.

The Frieda River deposit was discovered in the 1960s. It lies in extremely remote terrain, along the Pacific Ring of Fire which is prone to seismic activity.

The mine would produce tailings (or waste materials) containing sulphide, which turns into sulphuric acid when exposed to oxygen. For this reason, the tailings must be permanently covered by water.

The proposed mine’s location, high in the mountains, means a tailings accident could devastate the entire Sepik River Basin.

About 430,000 people depend on the Sepik River and nearby forests for their livelihood. The proposal has galvanised massive opposition from both locals and others.

Read more:
China’s push into PNG has been surprisingly slow and ineffective. Why has Beijing found the going so tough?

Downplaying the risks

In 2020, ten independent experts including myself, were commissioned by PNG’s Centre for Environmental Law and Community Rights to individually review the project’s “environmental impact statement”. The work was undertaken pro bono.

I’m an experienced gold exploration geologist and environmental scientist. In my review, I found the statement downplayed or obscured the proposal’s extraordinary level of risk.

First, it omitted a report by design engineers that analysed the extreme consequences of dam failure.

Second, the main report failed to mention the dam would need an intensive inspection and maintenance regime “in perpetuity”. In other words, a potentially toxic dam in a remote part of a very poor country requires highly skilled and experienced professionals to maintain it – not just for the 33-year life of the mine, but forever.

Our reports prompted a group of UN Special Rapporteurs to write letters of concern to the governments of PNG, Australia, China and Canada, where companies involved in the joint venture have ties.

The letters said the mine’s development appeared to “disregard the human rights of those affected … given the nature of the project it could undermine the rights of Sepik children to life, health, culture, and a healthy environment, including the rights of unborn generations.”

The Conversation contacted Pan Aust for a response to these claims. In a statement, the company said it was “respectfully engaged in the Government of Papua New Guinea’s approvals process” and as such, it was inappropriate to provide a public comment.

Read more:
Destitution on Australia’s hardening border with PNG – and the need for a better aid strategy

New safeguards are needed

Inadequate consideration of a mine’s social and environmental impact is rife cross the Pacific. And PNG provides many examples of the catastrophes that can result.

Tailings from BHP’s ill-fated Ok-Tedi mine, located in the same mountain range as the proposed Frieda River mine, severely damaged nearby rivers.

And environmental damage from the Panguna copper mine was a key factor in community unrest and the Bougainville civil war.

Recent research into governance of mining in PNG found government agencies were under-resourced, leaving “companies as effectively self-regulating”.

Proponents of mining in PNG frequently cite its contribution to economic development. But for the benefits to be realised, resources must be extracted in a way that is environmentally, socially and economically sustainable.

New laws are needed to ensure resource extraction projects in PNG don’t cause long-lasting social and environmental damage. This should include mandatory, transparent and independent reviews of projects.

Australia has extensive experience with environmental regulation of mining projects and can assist in this regard. Such assistance should be delivered in a way that strengthens relations between Australia and PNG, and empowers and equips the smaller nation.

Sustainable development for our Pacific neighbours is in Australia’s strategic interests. Australian companies often benefit significantly from resource extraction in PNG, creating an extra responsibility to ensure better outcomes.

Read more:
A brutal war and rivers poisoned with every rainfall: how one mine destroyed an island

Michael Main was one of ten independent expert reviewers of the Environmental Impact Statement for the Sepik Development Project and advises on resource extraction projects in the Pacific.

– ref. Australia can help ensure the biggest mine in PNG’s history won’t leave a toxic legacy – https://theconversation.com/australia-can-help-ensure-the-biggest-mine-in-pngs-history-wont-leave-a-toxic-legacy-185580

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rachele Sloane, Graduate Researcher and Tutor – Master of Education, Student Wellbeing Specialisation (MGSE), The University of Melbourne

New Child Safe Standards come into effect in Victoria this Friday, July 1. The set of 11 standards builds on the original seven. One significant change was made with little fanfare: well-being was included alongside safety as a key responsibility of organisations working with children and young people.

This change acknowledges growing community expectations and the shift toward a wellness-focused culture. Well-being is often discussed as self-evident.

Indeed, the new standards themselves do not provide a clear definition of well-being. Nor are they clear about associated expectations of what good practice looks like in schools and other educational settings.

Read more:
After years of COVID, fires and floods, kids’ well-being now depends on better support

Given these standards will amount to a requirement, organisations will need clear direction on how to meet their obligations in regard to well-being.

Well-being is a complex and multifaceted concept. Some researchers have even characterised it as a wicked problem. To meet this new responsibility to support, develop and provide for children and young people’s well-being, schools and educational settings in particular need to understand what this actually means.

Why have the standards changed?

Victoria’s Child Safe Standards recognise the vulnerability of children and young people and the responsibility of adults to help keep them safe. The standards have been in place since January 2016.

The Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse presented its final report in December 2017. The Victorian government then reviewed the standards and made several recommendations to strengthen the standards and align them more closely with the national principles for child-safe organisations. The primary focus during this time was on safety.

In recent years, interest in the concept of well-being has exploded, particularly with the impacts of COVID-19 on children and young people. Research and debate on well-being have burgeoned.

Read more:
Young people were already struggling before the pandemic. Here are 7 ways to help them navigate a changed world

The Commission for Children and Young People (CCYP) assists organisations to adhere to the Child Safe Standards. This has involved developing and embedding in practice the policy and procedures that support children’s safety.

The commission continues to provide guidance on the new standards. However, the concept of well-being has not been explicitly discussed or defined.

So what exactly is well-being?

Well-being is a term that seems simple enough on the surface and yet evades clear definition. It’s often defined as the subjective experience of quality of life. It is frequently linked to mental health, and in education is often conflated with attendance and behaviour.

The World Health Organization speaks about health as being more than merely the absence of illness. Its definition includes holistic well-being across multiple domains of functioning, but stops short of nominating a single definition of well-being itself.

The well-being of children and young people specifically is more complex still. As a concept, their well-being has been discussed simply as relating to mental health through to more complex understandings as an antidote to poor behaviour and as the key ingredient of positive outcomes.

The concept of youth well-being is so complex that there are increasing attempts to formally define it through conceptual framing. This framing is useful in drawing together knowledge from across disciplines and aspects of physical, mental and social health, along with subjective experience of life, behaviour and skills.

The problem remains that this framing doesn’t give us a concise and practical working definition. This may be because well-being itself is understood differently depending on the context and community in which it is being discussed.

Read more:
Students’ well-being must always be the priority. Here are 5 tips to help them through lockdown

What does this mean for education institutions?

This idea of including well-being in education is of course not new. Evidence to support the benefits of including well-being as an educational outcome has grown steadily over the past two decades.

Well-being has been included in Australia’s educational goals in successive policy directives. It’s reflected in growing numbers of focused programs targeted at schools.

Schools are already working to support student well-being through promotion, prevention and intervention. Unfortunately, definitions of well-being vary widely between policies and programs. The complexity and inconsistency of the concept and how to achieve it continue to create significant challenges.

This is reflected in the findings of a recent study of school principals in New South Wales and in the recommendations to come out of the Royal Commission into Victoria’s Mental Health System. These difficulties suggest schools are overwhelmed with choice and need greater support to select evidence-based programs that are shown to be effective.

Including well-being in the new Child Safe Standards requires schools to focus on well-being. They must now take on an increased responsibility to care not only for student safety but also their well-being.

Schools will have to revise and develop policy in ways that acknowledge the importance and complexity of well-being. They will need to engage thoughtfully with this concept.

As the standards have not defined the term, schools will need to conceptualise this concept for their context. This means drawing together and making explicit all the aspects that the school community understands as well-being. That’s likely to cover health, skills and capabilities, behaviours and subjective experiences.

Policymakers need to provide greater conceptual clarity to support schools in this important work.

Rachele Sloane receives an Australian Research Training Program Scholarship to support her Doctoral research at The University of Melbourne – Melbourne Graduate School of Education.

Annie Gowing 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. Schools will now be required to support well-being, but the standards aren’t clear on what that means – https://theconversation.com/schools-will-now-be-required-to-support-well-being-but-the-standards-arent-clear-on-what-that-means-185861

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Morag Kobez, Associate lecturer, Queensland University of Technology

When the temperature drops in the southern hemisphere, you might like to stave off the chill with a big steaming pot of mulled wine, and fill your home with the comforting aroma of red wine, citrus and spice.

The mention of mulled wine conjures images of winter-wonderland white-Christmas scenes – no matter where in the world you live.

Although mulled wine is a staple of contemporary Christmas celebrations throughout Europe, and the customs and recipes may differ somewhat, the celebratory nature of the warm, spiced (usually) red wine is common to all – as are the ingredients sugar, cinnamon and cloves.

Its long history incorporates both pagan and Christian lore, traverses old and new worlds and established it as a favourite Christmastime beverage, travellers’ tipple of choice and a tonic of sorts in times of convalescence.

Read more:
Appearance, aroma and mouthfeel: all you need to know to give wine tasting a go

Ancient pagan paradox

Whether for festivity or fortification, mulled wine has been around for at least 2,000 years.

The ancient Greek version of mulled wine, Ypocras or Hippocras, takes its name from Hippocrates, the Greek physician regarded as the father of medicine. (It is also the name of the apothecary’s bag or sieve used to strain this wine.)

Wine played an important role in medicine in Greek antiquity. In the only ancient cookery book surviving to our times, De re coquinaria, we see a few versions of spice wine (conditum paradoxum) and wine with honey and pepper.

The latter, known as conditum melizomum viatorum was recommended for travellers: the honey and spices acted as a preservative, allowing the alcohol to accompany travellers on long journeys.

Conditum paradoxium became a prominent feature of the Saturnalia Festival in ancient Rome: the winter solstice celebration of the passing of the shortest day of the year and the rebirth of the Sun.

By the time of the late-Roman Republic, Saturnalia had grown from a one-day celebration to a week-long festival held each year from December 17 to 23. Consuming the warming wine as part of the celebrations was thought to help ward off winter illness and so became firmly associated with the December celebrations.

Towards the end of the 4th century, this pagan solstice celebration became interwoven with Christianity and the celebration of Christmas Day. By the middle ages, mulled wine had become entrenched as part of the festivities throughout Europe.

Read more:
Pompeii is famous for its ruins and bodies, but what about its wine?

Mulling over the recipe

According to several medieval cookbooks the most common of the sweet, spiced wines in the late middle-ages were still referred to as hippocras, with the term “mulled wine” coming later.

Just as they do today, ingredients varied depending on the region, but key components were hot red wine blended with sugar and ground spices – usually ginger, cinnamon and pepper and sometimes nutmeg and cloves.

Throughout Europe, mulled wine is synonymous with postcard scenes of snow-capped Alps, après-ski shenanigans, the aroma of roasting chestnuts and Christmas markets.

In Sweden, glogg comes sprinkled with almonds and plump raisins, which have soaked up the wine and taken on the flavour of the spices. It is often served with distinctive raisin-studded saffron buns called Lussekatter.

Bischopswijn (Bishop’s Wine) is the Dutch name, in honour of Saint Nicholas, the bishop celebrated during the Feast of Sinterklaas in early December in the Netherlands.

Italians call it vin hrüle (French for “burnt wine”). In Poland it’s called grzane wino and in Germany it is gluhwein, which both directly translate to mulled wine.

So beloved is gluhwein in Germany, that when popular Christmas markets were cancelled in December 2020 due to COVID restrictions, pop-up gluhwein stalls began appearing in parks and street corners in German cities despite the rules.

It sparked a plea in parliament from then German Chancellor Angela Merkel for citizens to forgo their usual Christmastime tipple to help avoid increased numbers of deaths.

Exorcising the winter chill

In France it’s called vin chaud (“hot wine”) and more likely than not to contain star anise. The larger-than-life French writer Colette described vin chaud as “the great exorcist of winter crepuscules [twilight] that fall as early as three o’clock” in an advertisement she wrote for a French wine merchant in the early 20th century.

Rather than a Christmastime tipple, in the first 100 years of Australian settlement, mulled wine was more likely to be administered during times of illness or convalescence rather than times of celebration.

In the 19th and 20th centuries Australian domestic cookbooks commonly included recipes for sick or convalescing patients. Advice about food preparation for “invalids”, “convalescents” or “the sickroom” would commonly take up an entire section of cookbooks. Many of these included recipes for mulled wine.

With nobody under any illusions nowadays that mixing up a large amount of sugar in a hefty pot of red wine is good for anyone’s health, we find other similarly absurd excuses to partake. Christmas in July, anyone?

Morag Kobez 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. Mulled wine: how ‘Christmas in a cup’ went from ancient medicine to an Aussie winter warmer – https://theconversation.com/mulled-wine-how-christmas-in-a-cup-went-from-ancient-medicine-to-an-aussie-winter-warmer-184447

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Caleb Goods, Senior Lecturer – Management and Organisations, UWA Business School, The University of Western Australia

Uber Australia has struck a historic agreement with the Transport Workers’ Union – a statement of principles that re-regulate work in the Australian rideshare and food delivery industry.

This is a major shift to industrial relations in the gig economy.

Uber and its rival platforms have largely treated their workforce as independent contractors, not employees with rights to benefits such as sick leave, minimum wages or union representation.

Now the poster company of the gig economy has agreed with the union that workers on the platform should receive some baseline conditions.

What Uber and the Transport Workers’ Union agree on

First, and most importantly, Uber and the Transport Workers’ Union have agreed to support the creation of an independent umpire, potentially as part of the Fair Work Commission, to apply minimum standards and practices across the industry.

There are four key objectives.

First, an enforceable floor around earnings, to give transparency to drivers and ensure platforms don’t seek to compete by driving down labour costs. Earnings are a critical concern for gig workers.

Second, enhanced and low-cost opportunities for workers to resolve disputes via an independent umpire. Gig workers, as contractors, currently have little recourse to address grievances.

Read more:
Delivery workers are now essential. They deserve the rights of other employees

Third, the right for workers to collectively organise and be represented by a union.

Fourth, the effective enforcement of these and other standards, including occupational health and safety compliance.

Beyond these key principles, Uber and the Transport Workers’ Union have also agreed to have an ongoing conversation about making these principles work in reality, not just on paper.

Why now?

The Uber-Transport Workers’ Union statement of principle follows the union signing a similar joint charter with DoorDash in May.

Given DoorDash has been operating in Australia since 2019, and Uber since 2012, why are they making these voluntary agreements to pursue improved working conditions now?

The answer seems reasonably obvious: the Morrison government, which had little enthusiasm for regulating the gig economy, has been replaced by the Albanese government, which has signalled it will.

The new Labor government’s plans for the gig economy and employee-like work arrangements include giving the Fair Work Commission the power to regulate “employee-like” forms of work.

The exact details and timeline for these reforms have not been announced.

These union-platform agreements suggest that platforms are keen to get in front of, and potentially shape, this regulation agenda.

No more debating classification

Critically, unions and platforms working together may mean the end of the classification debates – employee versus independent contractor – that have been fought out in the Fair Work Commission and the courts over the past five years.

As we have suggested previously, the debates over whether workers treated as independent contractors should actually have been classified as employees have largely been a dead-end. They may have even harmed workers, as platforms have sought to avoid doing anything the Fair Work Commission or a court might interpret as indicative of an employer-employee relationship.

Read more:
Did somebody say workers’ rights? Three big questions about Menulog’s employment plan

This agreement represents a different approach that may produce better outcomes. It should help platforms avoid the cost and reputational damage of ongoing litigation. It also helps the union. Recent High Court rulings have made it harder for the union to recruit, organise and represent gig workers. This agreement implicitly accepts the union’s right to represent those workers.

Setting the agenda

These statements of principles also strongly align with the Albanese government’s proposal to imporve the conditions of “employee-like work.”

Uber and Doordash appear to be embracing self-regulation to help set the agenda around what is (and importantly what is not) included in the new regulations for employee-like work arrangements.

The future of gig work is looking very different from what it did a few months ago.

Caleb Goods is part of a research team that received a University of Sydney Business School Industry Partnership grant. Uber Technologies is a Partner Organisation on this grant and provided a minority financial contribution to the project.

Alex Veen is part of a research team that received a University of Sydney Business School Industry Partnership grant. Uber Technologies is a Partner Organisation on this grant and provided a minority financial contribution to the project. He further receives funding from the Australian Research Council in the form a Discovery Early Career Researcher Award (DECRA) for his project entitled ‘Algorithmic management and the future of work: lessons from the gig economy.’

Tom Barratt is part of a research team that received a University of Sydney Business School Industry Partnership grant. Uber Technologies is a Partner Organisation on this grant and provided a minority financial contribution to the project.

– ref. What’s driving Uber’s historic agreement with the TWU on gig work – https://theconversation.com/whats-driving-ubers-historic-agreement-with-the-twu-on-gig-work-186044

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Paul Grogan, Adjunct Senior Lecturer, The Daffodil Centre, University of Sydney

ABC TV’s Four Corners this week reported how unlawful sale of e-cigarettes in Australia is out of control.

The program highlighted the effects on young people, in particular, including how easy it is for them to buy the products.

How did this slow-moving public health train wreck unfold in broad daylight, almost a decade after the Cancer Council warned it was coming?

The answer is poor or non-existent enforcement of good laws.

A growing problem

The use of all harmful substances in young Australians is declining – except for e-cigarettes and smoking in men aged 18-24.

Lifetime use of e-cigarettes increased by 46% between 2016 and 2019 in non-smokers aged 18-24 – a huge spike in the use of a harmful substance in just three years.

Last week, an updated statement from the National Health and Medical Research Council reflected increasing concerns from public health officials about the growing uptake of e-cigarettes, particularly by young people.

Read more:
A damning review of e-cigarettes shows vaping leads to smoking, the opposite of what supporters claim

But aren’t these illegal?

Anyone using a nicotine e-cigarette without a valid doctor’s prescription has obtained the product unlawfully. Its importation was unlawful, as was its storage, sale and promotion.

Yet, as the Four Corners program showed, this is happening on an industrial scale. Merchants with a profit motive are promoting addictive products, with no regard for the health of young people.

Retailers and online entrepreneurs are clearly not complying with current laws. And these laws are not being enforced.

We need to target importation

E-cigarettes are not manufactured in Australia. If their destination is not a pharmacy or someone with a valid prescription, their importation is unlawful.

But it is clear, from the number of illegal e-cigarettes available in Australia, the federal government is not enforcing its own importation rules.

Attempts to amend regulations to further restrict imports were proposed in 2020. This would have enabled the Australian Border Force to intercept illegal e-cigarette imports.

However, the government assured the community that requiring all
non-tobacco nicotine products to only be available on prescription (schedule 4 of the Poisons Standard) would achieve the same result. It said this would protect young people from e-cigarettes.

It’s almost nine months since this came into effect in October 2021. Yet young people, in increasing numbers, are accessing e-cigarettes.

The scheduling standard and the rules underpinning it are clearly being ignored. The federal government must revisit proposals to allow interception of illegal e-cigarettes at the border or find another mechanism to block them.

We need to target their sale

Retailers and wholesalers are also breaking rules set out in official advice from the Therapeutic Goods Administration and corresponding information on state government websites.

New South Wales Chief Health Officer Kerry Chant has warned that nicotine e-cigarette traders, other than pharmacies, could face prosecution, heavy fines and even jail.

Yet tobacconists, convenience stores and vape shops are still breaking the rules.

State and territory governments must enforce their laws, especially those being broken in plain view. Authorities can impose substantial fines for offenders, which would not only deter unlawful trade, it would fund additional enforcement.

There are also laws for the bulk storage and transport of schedule 4 poisons, such as nicotine. Four Corners showed how readily a film crew could expose breaches of these laws.

If young people can find them, so can the authorities

Young people told Four Corners they can access products without a prescription from online entrepreneurs importing, storing and selling nicotine e-cigarettes.

Seizing illegal imports will eventually dry up their supply, but there will be stockpiles.

If school children can access these suppliers and their products with a quick search on their smartphones, authorities can also find them and put them out of business.

Read more:
Vaping is glamourised on social media, putting youth in harm’s way

What needs to happen next?

E-cigarette use in young Australians is a crisis, but is fixable. The federal government must stop illegal imports, the states and territories must end the unlawful retail, wholesale and interstate trade.

The harms of e-cigarettes are severe and far outweigh any modest benefits; there are laws to protect young people from them.

If the crisis worsens, more people will ask, how did this happen? The answer will be simple: governments made good laws, but they did not enforce them.

Read more:
It’s safest to avoid e-cigarettes altogether – unless vaping is helping you quit smoking

Paul Grogan is employed by the Daffodil Centre, a joint cancer research venture between Cancer Council NSW and the University of Sydney. He is an investigator on a current research project on e-cigarette use in young people jointly funded by the NSW Government and the Minderoo Foundation, with in-kind support from Cancer Council NSW.

– ref. How can we reverse the vaping crisis among young Australians? Enforce the rules – https://theconversation.com/how-can-we-reverse-the-vaping-crisis-among-young-australians-enforce-the-rules-185867

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

As well as her interviews with politicians and experts, Politics with Michelle Grattan includes “Word from The Hill”, where she discusses the news with members of The Conversation politics team.

Michelle and Peter Browne from the Politics + Society team discuss Anthony Albanese’s weighing a Ukraine visit and whether Australia will announce more support for that country and reopen its embassy there.

They also canvass the just-released Lowy Institute’s poll, which found a narrow majority of Australians support increased defence spending, and Defence Minister Richard Marles’ announcement extending the terms of the military’s top brass.

Meanwhile Parliament House has been like the first week of school, with new MPs being briefed on how the place works. Crossbenchers are in a row with the government over Albanese’s plan to cut back the additional staff they will get, above the entitlement of government and opposition backbenchers, from four in the last parliament to just one.

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. Word from The Hill: Parliamentary ‘newbies’ inspect their workplace, with some complaints – https://theconversation.com/word-from-the-hill-parliamentary-newbies-inspect-their-workplace-with-some-complaints-186041

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Hawkins, Senior Lecturer, Canberra School of Politics, Economics and Society, University of Canberra

“Stagflation” is an ugly word for an ugly situation – the unpleasant combination of economic stagnation and inflation.

The last time the world experienced it was the early 1970s, when oil-exporting countries in the Middle East cut supplies to the United States and other supporters of Israel. The “supply shock” of a four-fold increase in the cost of oil drove up many prices and dampened economic activity globally.

Stagflation was thought left behind. But now there is a real risk of it coming back, warns the central bank for the world’s central banks.

“We may be reaching a tipping point, beyond which an inflationary psychology
spreads and becomes entrenched,” says the Bank for International Settlements BIS in its latest annual economic report.

By “inflationary psychology” it means that expectations of higher prices lead consumers to spend now rather than later, on the assumption waiting will cost more. This increases demand, pushing up prices. Thus expectations of inflation become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The danger of stagflation comes from this inflationary cycle becoming so entrenched that attempts to curb it through higher interest rates push economies into recession.

Global inflation since the 19th century

What’s driving inflation

As well as its own expert staff, the BIS brings together expertise from its member central banks, such as the US Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank, the Bank of England and Reserve Bank of Australia. So its views are worth paying attention to.

Its report makes clear its experts, like most forecasters, have been surprised by the extent of the rise in inflation.

This is a global phenomenon, which the report attributes to a combination of an unexpectedly strong economic rebound from the COVID-19 lockdowns, a sustained switch in demand from services to goods, and supply bottlenecks exacerbated by a shift from “just-in-time” to “just-in-case” inventory management.

Then there is Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

The war’s effect in driving up the price of oil, gas, food, fertilisers and other commodities has been “inherently stagflationary”:

Since commodities are a key production input, an increase in their cost constrains output. At the same time, soaring commodity prices have boosted inflation everywhere, exacerbating a shift that was already well in train before the onset of the war.

The only bright note is that BIS expects these price surges to be less disruptive than the oil supply shock of the 1970s.

This is because the relative impact of the oil supply shock was greater due to economies in the 1970s being more energy-intensive.

There is also much more focus now on containing inflation, with most central banks having a clearly stated inflation target (2% in Europe and the US, 2%-3% in Australia).

What are the biggest dangers?

But the current situation is still very challenging, the report says, because increases in the price of food and energy are particularly conducive to spreading inflationary psychology.

This is because food is bought frequently, so price changes are notable. The same goes for fuel prices, which are prominently displayed on large roadside signs.

There is also the risk in many economies of a wage-price spiral – in which higher prices drive demands for higher wages, which employers then pass on in higher prices.

Read more:
Rising prices: why the global drive to keep food cheap is unsustainable

Central banks face what Reserve Bank of Australia governor Philip Lowe has called a “narrow path”.

To achieve a “soft landing” they need to raise interest rates enough to bring inflation down. But not enough to cause a recession (and thus stagflation).

How to avoid a ‘hard landing’?

The BIS report cites an analysis of monetary tightening cycles – defined as interest rate rises in at least three consecutive quarters – in 35 countries between 1985 and 2018. A soft landing was achieved in only about half the cases.

A key factor in the hard landings was the extent of financial vulnerabilities, particularly debt. Economies with hard landings on average had double the growth in credit to GDP prior to the interest-rate rises.

This factor contributes to BIS concerns now. As the report notes:

Unlike in the past, stagflation today would occur alongside heightened financial vulnerabilities, including stretched asset prices and high debt levels, which could magnify any growth slowdown.

Furthermore, the slowdown in China’s labour productivity is removing an important boost to global economic growth and restraint on global inflation.

But a key lesson from the 1970s is that the long-term costs of doing nothing outweigh the short-term pain of bringing inflation under control.

Read more:
5 things to know about the Fed’s biggest interest rate increase since 1994 and how it will affect you

This means governments must curb handouts or tax cuts to help people with cost-of-living pressures. Expansionary fiscal policy will only make things worse. Assistance must be strictly targeted to those who most need it.

There is also a need to rebuild monetary and fiscal buffers to cope with future shocks. This will require raising interest rates above inflation targets and returning government budgets (close) to surplus.

John Hawkins was formerly a senior economist at the Reserve Bank of Australia and the Bank for International Settlements.

– ref. 1970s-style stagflation now playing on central bankers’ minds – https://theconversation.com/1970s-style-stagflation-now-playing-on-central-bankers-minds-185868