You’ve found the perfect dress. You’ve tried it on before and you know it looks great. Now it’s on sale, a discount so large the store is practically giving it away. Should you buy it?
For some of us it’s a no-brainer. For others it’s an ethical dilemma whenever we shop for clothes. What matters more? How the item was made or how much it costs? Is the most important information on the label or the price tag?
Of the world’s industries that profit from worker exploitation, the fashion industry is notorious, in part because of the sharp contrast between how fashion is made and how it is marketed.
Some work in conditions so exploitative they meet the definition of being modern slaves – trapped in situations they can’t leave due to coercion and threats.
But their plight is hidden by the distance between the worker and the buyer. Global supply chains have helped such exploitation to hide and thrive.
Do we really care, and what can we do?
We conducted in-depth interviews with 21 women who buy “fast fashion” – “on-trend” clothing made and sold at very low cost – to find out how much they think about the conditions of the workers who make their clothes, and and what effort they take to avoid slave-free clothing. Well-known fast-fashion brands include H&M, Zara and Uniqlo.
What they told us highlights the inadequacy of seeking to eradicate exploitation in the fashion industry by relying on consumers to do the heavy lifting. Struggling to seek reliable information on ethical practices, consumers are overwhelmed when trying to navigate ethical consumerism.
Out of sight, out of mind
The 21 participants in our research were women aged 18 to 55, from diverse backgrounds across Australia. We selected participants who were aware of exploitation in the fashion industry but had still bought fast fashion in the previous six months. This was not a survey but qualitative research involving in-depth interviews to understand the disconnect between awareness and action.
Our key finding is that clothing consumers’ physical and cultural distance from those who make the clothes makes it difficult to relate to their experience. Even if we’ve seen images of sweatshops, it’s still hard to comprehend what the working conditions are truly like.
Garment workers sew clothes at a factory in Huaibei, Anhui province, China. Xie Zhengyi/AP
As Fiona*, a woman in her late 30s, put it: “I don’t think people care [but] it’s not in a nasty way. It’s like an out of sight, out of mind situation.”
This problem of geographic and cultural distance between garment workers and fashion shoppers highlights the paucity of solutions premised on driving change in the industry through consumer activism.
Who is responsible?
Australia’s Modern Slavery Act, for example, tackles the problem only by requiring large companies to report to a public register on their efforts to identify risks of modern slavery in their supply chains and what they are doing to eliminate these risks.
While greater transparency is certainly a big step forward for the industry, the legislation still presumes that the threat of reputational damage is enough to get industry players to change their ways.
The success of the legislation falls largely on the ability of activist organisations to sift through and publicise the performance of companies in an effort to encourage consumers to hold companies accountable.
All our interviewees told us they felt unfairly burdened with the responsibility to seek information on working conditions and ethical practices to hold retailers to account or to feel empowered to make the “correct” ethical choice.
“It’s too hard sometimes to actually track down the line of whether something’s made ethically,” said Zoe*, a woman in her early 20s.
Given that many retailers are themselves ignorant about their own supply chains, it is asking a lot to expect the average consumer to unravel the truth and make ethical shopping choices.
Confusion + overwhelm = inaction
“We have to shop according to what we care about, what is in line with our values, family values, budget,” said Sarah*, who is in her early 40s.
She said she copes with feeling overwhelmed by ignoring some issues and focus on the ethical actions she knew would make a difference. “I’m doing so many other good things,” she said. “We can’t be perfect, and I can only do so much.”
Other participants also talked about juggling considerations about environmental and social impacts.
“It’s made in Bangladesh, but it’s 100% cotton, so, I don’t know, is it ethical?” is how Lauren*, a woman in her early 20s, put it. “It depends on what qualifies as ethical […] and what is just marketing.”
Comparatively, participants felt their actions to mitigate environmental harm made a tangible difference. They could see the impact and felt rewarded and empowered to continue making positive change. This was not the case for modern slavery and worker rights more generally.
Fast fashion is a lucrative market, with billions in profits made thanks to the work of the lowest paid workers in the world.
There is no denying consumers wield a lot of power, and we shouldn’t absolve consumers of their part in creating demand for the cheapest clothes humanly – or inhumanly – possible.
But consumer choice alone is insufficient. We need a system where all our clothing choices are ethical, where we don’t need to make a choice between what is right and what is cheap.
The names of study participants have been changed to protect their anonymity.
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.
Your child’s experience of needles in their early years may impact how they feel about and react to subsequent vaccinations. So it’s important to reduce the chance of a negative experience.
But what can parents do to help prepare their child for the COVID-19 Pfizer vaccine or other injections?
Fear or phobia?
Most children are fearful of needles. But for some children, this fear is more serious and can be defined as a needle phobia.
Needle phobia is a very scary and distressing response to the presence of or reaction to a needle, for example, to take blood or have an injection. The anxiety and fear are out of proportion to the threat, and people will avoid needles as much as possible.
In severe cases, the level of anxiety caused by just the sight of a needle may result in feelings of dizziness, nausea, increased sweatiness, loss of consciousness, and fainting.
Almost one in five children (19%) aged 4-6 have a needle phobia, and this decreases to one in nine (11%) by age 10-11. Among adults, about 3.5-10% have a needle phobia.
Working as a nurse, I still remember Emma, a five-year old girl, who was petrified of needles. I recall her little face, the anger and fear, the tears and screams just at the sight of a needle.
Her increasing fear was due to previous blood tests, injections, and other medical procedures. And it didn’t get any easier until she got some professional play therapy help.
Reducing the chance of a negative experience
When booking vaccination appointments, consider asking the nurse to set aside extra time to prepare.
When children come for a vaccination, most nurses anticipate the child may be concerned and nervous, or very frightened of an injection.
Nurses may help by asking the child to tense and relax their muscles to prevent fainting. They may suggest taking a deep breath, holding it and breathing out slowly. They may also ask the child to wiggle their toes to provide some distraction.
Distraction can help take the child’s mind off it. Shutterstock
If the child is obviously distressed – for example, screaming, kicking and saying they don’t want it – parents can postpone the needle so the child has an opportunity to develop some coping strategies. This could potentially prevent a needle phobia from developing.
Parents are the best advocates for their child and know how to support them during their immunisations.
How can you prepare your child?
The first step is to consider when to give your child information about the vaccine. For children under five years, a shorter time frame works better; for example, the same day.
For children five to six years, you might tell them up a day or two before; and for those seven years, up to a week before.
Think about timing, based on your child’s age. Shutterstock
But if your child has a needle phobia, they may need significant help in a safe environment to play out their thoughts and feelings, and learn some stress management strategies.
Getting help from therapists
Qualified play therapists, child life therapists and child psychologists can help. After building a trusting relationship with the therapist, medical play therapy sessions involve role-playing scenarios to desensitise the child to medical equipment.
This often starts with toy medical equipment and moves towards more authentic medical equipment.
The therapist provides information to the child by showing them how things work. The child may then develop mastery by injecting their doll or teddy, while the therapist provides cues for coping strategies and resiliency.
Some children need one or two sessions, but those with a needle phobia may require up to ten sessions or more.
Therapists can also teach parents skills to support their child during a needle or other medical procedure.
Using play therapy techniques at home
Introduce some pretend medical equipment toys to your child’s playtime and notice if they’re curious or avoid them.
If they’re curious and seek more information, show and tell them about their upcoming vaccine and why they need it. You might say, for instance, it will help to stop them, and lots of other people, from getting the coronavirus, including their grandparents.
Children are aware from media and school that COVID has forced people to stay at home because it made many people sick, and they couldn’t breathe properly. You might explain that protection from the vaccine will help them stay at kinder or school and see their friends.
See how your child responds to medical toys. Shutterstock
For the child who avoids playing with the medical toys, distraction techniques may help. Consider introducing a new toy or object that can hold the child’s attention immediately before and during the injection. This might be sensory fidget toys, I-spy books, digital games or apps.
What tools do play therapists use?
For Emma, after developing a therapeutic play relationship, I introduced and practised the Magic Glove Technique. For children with good imaginations, they can learn to relax and pretend they have a magic invisible glove that makes their arm – and themselves – feel calm and relaxed.
Leora Kuttner practising the magic glove technique.
For other children, I have used Buzzy, a mechanical vibrating device that looks like a bee, developed by American physician and pain researcher Amy Baxter. It has a cold pack and the vibration inhibits the sensation of pain.
If your child has a negative experience during their vaccination, and you’d like to access professional help, ask your GP for suggestions of local playtherapists or child life therapists or child psychologists in your area.
Judith Parson 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.
Anthony Albanese on Sunday will unveil a plan for a Labor government to deliver up to 20,000 extra university places over 2022-23 and fund 465,000 free TAFE places, including 45,000 new ones.
The $1.2 billion “Future Made in Australia Skills Plan” will be directed at giving support in areas of skills shortages.
In his second major policy announcement in two days – the climate plan was announced on Friday – Albanese is both targeting the hard-hit university sector and playing to his central campaign themes of creating jobs and addressing skills.
The university initiative will cost $481.7 million over the forward estimates.
Labor says the free TAFE places will focus on areas suffering critical skills gaps.
It says the policy would help rebuild industries hardest hit by the pandemic, such as hospitality and tourism as well as meet current and future demand in occupations such as child care, aged care, disability care, nursing and community services.
It would provide opportunities for school leavers, people wanting to retrain, and unpaid carers seeking to get back into the workforce.
A $50 million TAFE technology fund would improve IT facilities, workshops, laboratories and tele-health simulators, providing infrastructure for students’ needs.
The cost of the TAFE places is $621 million over the forward estimates, which includes the $50 million for capital works fund.
The package includes about $100 million already announced to support 10,000 New Energy Apprenticeships.
The university sector has been particularly hard hit by the pandemic, with tens of thousands of job losses. The closed border cut off the flow of international students – which were vital to many universities’ finances – and public universities were not included in JobKeeper.
Labor says that currently there are not enough university places, yet Australia faces shortages of doctors, engineers, teachers, pharmacists and IT experts.
It says this year the offer rate fell to its lowest level in years, and more than 50,000 applicants missed out.
Extra funding would be allocated to universities based on
their ability to offer more places in areas of national priority and skills shortages, such as clean energy, advanced manufacturing, health and education
their efforts to target under-represented students – those who are the first in their family to go to university, Indigenous students, and people in regional, remote and outer-suburban areas
student demand.
Labor says Australia should be investing in opportunities for Australians to study and raise their skills rather than relying solely on migration to fill the skills gap.
It says one in four businesses are hit by critical skills shortages. Meanwhile nearly two million Australians are unemployed or under-employed.
Albanese will address a rally in western Sydney on Sunday.
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.
Science, at its heart, is a collaborative effort. The eureka moments are headline-grabbing and enormously important, but they don’t come out of the blue. They emerge from years or even decades of testing, rejecting and refining ideas, painstakingly building a body of knowledge. Progress would be extremely slow if we all had to start at the beginning, or unknowingly tread paths others have already been down.
This is the nub of the argument for open science. The first step is open access to the research literature without fees or paywalls. My goal is for all Australian research to be open access, domestically and internationally, and for research conducted overseas to be freely available to read in Australia.
This year, in discussions with government, researchers, publishers and other stakeholders, I began the first steps towards a potential model. We are in the early stages, and the detail will take some time to emerge. But the appetite for change is strong, and I have no doubt that if we can realise an open access strategy, it will boost Australian discovery, innovation and prosperity.
As I wrote recently in Australian Quarterly, open science is a bigger and more transformative shift. As well as access to research papers, it means also sharing research data, code and software, and research infrastructure. You can think of it as scientists and researchers sharing the back story.
This has the potential to make science faster, more efficient and more accurate. It allows researchers to test findings and build on each other’s work towards an ever more sophisticated picture. It builds collaboration across disciplines, allowing new explanations and insights to emerge.
The COVID-19 pandemic offers a great example of these benefits. In January 2020, researchers began sharing the genetic code of the SARS-CoV-2 virus with colleagues around the world. Edward Holmes, a professor at the University of Sydney, won the 2021 Prime Minister’s Prize for Science for his role in this, after he worked with colleagues in China and Scotland to release the genetic code, catalysing work on a test and a vaccine.
Science publishers also played their part by bringing research out from behind paywalls and making it available for everyone to read. This is shared knowledge creation in action.
We remain in the grip of the pandemic, but the vaccines and therapies developed in record time through concerted, collaborative efforts will save countless lives and speed the recovery significantly.
The framework recognises the urgency of interconnected global challenges, such as climate change and the pandemic, and acknowledges the importance of science in providing solutions. It also recognises that open science is more efficient, improving quality, reproducibility and impact, and thereby increasing trust. Open science is also more equitable and inclusive.
Until now, there was no universal definition of open science, and standards existed only at regional, national or institutional levels. Countries have now agreed to abide by common standards, values and principles, and report back every four years on progress.
The recommendation calls on member states to set up regional and international funding mechanisms and invest in infrastructure for open science. Just as we are aiming to open access to research in Australia, it asks that nations ensure that all publicly funded research respects the principles and core values of open science.
I welcome this collaborative international approach. Open science is a great aim. Working together and sharing insights as a global science community is the best way to push the boundaries of knowledge and discovery.
Cathy Foley 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.
Labor’s “Powering Australia” climate policy, released on Friday, is carefully calibrated to the politics.
Anthony Albanese described it as “modest”, declaring “we do not pretend that it is a radical policy”. It is indeed risk averse.
Labor has learned heaps from its 2019 climate policy problems which caused it so much grief, just when the issue should have been favourable ground for it.
For one thing, don’t be over-ambitious. For another, have answers, in the form of modelling. Don’t say costs can’t be estimated.
Debate has raged within Labor about where to set the crucial medium term target. The attention internationally is now on 2030, not 2050.
An ultra cautious option would have been to just accept the government’s projection of a 35% cut on 2005 levels and turn that into a firm target. But that wouldn’t wash, given Labor has always elevated climate change as an issue.
The choice of a 43% target – compared to 45% in 2019 – is one that differentiates the opposition from the government, but still provides Labor with cover.
State governments and business have embraced targets that are more or equally ambitious. This makes it much harder for Labor’s opponents to easily demonise its policy.
Albanese promises a Labor government would take the 43% target to next year’s international climate conference, where nations have been asked to put forward new ambitions. He wraps this with some tinsel by saying Australia would seek to host the COP conference in 2023, perhaps in conjunction with Pacific countries, for which climate is a major issue.
Labor’s policy has strong economic, regional and consumer focuses. It’s pitched to appeal in terms of jobs and cost of living, rather than primarily to environmental arguments.
It estimates 64,000 direct jobs and 540,000 indirect jobs would be created by 2030. Job creation would be heavily skewed to regional areas: Labor said five out of six of the new jobs would be in the regions.
Household power bills would be lowered – the modelling estimates by $275 in 2025 and $378 in 2030.
Obviously such estimates should be read with some scepticism – modelling all depends on the assumptions and the real world can change very quickly.
The share of renewables in the national electricity market by 2030 would be 82%, the policy says.
Importantly, to achieve more robust emission reductions, Labor would use the Coalition government’s Safeguard Mechanism, adopting a Business Council of Australia recommendation to, in effect, give it teeth to bring down the emissions of the companies that are big emitters.
Leaving aside the government’s attack, the sharpest criticisms of the policy will come from the left and green groups. The immediate business reaction was benign.
This will suit Albanese just fine. He emphasised Labor wants to work with business on climate policy.
The BCA described the policy as a “sensible and workable plan”. The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry said it offered a “pathway to achieve the economic and technological transition towards a more sustainable future”.
But Greenpeace said the policy was a missed opportunity. Greens leader Adam Bandt said: “Labor now joins the Liberals with targets that have given up on the science, given up on Glasgow and given up on climate.
“Labor’s backdown shows the only way we’ll get climate action is kicking the Liberals out and putting Greens in balance of power to push Labor to go further and faster.”
The risk, which Labor has decided to take, is that a middle of the road policy gives the Greens the chance to pick up votes. Albanese’s calculation is that the battle for votes is in the centre.
But the Bandt line about the Greens’ ambition to assert pressure on a Labor government is one that Scott Morrison will run hard with.
Energy expert Tony Wood, from the Grattan Institute, says the choice of the 43% target of “is a sound next step as it gets Australia on track towards net zero emissions by 2050”.
But Wood says there remain a lot of questions despite the detail that’s been given.
He says the policy, having ruled out targeting transport as too politically fraught and agriculture as just too hard, homes in on electricity and industrial emissions, although results there are not easy to achieve.
“The policy announcement rests heavily on economic analysis done by Reputex. It is unclear what drives the additional investment in renewables.
“The claimed additional emissions reduction in the electricity sector and the claimed savings to consumers are hard to verify and seem to depend on government largesse,” he says.
“And, the assumption that this would occur without accelerating the closure of existing coal-fired generators is inconsistent with the government’s projections and likely to prove optimistic.
“Using the government’s own Safeguard Mechanism to impose an obligation on large emitters is a sound concept. Again, the details of how the changes would work in practice to deliver the claimed reductions and at what cost, are hard to identify without further analysis”, Wood says.
On early indications the government will have substantially more trouble scoring hits against this policy than it did against Labor’s 2019 one.
Unsurprisingly, energy minister Angus Taylor immediately went back to mining familiar ground.
“At the heart of today’s announcement is a sneaky new carbon tax on agriculture, mining and transport,” he said (he’d earlier road-tested the line when the BCA produced its policy). “A future Labor government will legislate to force the nation’s 215 largest industrial facilities to reduce their emissions by five million tonnes each year (to zero by 2050).”
The “sneaky carbon tax” is an easy line. But it does have the ring of returning to old campaigns to fight a new one.
Michelle Grattan 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.
The following charts break the pandemic (23 months total; 21 months of mortality outside of China) into three 7-month periods: early, middle (covers the northern winter), and recent (mainly delta).
The countries included are those which report ‘total deaths’ on a weekly basis. Most of these have reported total deaths to the end of October 2021.
Chart by Keith Rankin.
The first chart shows the ‘low death’ countries. Of the selected countries, only Australia and New Zealand have had a negative death impact so far.
The black and grey represents the most recent seven months. It is clear that some countries that initially did particularly well at keeping death at bay were much less successful in recent months; especially Norway, Denmark, Finland and Cyprus. Sweden on the other had had a problematic 2020 experience, but has outperformed all its Nordic neighbours since May 2021.
In Finland and Denmark in particular, there are significant numbers of excess deaths in recent months that were not recorded as Covid19 deaths.
Chart by Keith Rankin.
The second chart looks at West Europe, with Iran and United States for comparison.
Italy is worst in West Europe, mainly due to its early experience of the pandemic. Greece is its opposite, with a good 2020 but a very poor 2021.
Of this group, Germany and Sweden are best overall. But we notice that Germany’s recent experience is problematic, starting to look worse than Italy’s. In recent months, the best countries are Sweden, France, Switzerland, and Portugal.
Chart by Keith Rankin.
The third chart looks at Eastern Europe, with USA as a comparator. Of these European countries, only Montenegro is not in the European Union. What is most noticeable here is how much Covid19 death East Europe managed to avoid in the first seven death months of the pandemic (March to September 2020).
In the delta period – May to October 2021 – the countries bordering West Europe performed easily the best; presumably a mix of higher (but not high) vaccination rates, and natural immunity gained from their grim winter experiences.
We also note that the United States experience is comparable with that of East Europe’s European Union countries.
Chart by Keith Rankin.
The final (Americas) chart is drawn on the same scale as the East European one. Again, we see that the United States’ experience is comparable with that of its southern ‘neighbours’. Peru, while worst overall because of its early experience, is consistent in recent months to the other large American nations shown. Guatemala’s recent experience reflects the generally problematic experience of the Caribbean region since May 2021. (Indeed the pandemic was still raging through Barbados in November; though that country still managed to celebrate becoming a republic.)
I have included South Africa as a comparator, and we can see that its covid experience was comparable with that of the American countries.
In general, we will need to monitor excess deaths at least until 2024, to get a realistic impression of the net loss of life due to the Covid19 virus, and our responses to it. Note the word ‘net’; just as the pandemic has cost lives, it has also saved lives. One reason for lives being saved is that we now know more about the impact on our lives of an unexpected silent pandemic, and our various under- and over-reactions to such an event, than we ever did before.
We should also note that the human impact – bad (mostly) and good – of Covid19 goes far beyond the pandemic’s mortality experience.
——-
Keith Rankin (keith at rankin dot nz), trained as an economic historian, is a retired lecturer in Economics and Statistics. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand.
Review: Platée, directed by Neil Armfiled, Pinchgut Opera
French master composer and theorist Jean-Philippe Rameau (1683-1764) created the opera Platée for the wedding of Louis, Dauphin of France, son of King Louis XV of France, and the Infanta Maria Theresa of Spain.
The work challenged the traditional French opera of the time, the tragédie lyrique by subverting Greek mythological characters and infusing 18th century comédie lyrique with dramatic integrity between text and music, harmonic sophistication and comic grandeur.
The naïve ugly swamp queen Platée (Kanen Breen) falls for the god Jupiter (Peter Coleman-Wright), who proposes to wed her to get into the good books of his jealous wife Juno (Cheryl Barker).
Steering the action are none other than a satyr and the king of Greece, Cithéron (Adrian Tamburini); the god of mockery and scorn, Momus (David Greco); the inventor of comedy, Thespis (Nicholas Jones); the messenger of the gods, Mercury (Jones), and Love and Madness (Cathy-Di Zhang). These characters set out in the prologue to “use laughter to teach these humans a lesson”.
Platée was well-received in Versailles in 1745 by both audience and critics, but has only been re-staged sporadically, mostly in festival programs in Europe and the United States. The last productions date from 2014 in both Paris and Vienna. This is the opera’s first ever staging in Australia
A stunning Australian cast
Tragedy makes us cry and feel empathy while comedy excites the mind’s inquisitiveness. Comedy exposes the truth and offers a space where we feel safe to not take ourselves too seriously so we can laugh at our own ignorance and transform.
Led by Erin Helyard (artistic director, conductor and harpsichord) and Neil Armfield (director), Pinchgut’s Australian production team blends the historically informed baroque sound with modern visual cues.
After-party clutter and hangovers, the projection of stage action (Sean Bacon) and wedding cake transformations (cake design by Jemima Snars), thunder and lightning effects (sound design by Alexander Berlage), and contemporary moves (choreography by Shannon Burns) swirl into a hotchpotch of plot twists that render Platée undone.
Platee blends baroque music with contemporary staging. Pinchgut Opera/Brett Boardman
Performing in drag, Kanen Breen’s Platée fuses cabaret, burlesque and an immense physicality. She is sexy, frivolous, ridiculous, pitiful and always entertaining.
The most touching aspect of Breen’s characterisation is the vulnerability of the character. His Platée is in constant physical movement, and his tenor voice displays a rich palette of colours, including a funny falsetto.
Jones, Tamburini and Greco deliver solid performances vocally and histrionically.
Chloe Lankshear sings beautifully and sincerely the obbligato air Soleil, fuis de ces lieu (Oh sun, flee this space), and performing both Love and Madness, Cathy-Di Zhang, has a commanding vocal and physical presence.
Cathy Di Zhang has a commanding presence. Pinchgut Opera/Brett Boardman
Beloved Australian opera singers Cheryl Barker and Peter Coleman-Wright grace the stage dressed as bride and groom to perform the virtues of marital commitment and fortitude. Coleman-Wright’s rendition of Jupiter’s opening air Aquilons trop audacieux (North wind, you are too bold) delights with a smooth and light tone throughout the range enhanced by an acute attentiveness to the meaning of the words and nuance of French pronunciation.
Barker’s charisma does not require much time on stage to conquer the audience as the goddess who protects the state, children and marriage.
Magical music
Helyard plays the harpsichord and conducts his orchestra, all dressed in white. Facing the audience, he spins Rameau’s music with abandon and holds the pulse of the audience’s emotions in his palm.
Pinchgut’s historical opera revivals have a world-class reputation for their exquisite musical interpretations. The Orchestra of the Antipodes’s baroque specialists give the audience vigorous and wide-ranging instrumental timbres and dance rhythms, honouring the subtleties of Rameau’s score. The solution to infuse the visual narrative with contemporary and local cultural clichés amuses with the ridicule of the familiar and keeps us on our toes.
The Cantillation Chorus has the most gorgeous sound and executes the force of Rameau’s choral writing to perfection. But it is unfortunate they are not trained actors, as their characterisations don’t stand up to their musical performances.
On their 20th anniversary, Pinchgut Opera has delivered another Australian premiere of a baroque gem in unprecedented trying circumstances. The arts heal the soul and Pinchgut’s storytellers and singers have done it again.
Platée is at City Recital Hall, Sydney, until December 8.
Daniela Kaleva 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.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Wesley Morgan, Research Fellow, Griffith Asia Institute and Climate Council researcher, Griffith University
The Labor opposition has pledged to reduce Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions by 43% this decade based on 2005 levels, claiming the plan will create jobs, cut power bills, boost renewables and provide business certainty.
Labor says the policy would create 604,000 jobs – mostly in regional areas – unlock A$52 billion in private sector investment in Australian industry, and cause electricity prices to fall by $275 per household by 2025.
Announcing the policy on Friday, Labor leader Anthony Albanese said the plan was backed by comprehensive modelling. He said Labor has produced a policy Australia can be proud of, while the Morrison government was “frozen in time while the world warms around it”.
Labor’s emissions-reduction goal is a significant step up on what the Morrison government has offered – 26-28% over the same time frame. And it’s a firm step to build on in coming years.
But it falls short of what experts say is needed for Australia to do its share on emissions reduction under the Paris Agreement, and is less ambitious than the targets adopted by Australia’s international peers.
What the science says is needed
While Labor’s 2030 target is higher than the Coalition’s, and provides a solid foundation on which to build, it still falls well below what the science says is necessary.
Earlier this year an independent Climate Targets Panel – made up of high-profile Australian climate scientists and experts – examined the action required by Australia if it’s to act consistently with the Paris Agreement goals.
To do its share in limiting global warming to below 1.5℃ this century, Australia must cut emissions by 75% below 2005 levels this decade. Limiting warming to well below 2℃ this century would require a 50% emissions reduction in the same time frame.
The last official government review of Australia’s climate targets was conducted by the Climate Change Authority, and updated in 2015. It found that to act in line with the 2℃ goal, Australia should aim for 45–65% emissions reduction by 2030, based on 2005 levels.
Notably, the Coalition government ignored this recommendation when it set Australia’s 2030 target of 26-28%. This recommendation is also more ambitious than the target announced by Labor today.
Australia should aim for 45–65% emissions reduction by 2030 to act in line with Paris. Shutterstock
The global picture
The Glasgow Climate Pact, agreed to at COP26 last month, called on nations to bring a stronger 2030 target to the next United Nations conference in November 2022. It said limiting global warming to 1.5℃ would require global emissions reduction of at least 45% below 2010 levels by 2030.
To play their part, wealthy nations need to cut emissions by much more than 45% this decade. This particularly applies to Australia – a skilled, wealthy, developed nation blessed with sunshine and wind.
While the Glasgow pact uses a baseline year of 2010 rather than Australia’s 2005, our national emissions were similar in both years. So Labor’s new 43% commitment approaches, but still falls short of, the Glasgow pact.
Pacific island countries have called on Australia to cut emissions by at least 50% by 2030. So again, Labor’s target comes close but does not actually fulfil what island states want to see from Australia to help ensure their survival.
Labor’s 43% target also brings us closer to, but not into line with, our major allies. Over the same time frame, the United States is aiming for a 50-52% reduction, Japan 46% and New Zealand 50%. The United Kingdom plans to reduce emissions by 68% below 1990 levels, and the European Union 55%.
And special treatment afforded Australia under the Kyoto protocol – the precursor to the Paris Agreement – means the country is uniquely advantaged. We are allowed to count emissions from land use change in the base year from which emissions reduction is measured – something most countries don’t do.
Because of this, an Australian commitment to 43% below 2005 levels – a year when land use emissions were high – involves far less real-world emissions reduction than that of our international peers.
Both the Morrison government’s target, and that of Labor, is below that of our international peers. Mick Tsikas/AAP
Building on the work of others
Thanks to the head-start gifted by the states and territories, Australia could achieve emissions reduction far beyond the target set by Labor with just a modest amount of federal effort.
The Morrison government may claim Australia’s woeful 2030 target is “fixed”, but state and territory commitments made it redundant long ago.
The two most populous states – New South Wales and Victoria – both plan to halve their emissions over the same period. South Australia and the ACT intend to outperform even that, and Tasmania is already at net-zero emissions.
Even in Western Australian – where energy sector emissions have grown by two-thirds since 2005 as a result of unrestrained gas expansion – the state government announced yesterday it will establish a process to set emissions reductions targets in line with its net-zero goal.
Assuming state targets are only met and not exceeded, Australia’s emissions would fall by 34% from 2005 levels by 2030 with no effort from the federal government whatsoever.
In 2019, the Business Council of Australia loudly opposed Labor’s 2030 target of 45% below 2005 levels in 2030. In the context of increased state and territory ambition, it has now adopted this target as its own. Far from being “economy-wrecking” or other such hyperbole, such a target is in fact a humble but important additional effort that builds on existing state and territory action.
As has been shown time and again – most recently just yesterday in research the Climate Council commissioned from Deloitte Access Economics – good climate policy is good economic policy, and will drive job creation in regional areas.
Setting a stronger 2030 target is important for driving investment in the clean energy economy of the future. Australia is well-placed to take advantage of a world shifting toward net-zero emissions, and it makes no sense to delay the inevitable transition. This is especially so when Australia is so acutely vulnerable to climate impacts.
Australia is well-placed to take advantage of a world shifting toward net-zero emissions. Shutterstock
Go further, faster
Announcing the policy on Friday, Albanese said the planned emissions reduction was consistent with that of Canada, which has a comparable economy.
If Labor wins government at next year’s election, Australia could “go to international climate conferences and not be in the naughty corner”, Albanese said. “I wanted to make sure we have a policy that doesn’t leave people behind, that supports industry, supports jobs and gets the balance right.”
There’s no question that Labor’s target is inadequate. But it provides a solid framework for further action in the next decade.
Any federal government that implements meaningful policy to reduce emissions will quickly realise it’s in Australia’s interests to go further, faster. Doing so will leave households better off, grow jobs in regional Australia, and ensure we play a role in the global effort to avert climate catastrophe.
2021 has been a milestone year for advocacy for a right to repair. In November, Apple announced its Self Service Repair program, through which it will offer parts, tools and manuals for consumers to repair their iPhones.
The announcement was cautiously welcomed by advocates, who have highlighted the company’s lacklustre record on repairability, and monopolistic strategies that force consumers to seek repairs at registered outlets.
The Australian Productivity Commission has also released the findings of a major inquiry that found “significant and unnecessary barriers” to consumers’ right to repair. It has recommended a range of measures on this front.
So what is a right to repair? And to what extent do the new recommendations address consumers’ rights, and manufacturers’ responsibilities?
Productivity Commission’s proposed reforms to overcome barriers to repair. Right to Repair Productivity Commission Inquiry Report Overview and Recommendations p5
The Right to Repair movement
Over the past decade, a coalition of tech entrepreneurs, farmers, repair enthusiasts, vehicle owners, designers and environmentalists have formed a global Right to Repair movement. They argue that a right to tinker is essential to owning technological devices.
The movement pushes against barriers such as commercial strategies that limit spare part availability, proprietary fittings, confusing warranty conditions and the increasing sophistication of products. Repair is also increasingly recognised as an urgent response to reducing global e-waste.
The commission has stopped short of recommending a clear “right to repair”, which advocates may see as a missed opportunity.
That said, many recommendations have significant potential to ensure consumers are provided durable products in the first place, or can get them repaired, replaced or refunded under existing Australian Consumer Law consumer guarantees. If enacted, consumers will likely benefit from requirements for:
product package labelling that sets out how durable or repairable a product is
warranties that say consumers won’t lose their rights to a repair, replacement or refund just because they used an unauthorised repairer or spare parts, and
software updates to be provided for a reasonable time for products with embedded software.
The proposed product labelling scheme would be particularly useful on bigger-ticket products such as washing machines. Properly implemented labels would allow consumers to compare products based on durability before buying them – similar to labels disclosing a product’s electricity or water-use efficiency.
Another significant set of recommendations would make it much easier for consumers to enforce their existing rights. This includes the introduction of more dispute resolution options as alternatives to making complaints directly to a court or a tribunal. They propose:
the ability for the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission to seek “pecuniary penalties” (a type of non-criminal fine) against suppliers and manufacturers
a “super complaints” process that will allow consumer organisations to take action on behalf of consumers, and
enforceable decisions by state and territory fair trading agencies.
There were also positive proposals for independent repairers, particularly in removing certain barriers to repair posed by the Copyright Act. The commission recommended a “fair dealing” exception that would allow repairers to copy and share repair information, as well as a ban on contractual terms that attempt to restrict these rights.
Also, diagnosis and repair information is currently often hidden behind “digital locks” in devices, or technological protection measures that aim to prevent outsider access and copying. The commission recommended changes to the Copyright Act’s technological protection measures regime, which would let repairers access this “locked” information.
Concerns raised about premature obsolescence in devices were doubted, and the commission didn’t support proposals to directly prevent this. It also wasn’t convinced competition in repair markets other than agricultural machinery were being hampered by manufacturer restrictions.
The commission merely recommended evaluating an existing information sharing scheme for motor vehicle repair, and further inquiry into repair markets for mobiles and tablets, medical devices and watches.
In the context of the international debate on the right to repair – which has centred on farmers’ rights to fix their tractors – the most radical proposal has been for the agricultural machinery repair market.
The commission recommended mandatory access to repair information and diagnostic software tools for all owners and repairers in this market “on fair and reasonable commercial terms”.
The agricultural machinery repair market has long been a battleground in the right to repair debate. Shutterstock
E-waste and the climate transition
Importantly, the commission considered right to repair issues in the context of wider e-waste concerns. Here the recommendations were that:
the government should use more tracking devices to figure our where e-waste ends up.
A striking feature of the report is the relatively brief treatment of “green” technologies. It notes the growing significance of solar waste, and that solar panels and lithium-ion batteries nearing their end of life will likely generate significant e-waste in coming years. Yet no specific recommendations are made for rights to repair renewable technologies.
It also had little to say about electric cars, despite the acknowledged repairability issues in the electric vehicle market.
Overall, the recommendations will help propel debate on the right to repair. But focusing on encoding these rights in already established sectors risks obscuring important repair issues associated with transitioning to climate-friendly technologies.
These problems will only become more obvious, as more households adopt rooftop solar and electric vehicles become the norm.
Matthew Kearnes receives funding from the Australian Research Council. This research is supported by the UNSW Allens Hub for Technology, Law and Innovation, Right to Repair Stream.
Kayleen Manwaring receives funding from the UNSW Allens Hub for Technology, Law and Innovation, Challenges for a Cyber-Physical World stream.
Paul Munro receives funding from the Australian Research Council.
Roberta Pala and Shanil Samarakoon 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.
University of Canberra Professorial Fellow Michelle Grattan and University of Canberra Vice-Chancellor Professor Paddy Nixon discuss the week in politics.
This week they discuss the new COVID variant that has arrived in Australia called Omicron. Because of this, the government as decided to delay opening the international border to skilled workers and international students for a fortnight. But Scott Morrison has stressed he wants Australia to keep moving to COVID normal and does not want any further lockdowns.
They also canvass the release of the highly anticipated Jenkins Report into the parliamentary workplace. The report exposed that one in three people have experienced some form of sexual harassment while working there. The release of the report didn’t stop politicians from acting badly though, with a Liberal Senator accused of barking at Independent Jacqui Lambi, and Greens Senator Lidia Thorpe making an offensive and sexist comment at Liberal Hollie Hughes.
The final sitting week for the year saw former Attorney-General Christian Porter and Health Minister Greg Hunt announcing they won’t contest the election. There were also new allegations against Education Minister Alan Tudge by his former staffer who accused the minster of acting violently towards her. Tudge has now stood aside pending an inquiry.
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.
2021 has been a milestone year for advocacy for a right to repair. In November, Apple announced its Self Service Repair program, through which it will offer parts, tools and manuals for consumers to repair their iPhones.
The announcement was cautiously welcomed by advocates, who have highlighted the company’s lacklustre record on repairability, and monopolistic strategies that force consumers to seek repairs at registered outlets.
The Australian Productivity Commission has also released the findings of a major inquiry that found “significant and unnecessary barriers” to consumers’ right to repair. It has recommended a range of measures on this front.
So what is a right to repair? And to what extent do the new recommendations address consumers’ rights, and manufacturers’ responsibilities?
Productivity Commission’s proposed reforms to overcome barriers to repair. Right to Repair Productivity Commission Inquiry Report Overview and Recommendations p5
The Right to Repair movement
Over the past decade, a coalition of tech entrepreneurs, farmers, repair enthusiasts, vehicle owners, designers and environmentalists have formed a global Right to Repair movement. They argue that a right to tinker is essential to owning technological devices.
The movement pushes against barriers such as commercial strategies that limit spare part availability, proprietary fittings, confusing warranty conditions and the increasing sophistication of products. Repair is also increasingly recognised as an urgent response to reducing global e-waste.
The commission has stopped short of recommending a clear “right to repair”, which advocates may see as a missed opportunity.
That said, many recommendations have significant potential to ensure consumers are provided durable products in the first place, or can get them repaired, replaced or refunded under existing Australian Consumer Law consumer guarantees. If enacted, consumers will likely benefit from requirements for:
product package labelling that sets out how durable or repairable a product is
warranties that say consumers won’t lose their rights to a repair, replacement or refund just because they used an unauthorised repairer or spare parts, and
software updates to be provided for a reasonable time for products with embedded software.
The proposed product labelling scheme would be particularly useful on bigger-ticket products such as washing machines. Properly implemented labels would allow consumers to compare products based on durability before buying them – similar to labels disclosing a product’s electricity or water-use efficiency.
Another significant set of recommendations would make it much easier for consumers to enforce their existing rights. This includes the introduction of more dispute resolution options as alternatives to making complaints directly to a court or a tribunal. They propose:
the ability for the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission to seek “pecuniary penalties” (a type of non-criminal fine) against suppliers and manufacturers
a “super complaints” process that will allow consumer organisations to take action on behalf of consumers, and
enforceable decisions by state and territory fair trading agencies.
There were also positive proposals for independent repairers, particularly in removing certain barriers to repair posed by the Copyright Act. The commission recommended a “fair dealing” exception that would allow repairers to copy and share repair information, as well as a ban on contractual terms that attempt to restrict these rights.
Also, diagnosis and repair information is currently often hidden behind “digital locks” in devices, or technological protection measures that aim to prevent outsider access and copying. The commission recommended changes to the Copyright Act’s technological protection measures regime, which would let repairers access this “locked” information.
Concerns raised about premature obsolescence in devices were doubted, and the commission didn’t support proposals to directly prevent this. It also wasn’t convinced competition in repair markets other than agricultural machinery were being hampered by manufacturer restrictions.
The commission merely recommended evaluating an existing information sharing scheme for motor vehicle repair, and further inquiry into repair markets for mobiles and tablets, medical devices and watches.
In the context of the international debate on the right to repair – which has centred on farmers’ rights to fix their tractors – the most radical proposal has been for the agricultural machinery repair market.
The commission recommended mandatory access to repair information and diagnostic software tools for all owners and repairers in this market “on fair and reasonable commercial terms”.
The agricultural machinery repair market has long been a battleground in the right to repair debate. Shutterstock
E-waste and the climate transition
Importantly, the commission considered right to repair issues in the context of wider e-waste concerns. Here the recommendations were that:
the government should use more tracking devices to figure our where e-waste ends up.
A striking feature of the report is the relatively brief treatment of “green” technologies. It notes the growing significance of solar waste, and that solar panels and lithium-ion batteries nearing their end of life will likely generate significant e-waste in coming years. Yet no specific recommendations are made for rights to repair renewable technologies.
It also had little to say about electric cars, despite the acknowledged repairability issues in the electric vehicle market.
Overall, the recommendations will help propel debate on the right to repair. But focusing on encoding these rights in already established sectors risks obscuring important repair issues associated with transitioning to climate-friendly technologies.
These problems will only become more obvious, as more households adopt rooftop solar and electric vehicles become the norm.
Matthew Kearnes receives funding from the Australian Research Council. This research is supported by the UNSW Allens Hub for Technology, Law and Innovation, Right to Repair Stream.
Kayleen Manwaring receives funding from the UNSW Allens Hub for Technology, Law and Innovation, Challenges for a Cyber-Physical World stream.
Paul Munro receives funding from the Australian Research Council.
Roberta Pala and Shanil Samarakoon 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.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Chay Brown, Research and Partnerships Manager, The Equality Institute, & Postdoctoral fellow, Australian National University
The Northern Territory has the highest rates of domestic, family, and sexual violence in Australia.
Aboriginal women in the Northern Territory are among the most victimised groups of people in the entire world.
Programs and services in the Northern Territory attempting to address these unacceptable levels of violence must do so with little support and funding.
A recent report evaluated two community projects that aim to prevent violence against women by changing attitudes towards women and girls.
It found these Indigenous-led community projects were having some success in helping to shift attitudes about gender stereotypes.
The Tangentyere women’s group, a group of senior Aboriginal women from Alice Springs town camps that campaigns against family violence, has run two prevention projects that were recently evaluated: Girls Can Boys Can and Old Ways Are Strong. These projects aimed to increase positive strength-based representations of Aboriginal children and families.
Both of these projects were developed in partnership between the Tangentyere Family Violence Prevention Program, Larapinta Child and Family Centre, and iTalk Studio. The projects were also co-designed with Town Campers in Mparntwe/Alice Springs.
These prevention projects focused on the drivers of violence against Aboriginal women, such as:
• gendered factors, including gender inequality
• the impacts of colonisation on Aboriginal people, families and communities
• the power imbalance between non-Indigenous people and Aboriginal people, including systemic and structural inequalities.
Girls Can Boys Can developed gender-equitable messaging and resources for early childhood educators to be used in classroom and playgroup settings. This messaging aimed to help structure conversations around gender equality and challenge gender stereotypes.
Old Ways Are Strong developed animations to challenge the racist attitude that violence is a part of traditional Aboriginal cultures.
The messages and resources from these projects were distributed throughout the community through workshops, merchandise and posters, as well as across social media and local television networks.
The evaluation of these programs involved 60 surveys with local community members and 16 interviews with project staff. There were also 110 social media surveys, 18 animation audience surveys and 36 training feedback surveys.
The data from the surveys and interviews was compared to the data collected before the projects began (the baseline) to see whether they had any impact on people’s attitudes, beliefs and/or knowledge about gender, violence and Aboriginal cultures. These are three key findings:
1. Violence prevention staff lacks training and funding
The evaluation showed workforce capacity grew considerably through the projects. Most project staff were early childhood educators or working in learning centres, while some worked in specialist domestic, family, and sexual violence services.
Staff knowledge about violence against women, its drivers, and how to prevent it increased dramatically through their work on the projects.
However, the evaluation also found Northern Territory primary prevention work (which focuses on the causes of violence) receives limited funding, and there is also no funding for the workforce itself.
As a result, the staff do this prevention work on top of their usual roles. They were continuing to teach their classes or support women experiencing violence, while also planning and delivering primary prevention workshops.
As an analogy, this is akin to a doctor in the emergency department dealing with car crash casualties while also producing resources that explain the importance of wearing a seat belt.
The project staff essentially learned about violence prevention on the job. They received little or no prior training and received no support outside of the partner organisations. They also reported high levels of burnout and vicarious trauma, and felt unsupported in their primary prevention work.
One key participant reflected:
That’s generally how the roles transpire is that you do end up in a crisis response mode, rather than being given the tools to (actually do) that work.
2. Explicit direct messaging could shift people’s attitudes
A small number of the survey participants, who were mostly from Alice Springs Town Camps, were surveyed at the beginning and end of the evaluation. Although the sample size was small, there was a shift in their attitudes towards gender roles.
In the baseline survey, the respondents said things such as “girls can’t play footy” or “boys can’t cry”. In the survey at the end, 90% of the respondents demonstrated at least one positive shift toward the idea that girls/women and boys/men can do the same things.
The most positive changes were found among respondents who had a high level of participation in the projects. This perhaps shows repeated and intensive messaging is needed for messages to resonate among people.
The surveys also showed a high proportion of respondents justified violence against women in certain situations (44% in the baseline group, and 52% in the post-project group). It’s important to note these groups were made up of mostly different people.
The justification of violence was linked to jealousy or “jealousing”. Respondents were more likely to justify violence in cases or situations associated with real or imagined sexual misconduct, for example, if a woman comes home late or looks at another man. Said one participant:
It’s not alright (to use violence), but a lot of (jealous violence) does happen. A woman shouldn’t be texting another man if they have feelings for her.
The surveys showed how this concept of “jealousing” plays out in gendered ways. For men in particular, perceived sexual entitlement might play a role in justifying violence and coercive and controlling behaviour.
Although the projects were not targeted at the problem of “jealousing”, this finding could provide direction for future work.
How can we improve violence prevention programs?
The evaluation showed the importance of explicit and direct messaging – or “talking straight” as it’s called in Central Australia. Messaging about gender-based violence that was implied but not explicitly stated had less of an impact.
In future projects, explicit and accessible messaging should be used to challenge highly entrenched attitudes and beliefs, such as the misconception that traditional Aboriginal cultures condone violence against women.
The link between “jealousing” and justification of violence highlighted the need for education about healthy relationships in schools and communities. Explicit messaging must challenge the notion that possessiveness is “normal”, acceptable or even “desirable” in a partner.
This is one of the most important and urgent issues for the domestic, family, and sexual violence sector to tackle in the Northern Territory.
Funding for dedicated primary prevention workers is also important. These workers need a commitment from different levels of government to adequately fund, resource, and support their work.
Chay Brown receives funding from ANROWS and the Gender Institute at the Australian National University.
Carmel Simpson works for Tangentyere Council- Girls Can Boys Can Project. Carmel receives funding from Northern Territory Government Safe Respected Free from Violence Prevention Grant. Carmel is affiliated with Tangentyere Council- Girls Can Boys Can Project.
Shirleen Campbell is affiliated with
tANGENTYERE WONEMS SAFETY GROUP.
Dentists have reported a rise in teeth clenching and grinding since the pandemic began.
The symptoms of teeth clenching and/or grinding (also known as bruxing or parafunction) can include pain in teeth and gums, as well as jaw joints and muscles.
The pain it causes can be debilitating and significantly affect your daily life.
We’re specialist dentists who teach, research and practise in the areas of prosthodontics (Dale Howes) and community dentistry (Alexander Holden). Here’s what you need to know about clenching and grinding your teeth.
Our top and bottom teeth are only designed to meet when we need them to; for biting and chewing food.
We naturally spend only a small portion of the day chewing, with our top and bottom teeth making contact with each other.
As you read this article, think about how, subconsciously, you have positioned your teeth and jaws. Assuming you are not eating or chewing while reading, your teeth should be apart when you’re relaxed, whether or not your lips and mouth are shut.
If we grind or clench more than nature intended, the teeth can become worn over time, while the jaw muscles can become fatigued and tight.
The jaw joints (known as the temporomandibular joints) attaching the lower jaw to the skull contain a disc, which helps control the way the jaw joints move.
This disc can become distorted or dislocated, which can lead to clicking, reduce function and cause pain.
So why do we grind our teeth?
Stress is one of the main contributing factors.
When I (Alexander Holden) see patients who complain of soreness in their jaw joints and surrounding muscles, or who have obvious signs of grinding or wear on their teeth, I’ll ask about stress.
“No, I’m not stressed at all!” is often the answer, but then when we sit and talk about what’s really going in their life, the sources of stress quickly become apparent.
Starting a new job, challenges at home or with family, or coping with a life change are all common experiences that stress us more than we realise. It’s not always easy to identify when we’re experiencing tough times.
Stress can contribute to a habit of jaw clenching or teeth grinding. Shutterstock.
What can we do about it?
The first step is becoming aware you’re grinding and clenching, and making an often subconscious behaviour into one that we can control and stop.
Dental practitioners are trained to check the health and status of the jaw joints and the muscles that help you to chew.
A dental check-up can help reveal the signs of teeth grinding and jaw clenching, which can include cracked teeth and fillings, worn crowns or cusps (which is what the elevated edge of a tooth is called) and tender jaw muscles. Tender muscles around sides of the head and neck are also common.
If you grind at night (ask your partner), you might wake with sore teeth, jaw joints or head and neck muscles. Chat with your dentist about whether a bite guard (also known as a bite raising appliance or “splint”) might be right for you. These protect your teeth and jaws while you sleep.
For those who have issues with a sore jaw from clenching and grinding, avoid chewing gum for extended periods of time. Chewing sugar-free gum has been linked to reducing risk of tooth decay but for grinders, it can contribute to jaw pain.
At the end of the day, patients need to also address the stressors which may be the underlying cause.
For many people, teeth grinding is cyclical and periodically disappears after the source of their stress is managed or subsides.
For others, it might not be so straightforward.
That’s where the advice and care of a dentist can help get you the care you require.
Associate Professor Alexander Holden is engaged in funded research/evaluation activities for NSW Health and has received research funding from the Australian Skeptics Inc. and the Dental Council of NSW in the recent past. Alexander is also holds Director roles with the Australian Dental Association NSW Branch, Filling the Gap (a charity dedicated to providing care to undeserved community groups) and the Australasian College of Legal Medicine. He holds affiliate appointments as a Clinical Associate Professor with the University of Sydney and as Associate Professor (Status Only) with The University of Toronto Faculty of Dentistry.
Dale Howes 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.
Many people believe Australia’s shift to electric vehicles is stuck in the slow lane – another strollout, rather than a rollout. But while federal policies are still lacklustre, most Australians themselves are ready for the shift, according to our recent research.
We found most car-owning households will be able to charge their cars in their garage or driveway. Electric vehicles are also getting more attractive as purchase costs fall and battery range rises.
Australia’s world-beating solar uptake is another plus. Many of our three million solar households would be able to effectively charge their cars for free at daytime.
Surveys have found 56% of Australians would consider going electric with their next car purchase, while the share of consumers who would not purchase an electric car is declining quickly.
Charging at home will be key to boosting electric vehicle uptake. Shutterstock
Will electric vehicles come suddenly or slowly?
The shift will not be sudden and disruptive but gradual, as people trade in their old petrol clunkers for sleek new electric vehicles. Many will buy an electric car for everyday driving, while holding onto a petrol or diesel SUV for longer trips. No weekends need be sacrificed.
About half of Australia’s car-owning households live in houses with off-street parking and own more than one car. These households will be the first to shift to electric cars.
Almost all owners charge their electric vehicles at home. For most houses with off-street parking, charging a vehicle is as simple as getting an electrician to check your wiring and install an outlet in your garage or near your driveway. In most cases installation isn’t expensive.
While surveys still show drivers worry about battery range for electric vehicles, the underlying technology is improving year by year. As batteries get better and cheaper, these issues will fade into memory. Technology isn’t standing still.
This year, for instance, electric vehicles came on market in Australia with a battery range of up to 650km, and on average 400km. That’s more than enough for common weekend round trips, such as Melbourne to Phillip Island (280km), Sydney to Kiama (260km), or Brisbane to Sunshine Coast (200km).
While everyone knows running an electric vehicle is cheaper than petrol or diesel – due to much cheaper energy and vastly reduced maintenance costs – the upfront cost has to date been a deterrent. That, too, is changing.
The cost of an electric car is falling. Price parity in many market segments should be reached by the mid 2020s. That means one-car households who currently rely on utes or 4WDs for weekend trips will be able to easily switch in time to contribute to our target of net-zero by 2050 target.
Not only that, but our research has found the number of public electric vehicle chargers has soared to more than 2500 standard chargers. There are now almost 500 fast chargers, which can get your electric vehicle back to 80% charged in under an hour.
As range anxiety fades, electric vehicle road trips are set to grow. Pictured: Sea Cliff Bridge, north of Wollongong. Shutterstock
How can we shift to electric vehicles faster?
For us to reach net zero by 2050, we need electric vehicles to make up an increasing share of Australia’s cars. The federal government is belatedly embracing the technology as part of the new 2050 target.
While Australia is increasingly ready to shift, at present electric vehicles still make up less than 1% of new car sales. By contrast, Norway will sell its last fossil fuel-powered car next year if current trends hold.
At present, many manufacturers have skipped Australia entirely to focus on more attractive markets, leaving us with a limited range and older models.
So what needs to happen? As our report explains, the best way to bring down prices and increase the variety of electric vehicles is for the federal government to introduce an “emissions ceiling” on new vehicles.
This ceiling would limit the average emissions from vehicles and encourage manufacturers to bring Australia’s electric vehicle range up to par with the rest of the world.
Do these policies work? In a word, yes. Countries with emissions ceilings in place have a much wider range of electric vehicles for sale. Last year there were only 31 zero-emissions vehicles for sale in Australia, compared to more than 130 in the United Kingdom.
If we had an emissions ceiling in place, drivers would find it easier to switch to electric vehicles, as more choice brings cheaper cars and a wider range. Of course, no one would be forced to shift. Those who want to wait for an electric ute or SUV will be able to.
While people who own detached homes with off-street parking will find it easier to switch to electric cars, Australians who rent or live in apartments may find it harder or more expensive to get a charger installed at home.
Once homeowners with offstreet parking begin to shift to electric vehicles, charging will get easier for everyone else. Why? Because the increase in electric vehicles will prompt commercial operators to add more and more public chargers in accessible locations. The federal government’s Future Fuels and Vehicles Strategy also has plans to close gaps in the network.
If you want a glimpse of the future, look at South Korea. There, companies are building ultra-fast charging stations as a replacement for petrol stations, offering recharging in under 20 minutes and a cafe to fill the time. In the near future we’ll use clean, fume-free charging stations like these in the same way we use petrol stations today.
As a bonus for switching, the air in our cities will become ever cleaner, and traffic noise will plummet.
Even if our leaders drag their feet on electric cars, we don’t need to. Australians are ready to swap petrol for electric. And we’ll never look back.
Ingrid Burfurd 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.
Have you ever tried to do up a zip or button a shirt one-handed? Put on a pair of jeans while seated? Do you know someone with Autism Spectrum Disorder, who can’t stand the feeling of certain fabrics against their skin? If your feet are different sizes, or you only have one foot, how do you buy shoes?
Advances in “adaptive clothing” aim to address these problems.
Adaptive clothes are specially designed for people with a disability. This can mean providing one-handed zippers on shoes, replacing buttons with magnetic closures or designing clothing and footwear so you can get dressed while in a seated position.
The key to effective adaptive clothing is catering for the vast array of needs different consumers have, while maintaining style and fashionability. Recently, fashion brands have begun to provide on-trend clothing with new styles, combining fashion and technology for people with a variety of disabilities.
Here are five different ways fashion is approaching adaptive clothing.
1. Magnets, not buttons
Under Armour were one of the first to adopt a magnetic zipper in clothing. Their redesigned jacket zip called MagZip uses magnets to connect the ends of the zip, making clothing easier to do up one-handed.
Magnets have also been used in shirts, pants and other garments in lieu of buttons. These enable individuals who don’t have the dexterity or ability to use buttons to better dress themselves.
2. Shoes without laces
Different iterations of shoes also aim to make the process of tying laces easier, or remove the need all together. Zips can replace traditional laces, enabling shoes to be done up one-handed.
Another design is Nike’s Go FlyEase, a sneaker utilising a hinge design. The wearer steps into the shoe and the hinge opens, holding the shoe in place.
Many people with autism are sensitive to certain fabrics or to tags and clothing labels.
Adaptive brands, such as JAM the Label, screen-print labels, avoiding physical tags and offer a range of hyposensitive bamboo and linen fabrics.
Baby onesies and traditional bathers which cover the stomach are not always practical for everyone. Their design can be restrictive to people who are tube feed or use ostomy pouches.
Among other designs, Australian adaptive clothing manufacturer Wonsie sells garments with stomach access for both children and adults who require frequent access to the stomach, meaning medical devices need not be a barrier to fashion.
4. 3D printing and custom designs
In the past, adaptive products were often designed to be unobtrusive, such as black wheelchairs or flesh-coloured prostheses and hearing aids. But this is changing too.
Advances in 3D printing technology means devices, such as hearing aids, can come in many different designs and colours. Shutterstock
3D printing and advanced manufacturing are allowing for great flexibility and customised designs of various devices and fashion items.
Open Bionics used 3D printing to create the Hero Arm, a bionic arm powered by muscle movements. By using 3D printing to customise the arm to the user, the company is also able to provide users options around designs ranging from colours to branded content: a blend of function and fashion.
The technology behind adaptive fashion is not limited to product design: it is also used in sales and marketing, too.
Every Human’s Unpaired system allows consumers to purchase single shoes, while searching by size, width and a range of adaptive features such as easy to put on, and friendly for those who are wearing ankle/foot orthosis.
This can benefit people who have different sized or shaped feet or with prosthetics, where traditional shoes would not suit.
While it seems like a relatively simple idea, this requires brands to have more sophisticated ordering systems. Products must be itemised individually, rather than in traditional pairs, and tagged with additional features such as left or right shoe, and which adaptive features each side possesses, so consumers can search by their needs.
Adapting beyond technology
Like many consumers, people with a disability simply want to be able to shop in physical or online stores and find clothing they like and that fits. So while technology is helping retailers offer an increasing range of adaptive clothing, it is not the only solution.
The next step is to not only think about the clothing itself, but also about the wearer and how they want to shop.
All fashion brands should be adapting their items to the vast array of consumer needs: the technology is already here.
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.
Armida Salsiah Alisjahbana is the United Nations Under-Secretary-General and Executive Secretary of the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP).
OP-ED by Armida Salsiah Alisjahbana, Under-Secretary-General of the United Nations and Executive Secretary of ESCAP.
Armida Salsiah Alisjahbana is the United Nations Under-Secretary-General and Executive Secretary of the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP).
As the world observes the International Day of Persons with Disabilities today, we honour the leadership of persons with disabilities and their tireless efforts to build a more inclusive, accessible and sustainable world. At the same time, we resolve to work harder to ensure a society that is open and accommodating of all.
An estimated 690 million persons with disabilities, around 15 per cent of the total population, live in the Asia-Pacific region. Many of them continue to be excluded from socio-economic and political participation. Available data suggests that persons with disabilities are almost half as likely to be employed as persons without disabilities. They are also half as likely to have voted in an election and are underrepresented in government decision-making bodies.Just about 0.5 per cent of parliamentarians in the region are persons with disabilities. Women with disabilities are even less likely to be employed and hold only 0.1 per cent of national parliament positions.
One of the main reasons behind these exclusions is a lack of accessibility. Public transportation and the built environment in general — including public offices, polling stations, workplaces, markets and other essential structures — lack ramps, walkways and basic accessibility features. Accessibility, however, goes beyond the commonly thought of physical structures. Barriers to access to services and information and communication technology must also be removed, to allow for the participation of persons with diverse types of disabilities, including persons with intellectual disabilities and hearing and vision impairments.
The COVID-19 pandemic and related lockdowns has exacerbated existing inequalities. Many persons with disabilities face increased health concerns due to comorbidities and were left without access to their personal assistants and essential goods and services. As much of society moved online during lockdowns, inaccessible digital infrastructure meant persons with disabilities could not access public health information or online employment opportunities.
Despite these challenges, persons with disabilities and their organizations were among the first to respond to the immediate needs of their communities for food and supplies during lockdowns in addition to continuing their long-term work to support vulnerable groups.
ESCAP partnered with several of these organizations to support their work during the pandemic. Samarthyam, a civil society organization in India led by a woman with disabilities, has trained many men and women with disabilities to conduct accessibility audits in their home districts. With these skills, they are becoming leaders and advocates in their communities, working towards improving the accessibility of essential buildings everywhere.
Another ESCAP partner, the National Council for the Blind of Malaysia (NCBM), is working to improve digital accessibility by training a group with diverse disabilities in web access auditing, accessible e-publishing and strategic advocacy. NCBM hopes to support participants in forming a social enterprise for web auditing and accessible publishing, creating employment opportunities and enabling persons with disabilities to lead efforts to improve online accessibility.
Women and men with disabilities have been leaders and champions to break barriers to make a difference in Asia and the Pacific. Today, ESCAP launches the report “Disability at a Glance 2021: The Shaping of Disability-inclusive Employment in Asia and the Pacific.” The report highlights some innovative approaches to making employment more inclusive, as well as recommendations on how to further reduce employment gaps.
Adjusting to a post-COVID-19 world presents an opportunity for governments to reassess and implement policies to increase the inclusion of persons with disabilities in employment, decision making bodies and all aspects of society. Accessibility issues impact not only persons with disabilities but also other people in need of assistance, including older persons, pregnant women or those with injuries. Implementing policies with universal design, which creates environments and services that are useable by all people, benefits the whole of society. Governments should mainstream universal design principles into national development plans, not only in disability-specific laws and policies.
As a global leader in disability-inclusive development for over 30 years, the Asia-Pacific region has set an example by adopting the world’s first set of disability-specific development goals in the Incheon Strategy to “Make the Right Real.” Meeting the Incheon Strategy goals will require governments to intensify their efforts to reduce barriers to education, employment and political participation.
At ESCAP, we know that achieving an inclusive and sustainable post-COVID-19 world will only be possible with increased leadership and participation of persons with disabilities. To build back better — and fairer — we will continue to strengthen partnerships with all stakeholders so together we can “Make the Right Real” for all persons with disabilities.
——-
Armida Salsiah Alisjahbana is Under-Secretary-General of the United Nations and Executive Secretary of ESCAP.
New Zealand Parliament Buildings, Wellington, New Zealand.
Editor’s Note: Here below is a list of the main issues currently under discussion in New Zealand and links to media coverage. You can sign up to NZ Politics Daily as well as New Zealand Political Roundup columns for free here.
In September, Boeing announced it would design and build a new military aircraft in Queensland, a first in Australia for over 50 years.
The “Loyal Wingman” is an uncrewed craft that flies in teams with other crewed and uncrewed aircraft to provide surveillance and reconnaissance support to a mission. But it could also be fitted with weapons. It completed its first test flight in March and plans are to have the production facility up and running in just a few years.
Although a lot of defence forces have used uncrewed aircraft (including drones) for a long time, they have primarily been remotely piloted from the ground. The test of the Loyal Wingman involved pre-programmed flying with human oversight.
This raises questions of whether our laws are adequate to protect us from a host of concerns involving health, safety and data collection when autonomous aircraft systems are in the skies.
What are the advantages of autonomous aircraft?
Defence forces around the world are investing heavily in these types of artificial intelligence technologies.
Unlike remotely piloted systems that require sizeable teams on the ground, these craft can be deployed in large numbers by small teams. This could exponentially increase the size of a country’s air force – an invaluable thing.
Further, these uncrewed aircraft are a fraction of the cost of one flown by a human crew. So, while they are not designed to be disposable (they still cost a few million dollars each), they are ultimately expendable in return for the right military advantage.
Although current spending on autonomous projects in Australia is small in relation to the overall defence budget, it is increasing.
Defence leaders are increasingly becoming aware of both the opportunities these systems present to the Australian Defence Force (ADF), as well as the challenges posed by other militaries exploiting them.
Legal questions about autonomous craft
The Loyal Wingman test flight took place at the remote South Australian Woomera Range Complex. The new drone test facility at Cloncurry, Queensland, will also likely host test flights in the future. That facility is specifically designed to support the testing of new autonomous military technologies.
But what happens when the crafts need to move beyond these specially equipped facilities in remote areas? What does this mean for everyday Australians?
Occasionally, we see tanks and other military vehicles on our roads. We see warships in our ports and hear fighter jets in our skies. We know that while these military vehicles have a war-fighting role, they also need to exist safely in our communities. This allows the ADF to train with them or move them between military bases, as well as to training or conflict zones.
There are a number of legal considerations for the design and deployment of any uncrewed autonomous military aircraft in our skies. These include privacy, noise, occupational health and safety, the environment and public liability.
Although amending the regulations is a relatively simple process – they are updated every six months – such a significant policy shift cannot be undertaken lightly or without consideration of the wider implications of allowing autonomous devices in our skies.
Then there’s the personal data these craft could inadvertently collect through their surveillance and reconnaissance sensors while in the sky.
The Australian privacy principles outlined in the Privacy Act 1988 cover incidentally collected information such as this. Although this is also an issue for crewed aircraft, the sheer volume of data that could potentially be collected from a large number of uncrewed, autonomous aircraft rings alarms bells.
This could require the ADF to report data breaches to those whose information is collected, and even pay compensation.
There are also environmental concerns, such as the possibility of an uncrewed autonomous aircraft unintentionally starting a bushfire on the ground.
In Germany, strict aviation rules contributed to the abandonment of one very expensive, autonomous, military drone project because the craft could not obtain clearance to fly in civil aviation airspace due to safety concerns.
Australia is only starting to consider these issues. For example, a current project is working on new standards for designing, testing and operating autonomous aircraft safely in the skies. This is primarily focused on commercial drones, but could set best practices for all autonomous craft.
The ADF and the law
The military is not always covered by the same rules as the rest of us. There are lots of exclusions for ADF members from the general application of Australian laws.
This means military vehicles and technologies can be excluded from certain government inquiries. For example, the recent federal government review into aircraft noise did not cover military drones.
New civilian technologies in Australian skies have already faced a host of questions. For example, the Google Wing delivery drone designers have had to take measures to deal with noise concerns (and swooping ravens)) in the Brisbane and Canberra suburbs where they are currently operating. Safety concerns have also had to be carefully considered.
The law is constantly being updated to keep pace with technology. For instance, a court recently set an important precedent by ruling that artificial intelligence systems can be legally recognised as an inventor in patent applications.
It’s not unreasonable to imagine circumstances could require a change to some defence safety aviation rules to allow for greater use of artificial intelligence in our skies.
Over the coming years, much thought will need to go into ensuring the ADF can safely and effectively get their autonomous craft to the starting line in a way that is workable under the Australian legal system and for the Australian public.
The Law and the Future of War research group at the University of Queensland receives funding from the Australian Government through the Defence Cooperative Research Centre for Trusted Autonomous Systems. The views and opinions expressed in here are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Australian Government or any other institution.
Internationally, and especially within the US, there has been a lot of talk about the so-called “great resignation” – the trend seeing large numbers of workers leaving their jobs during the COVID-19 pandemic, having reevaluated their priorities or simply because there are more opportunities than ever before.
While there isn’t enough firm data to confirm this is happening in New Zealand yet, there is little doubt a chronic skills shortage has given workers more bargaining power. Perhaps not surprisingly, research shows more and more workers are at least thinking about either changing or quitting their jobs since last year.
But this phenomenon – defined as “turnover intentions” – could also fuel what we’re calling the “great recruitment”. After all, as physics teaches us, for every action there is a reaction.
Calling it the great recruitment is obviously related to the sheer volume of recruitment activity that logically follows a great resignation. But it is also a reference to the related importance of a positive – great – recruitment experience for potential employees.
Shutterstock
Not a negative trend
Classic supply and demand principles tell us that if more workers are seeking greener employment pastures, there will be more ready-to-hire talent in the marketplace. For that reason alone, we urge organisations not to consider the great resignation a negative trend in the job market.
Of course, to be successful the great recruitment must be supported by businesses that prioritise the recruitment process, from candidate care to the vetting and hiring team, to the use of technology and protecting the organisation’s reputation and brand.
However, there are many practices that not only undermine but entirely defeat the positive potential of a great recruitment, including:
“ghosting”, where candidates apply for a role but get no response or experience a sudden silence part way through the process
posting vague or corny job descriptions – “customer services expert” anyone? – that do nothing to excite or provide context for potential applicants
relying too heavily on quasi-scientific personality profile tests and asking questions that are at best tokenistic, at worst discriminatory.
Making recruitment great
We also see recruitment processes stumble at the last hurdle by engaging in Game of Thrones-style salary negotiations, where candidates feel like they’re challenging a noble family. This is particularly disadvantages women and ethnic minorities.
How then to ensure your organisation is capturing the talent potential released by the great resignation and maximising the employment potential of the great recruitment? Here are our top 10 tips:
Choose your words carefully: write inspiring, authentic job advertisements. If your recruitment team can’t do it, get someone who can.
Be realistic: create reasonable candidate specifications – wanting extreme levels of skill, attitude and experience is likely put off good candidates.
Canvas others: when designing employee value propositions, get input from recruiters and current employees.
Remember glass houses: recognise there is no such thing as perfect behaviour when using behavioural-based interview questions, especially given the organisation itself may be questionable in some of its conduct.
Consider the context: give due consideration to reference check results – if a candidate’s last boss says he or she was disconnected in the end, perhaps it’s because they were already in a high state of turnover intention.
Go back to the future: be open to hiring past employees. Initiatives such as alumni programmes can be used to connect with and recruit former employees.
Know your team: be open to conversations about the attributes and attitudes of the person a successful candidate will be reporting to, and the team they will be working with.
Be technology wise: use automated recruitment technology (such as SnapHire, JobAdder or QJumpers) to enhance – not replace – an integrated people-oriented recruitment experience.
Provide clear pay ranges: if an applicant knows what the pay is from the outset, it saves everyone valuable time and energy.
Be gracious: formally thank all candidates for applying – this can help ensure you retain them as future applicants and/or customers.
With more talent in the market, those in recruitment will need to sharpen their games. Given much recruitment activity is outsourced and many recruiters will be booming in the current climate, organisational clients should have great expectations of recruitment professionals, too.
Employees face enough challenges in their working lives without having to endure a recruitment experience that is anything less than great.
Finally, the great recruitment must also account for future talent. Before we know it, the Roblox generation will be hitting the workforce, already adept at digital creation and collaboration, and expecting similar things from recruiters.
If we get it right, the great recruitment is a chance for employers to recast the great resignation as an opportunity for everyone to do better – now and into the future.
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.
Recent high-profile criminal cases, such as the suspected death of William Tyrrell and the abduction of Chloe Smith, have captured the attention of the media and the public.
As a former detective inspector, I investigated and managed more than 25 homicide investigations and many other major crimes during 28 years with the Queensland Police Service.
So what happens behind the scenes in a major crime investigation. And how does the investigation of major crime differ from volume crime?
The difference between major crime and volume crime
Homicides are the most obvious type of major crime, but it can also include robbery, rape and other serious offences such as organised crime.
The Queensland Crime and Corruption Commission’s list of major crime offences includes drug trafficking, fraud, money laundering, criminal paedophilia and homicide.
The Australian Institute of Criminology defines volume crime as offences that account for the largest proportion of crime recorded by the police. These include unlawful entry, assaults, motor vehicle theft and theft.
There is a difference between the way major crime and volume crime are investigated. Major crime investigations can take years for some cases, such as the murder of 13-year-old Daniel Morcombe, which took 11 years to reach a conviction.
In major crime, there is a clear division of labour rather then just one officer doing everything, as is usually the case in volume crime investigations. Assigned roles include the investigation manager, the arrest team, other investigators, an intelligence cell and specialist support staff.
Major crimes such as homicides involve dedicated taskforces or operations containing large teams of detectives, conducting parallel lines of inquiry.
This ability to put greater investigative effort and specialist support into major crime investigations contributes to much higher “clear-up rates” – when a suspect is identified and proceedings are begun – for these types of offences.
A New South Wales study showed that, from 2007 to 2016, 65% of murders were cleared by police within 90 days. The same study noted clear-up rates for property offences were much lower than for violent offences, including murder. In Queensland, 96% of murders reported in 2019–20 were cleared.
Percentage of homicides cleared by police, by region, 2016 or latest available year. United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime
Australia’s clearance rates for homicide compare well to the rest of the world. The United Nations Global study on homicide indicates clearance rates range between 50% and 90%.
The hunt for information
Most major investigations are a process of moving from having little information about the crime to having a lot. It is essentially an exercise in information management. Investigators need to acquire information to build a plausible account of what has happened.
Investigators do this by identifying, interpreting and assembling information into a form that shows whether a crime has been committed, and who is responsible for that crime. Sources of information can include crime scene material, intelligence databases, witnesses, victims and the media.
An investigative model
There is no standardised investigative process or model. The United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime provides some guidance on how to progress through a generic reactive investigation in its crime investigation toolkit.
In the United Kingdom, the College of Policing provides guidance on the investigative process. However, it notes that every investigation is different, and so may require a different path to solving the case.
In 2001, as part of a research project in conjunction with the Queensland Police Service, I developed an investigative model. It outlined several stages:
crime scene
initial assessment
investigation
target
arrest.
In the course of an investigation, police can return to any stage and begin a new line of inquiry. We have seen this occur with the disappearance of William Tyrrell, with police returning to the original crime scene some seven years later after receiving new information.
No matter what model is used, there are decisions that the management team of the investigation will need to make as it moves through the stages:
knowledge decisions are concerned with how particular information should be interpreted and treated by the investigative team
tactical decisions relate to what should be done, when and by whom
logistical decisions concern the operational supports and resources to be dedicated to an investigation
legal decisions need to be made to ensure any actions taken by the investigative team are legal and admissible in a court case.
The role of media and technology
The media are a great investigative tool and can be used to apply tactical pressure to suspects and drive the search for information from the public. The extensive coverage of high-profile cases, such as that of William Tyrrell, is an example of this. The use of the media can also coincide with covert policing strategies, such as listening devices, designed to target potential suspects.
Technology is now also playing a much larger role in major investigations. We all leave digital footprints, be they passive (your mobile phone searching for a signal from a cell tower) or active (using your phone to pay for fuel at a geographic location).
In one triple-murder investigation that I managed, the offenders were tracked up and down the eastern seaboard of Australia, and to the murder scenes, using their mobile phone data.
One thing that hasn’t changed over time is the importance of the investigative effort in the early stages of any major crime, but particularly murders. I have seen first-hand how putting the effort in early in terms of long hours and adequate resources can result in solving major crime.
Terry Goldsworthy 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.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tanya Hill, Honorary Fellow of the University of Melbourne and Senior Curator (Astronomy), Museums Victoria
Natacha Pisarenko/AAP Image
The Sun hasn’t set in Antarctica since October. Earth’s southernmost continent is currently experiencing a long summer’s day, one that stretches from mid-October until early April.
But on Saturday December 4, darkness will sweep across the ice of West Antarctica. The Moon will pass directly in front of the Sun, blocking its light and producing a total solar eclipse.
The path of totality crosses the Argentine, British and Chilean Antarctic Territories (which consist of overlapping regions), as well as the unclaimed territory known as Marie Byrd Land. Areas along the path will experience almost 2 minutes of darkness in the otherwise months-long stretch of daylight.
Meanwhile, the southern tips of South America, Africa, Australia and New Zealand will see a fairly minor partial eclipse. For South America and Africa, the eclipse will be in the early morning; for Australia and New Zealand it will happen as the Sun is setting.
The Moon’s goodnight kiss
As the Sun sinks towards the horizon the Moon will appear to kiss the top-left of the Sun. Of all Australia’s capital cities, Hobart will see the largest eclipse, but even so only 11% of the Sun’s area will be covered. For Melbourne, this drops to just 2%, while in Canberra it’s hardly visible – the Sun is crossing the horizon as a tiny eclipse occurs.
It’s a similar situation in New Zealand. Invercargill will see 4% of the Sun obscured by the Moon, with the Moon passing by the Sun’s left side. But move further north to Queenstown and the eclipse is barely visible for the setting Sun.
In fact, if you weren’t aware of it, you wouldn’t even know the eclipse was happening. It’s not until about 80% or more of the Sun is obscured before we notice any change in daylight.
Star light, star bright
Solar eclipses are one astronomical event that require special care to observe. Most importantly, never look at the Sun directly – even when it’s low on the horizon.
Be sure to protect your eyes by using specially designed eclipse glasses. These glasses also allow you to see any sunspots that might be active. The Sun is currently moving from a quiet phase to an active one, as part of a cycle that repeats every 11 years. You can check websites such as Spaceweather to see what’s happening on the Sun’s surface right now.
Normally, the projection method is a great way to observe solar eclipses. This involves making a small hole in the bottom of a plastic cup or piece of cardboard. Then, with your back to the Sun, hold the cup so the sunlight passes through the hole onto a flat surface such as a piece of paper or a wall, projecting an image of the Sun on the surface.
But because this is such a minor eclipse and it will happen at sunset in eastern Australia, it may be hard to focus the Sun’s image in this way.
A great way to safely share a view of a solar eclipse. Sid/flickr
The rarity of totality
Solar eclipses are relatively rare experiences, because the Moon’s orbit is tilted by 5 degrees relative to Earth’s orbit around the Sun, so they don’t quite move in the same plane. However, roughly every six months the orbits align to produce a pair of eclipses – a lunar eclipse at Full Moon, followed by a solar eclipse at New Moon (as we are experiencing now), or vice versa.
Lunar eclipses are seen by more people because everyone on the night side of the Earth during a lunar eclipse will see the event. Solar eclipses happen just as often, but they are seen by far fewer people because the shadow created by the Moon passing in front of the Sun covers a much smaller fraction of the Earth.
Furthermore, partial solar eclipses are difficult to observe and they pale in comparison to the experience of a total solar eclipse. While total solar eclipses happen roughly every 18 months being able to see totality is rarer still.
The Moon’s shadow as it crosses the Earth is only 100-260km wide, and you have to be located within that narrow path to see the totally eclipsed Sun. This is why eclipse-chasers travel the world to be in the right place at the right time. But when totality occurs in a remote location like Antarctica it’ll be mainly the penguins who get to see it.
The next total solar eclipse visible from Australia will happen in April 2023. The band of totality will just clip Australia near Exmouth at the tip of the North West Cape in Western Australia.
But many more Aussies and New Zealanders will get to see a total solar eclipse on July 22 2028. Totality will stretch across Australia, from the top of WA down through New South Wales, passing directly over Sydney. It will also cross the South Island of New Zealand, passing through Queenstown and Dunedin.
Tanya Hill 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.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bill Hare, Director, Climate Analytics, Adjunct Professor, Murdoch University (Perth), Visiting scientist, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research
Shutterstock
The controversial Scarborough gas project off Western Australia will cause a substantial rise in greenhouse gas emissions at a time when the world must rapidly decarbonise, new analysis released today shows.
The A$16 billion plan by Woodside Petroleum has been described as Australia’s biggest new fossil fuel investment in nearly a decade. The report, produced by Climate Analytics, a research organisation I help lead, is the first to examine the full climate impact of the entire expansion project.
The Morrison government has put the gas industry at the heart of its economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic. But as the Scarborough example shows, such projects makes it less likely the world will meet the goals of the Paris Agreement.
The sheer scale of emissions from the expansion, and projects linked to it, will make achieving 2030 emissions targets much harder for Western Australia and, by extension, Australia and the world.
The controversial Scarborough gas project has been described as the nation’s biggest fossil fuel investment in a decade. Scarborough Gas Action Alliance
Emissions worse than we thought
Woodside’s expansion proposal involves developing the Scarborough offshore gas field 375 kilometres off Australia’s northwest coast. It also includes a new pipeline to the company’s onshore Pluto processing facility on the Pilbara coast, and expansion of that facility.
Woodside last week announced it had approved the final investment decision on the developments. Chief executive Meg O’Neill said the project “supports the decarbonisation goals of our customers in Asia”.
Our study examines the full emissions implications of the expansion and associated projects, including domestic gas supply and a proposed project converting gas to hydrogen.
Estimates of the entire projects’ greenhouse gas implications are spread across several reports and documents. This report assembles these for the first time. The research was commissioned by the Conservation Council of Western Australia.
We examined the emissions from the gas facilities themselves, and emissions that will, or are likely to, occur as a result of the project. This second group of emissions includes locked-in domestic demand for natural gas and overseas export markets burning its product for energy.
We estimate that by 2055, the expansion and associated projects will emit 1.37 billion tonnes of greenhouse gases. Almost 20% is projected to be emitted in Western Australia and the rest would be emitted overseas where the exported gas will be burnt.
The total emissions we calculate is far more than the 878 million tonnes Woodside says the project will emit.
In a statement to The Conversation, a Woodside spokeswoman said its emissions figure was “correct and has been accepted by the federal regulator NOPSEMA”.
However the NOPSEMA report covers only the emissions that come from gas derived from the Scarborough gas field and not the emissions from the entire Pluto expansion. In contrast, Woodside’s greenhouse gas action plan is based on the entire Pluto expansion, including all aspects of the project we included in our calculations.
Woodside said Scarborough gas, used to generate electricity, could power ten cities the size of Perth for 30 years and the emissions would be around half those for the same electricity generated from coal.
However, we found that introducing Scarborough-Pluto gas into electricity grids of countries decarbonising in line with the Paris Agreement would raise greenhouse gas emissions by several hundred million tonnes between 2026 and 2040.
Woodside says the project could power ten cities the size of Perth for 30 years. David Goldman/AP
Questionable emissions reduction plan
Woodside says its “greenhouse gas abatement program” shows how the company will offset a substantial amount of emissions. We believe that plan, approved by the WA government, is questionable on several counts.
For example, a Woodside project approved in 2006 at 12 million tonnes of LNG per year was later scaled down. However, Woodside’s plan for emissions reduction plan comes off the earlier high-emissions baseline.
Woodside proposes to reduce emissions reductions using carbon offsets (removing CO₂ from the atmosphere in one place to compensate for emissions made elsewhere). But there appears to be no guarantee these offsets would not have occurred as part of Woodside’s usual business operations.
Woodside says it plans to abate all emissions from the project by 2050. But most of this emissions reduction will not occur until after 2040, and depends on factors such as the availability of technology, government policy and the availability of carbon offsets for purchase.
Woodside has also not accounted for expected global increases in the price of carbon offsets. We calculate that by 2050, the cost of offsets could comprise between 21% and 71% of Woodside’s export revenue for liquified natural gas.
Carbon offsets compensate for emissions in one place by reducing them elsewhere. Shutterstock
Bad news for net-zero
In May this year, the International Energy Agency said no new oil and gas fields can be developed if the world is to meet the goal of net-zero emissions by 2050 and avert catastrophic global warming.
This, in our view, includes the Scarborough-Pluto expansion. Introducing gas from the project into electricity grids of importing nations would slow global decarbonisation efforts.
Big buyers of Australian gas, such as South Korea and Japan, are moving away from fossil fuels and towards green hydrogen and renewable energy. This suggests a softening, or even collapse, in demand for LNG this decade – a trend consistent with assessments by the International Energy Agency and Australia’s Reserve Bank.
For Woodside, the Scarborough-Pluto expansion is increasingly looking like a stranded asset. And the WA government’s support for the project, and the broader gas industry, means it’s missing out on massive, and growing, opportunities in renewable energy and green hydrogen exports.
Bill Hare receives funding from the European Climate Foundation, Bloomberg philanthropy and the Climate Works Foundation. The research upon which this article is based was funded by the Conservation Council of Western Australia
The COP26 meeting has sharpened the world’s focus on climate change. To adapt and thrive in a world of reduced emissions, Australian businesses and communities need access to the technologies and innovation made possible by the nation’s researchers. But most Australian research is locked behind publisher paywalls.
Open access to research has become an important strategy to speed innovation. Making COVID-19-related research and data publicly accessible to fast-track the development of vaccines, treatments and policies is one example.
Given the gravity of the global climate emergency, it seems reasonable also to use open access to help speed green innovation.
But, as Prime Minister Scott Morrison recently noted, research systems driven by a “publish or perish mindset” do little to spur innovation. Scholarly communication models that lock research behind paywalls slow the flow of new knowledge from researchers into real-world innovation.
Australian universities pay hundreds of millions of dollars in subscription fees each year for access to publications by Australian researchers. Businesses, policy advisers, think-tanks and private individuals who don’t have access to a university library must either pay separately for access or miss out.
This is despite the fact Australia invests an estimated A$12 billion of taxpayer money each year in research and innovation, according to Chief Scientist Cathy Foley. Action is needed to ensure this publicly funded research can be translated into innovation for the wider economy.
International research communities are already using open-access strategies to maximise the impacts of climate-related research. Our analysis of publication data* shows between 2011 and 2020 the proportion of research on climate change that is open access rose from 30% to 50%. This is consistent with an accelerating international shift towards “public access to publicly funded research”.
More than half of the Australian research on climate change published in the past decade is behind a paywall. This puts Australia on par with the US and Canada – but well behind our nearest neighbour Indonesia, as well as most of Europe.
Australia’s low rates of open access have implications for communities in need of information about how to adapt to a warming world.
The Council of Australian University Libraries (CAUL) is leading the push for open access to Australian research. So-called “transformative agreements” are one aspect of its strategy. These are deals with publishers that cover both subscription access to articles that are still behind paywalls and open-access publishing rights for articles by Australian researchers.
In 2021 the CAUL signed transformative agreements with five major publishers.
Foley argues that a “gold” route to open access (paying publishers not to lock articles behind paywalls) is likely to cost less than Australian universities already pay for subscription access: between A$460 million and A$1 billion.
Foley wants a sector-wide approach that would result in all Australian research being published in open access, and all Australians able to access the journals that universities subscribe to.
So will the latest transformative agreements make it easier to access research needed to tackle climate change?
The short answer is “yes, but we need to do more”.
A few big commercial publishers dominate scholarly publishing.
So far CAUL has signed deals with only two of the largest publishers of climate-related research: Wiley and Springer Nature. The Springer Nature deal excludes many of its most prestigious titles, including the journal Nature.
If the deals with Springer Nature and Wiley had applied to all 2020 publications, our analysis suggests they would have made up to 200 more articles immediately accessible on publication.
Author provided
Deals with the Big Five publishers will create a step change in the amount of Australian climate change research that is freely accessible. But there is a danger they will further lock in the monopolies of a few players.
Australian researchers could make a bigger difference to open access by making their work available through other online sharing platforms. Discipline platforms like arXiv, Pubmed Central or university systems like QUT’s ePrints are examples.
Our analysis found less than 40% of Australia’s 2019 research output is accessible through these platforms. Australian researchers could make 1,400 articles on climate change more accessible by depositing them in a free open access repository today.
Tackling climate change and improving access to research are both complex and controversial issues. In each case, thinking through the implications in the short, medium and long term will be key to helping Australia achieve its goals.
* Data statement: data were obtained from Crossref metadata, Unpaywall, Microsoft Academic and the Global Research Identifier Database, via the data infrastructure developed by the Curtin Open Knowledge Initiative, Curtin University. “Climate change” is a topic category available from Microsoft Academic and this was supplemented by a search for terms associated with UN Sustainable Development Goal 7, “clean energy” and “net zero”.
Lucy Montgomery has received funding from Springer Nature for research relating to Open Access. She is also affiliated with a number or organisations involved in Open Access scholarly communication, including as a recipient of funding from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation; and as a member of the Scientific Committees for the Directory of Open Access Books (DOAB) and the OAPEN Open Access Books Toolkit. Montgomery is non-executive director of the not-for-profit consultancy Collaborative Open Access Research and Development (COARD).
Cameron Neylon has received funding from Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, Springer Nature, the Arcadia Fund, Arnold Foundation, Open Society Foundations, Canadian Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council and other organisations for research relating to Open Access. He is also affiliated or has an advisory role with a number or organisations involved in Open Access scholarly communication, including as part of the Initiatives for Open Citations and for Open Abstracts, an Advisory Board Member of Open Book Publishers, and others. Neylon is a non-executive director of the not-for-profit consultancy Collaborative Open Access Research and Development (COARD).
Karl Huang 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.
Anthony Albanese in Nimbin, NSW, on November 12 2019 amid a season of a catastrophic bushfires. Jason O’Brien/AAP
The Australian Labor Party is set to announce its target for cutting greenhouse gas emissions today.
At the 2016 and 2019 elections, Labor promised net zero emissions by 2050 and a cut of 45% on 2005 levels by 2030. Among the promises it adopted to get it there in 2019 was a target of 50% renewable energy by 2030.
But it lost those elections. So up to now Labor has refused to say what policies it will take to the 2022 election. We should know by the end of the day.
The Coalition’s position is clear – sort of.
Formally the government is sticking with its long-settled position of delivering a cut of 26-28% on 2005 levels by 2030 (as well as net zero by 2050).
But Prime Minister Scott Morrison is having a bet each way, by also saying the government will do better. As he said on November 15:
We are going to achieve a 35% reduction in emissions by 2030. That is what we’re going to achieve. That is what actually matters. What matters is what you actually achieve. We are well above our target.
This leaves Labor, which has consistently taken a stronger stance than the Coalition, with three broad options.
Targets, predictions, safeguards
Option 1 is to match the 35% reduction but make it a formal target, not a prediction.
Option 2 is to go a little higher with a prediction – say 40% – and claim this is achievable given announced Labor policies such as electric vehicles and upgrading the electricity grid (“rewiring the nation”).
Option 3 is set a more ambitious target – perhaps 45%, as Labor did at the last election, along with a change to the so-called “safeguard mechanism” introduced by the Coalition in 2016 as part of its alternative to a price on carbon.
The safeguard mechanism requires Australia’s largest greenhouse gas emitters to keep their net emissions below a certain cap.
At the 2019 election Labor proposed to cut the eligibility threshold for the cap from 100,000 to 25,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide a year, and extend it to more emitters.
The difference between now and 2019 is that this time the business community is behind the approach.
In fact, the Business Council of Australia’s climate plan, published in October 2021, is to do exactly this.
Each one of these options have pitfalls. Option 1 looks weak, and gives the government a free pass on climate. It’s hard for Labor politicians to campaign on the government not doing enough if they aren’t willing to do more themselves.
Option 2 (perhaps the most likely) is a hedge: Labor will do more because it cares about the planet, but not too much more because, you know, politics.
Option 3 is the bravest of the likely targets. It’s a bigger number that would make for more meaningful change. It also now has air cover from the Business Council of Australia.
But it’s also the option taken to the last election, which Labor lost. Maybe that was due to other reasons, such as the retiree tax, but it still seems politically risky.
No talk about a carbon price
One option you can bet Labor will not adopt is a price on carbon.
That’s the best way to balance what’s good about emissions (economic growth and development) with what’s bad about emissions (climate change).
This has been off the table with Labor since it lost government in 2013 – in no small part due to Tony Abbott exploiting the issue with his “great big tax” campaigning.
But a funny thing has happened on the way to the 2022 election. A few months ago the Coalition inserted a price on carbon into its own plan.
As The Conversation’s Peter Martin put it, the plan assumed emissions reductions “the same as what would be expected if Australians faced a carbon price (or tax) that climbed to A$24 per tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent by 2050”.
If Energy Minister Angus Taylor is trying to hide this, he is not being particularly stealthy about it.
Page 6 of the government document outlining the modelling and analysis behind the plan acknowledges it models voluntary emissions reductions “as an abatement incentive which is taken up across the economy and rises to $24/t CO2-e in 2050”.
It says behaving “as if” there was a carbon price of A$24 per tonne in place would get emissions down by 85%.
To get them down further to net zero would require an even higher carbon price: about A$80 per tonne on the model’s logic.
Labor could take its cue from the Coalition
So why doesn’t Labor do what it knows to be right – announce a price on carbon? It could say it will start at the government’s own figure of $24/tonne, and take any needed subsequent increases to future elections.
That won’t happen on Friday. Or any time soon. We should reflect on why.
Richard Holden is President of the Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia.
Breastplate, of metal, engraved ‘McIntyre King of Mannilla’, c.1860–1874. ‘King’ McIntyre (c.1814–74) . Donated by A.W. Wilkins to Birmingham Museum & Art Gallery, 1930.Birmingham Museum & Art Gallery
Readers are advised this article contains content relating to violent colonial practices and deceased Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, which some may find distressing.
Ancestors of Indigenous Australians are represented in Britain not only by the objects they made. The Ancestral Remains of Aboriginal people still lie in museums or in graves, marked and unmarked.
A number of Aboriginal people who travelled to Britain in the late 18th and 19th century died there. These include Yemmerrawanne, who visited with Bennelong in 1793; William Wimmera, whose mother was killed by colonists in northwest Victoria and who was subsequently brought by the Reverend Septimus Lloyd Chase to Reading, where the lad died in 1852; and Bripumyarrimin, “King Cole”, a member of the 1868 Aboriginal cricket team who died in London in the same year.
The 1868 Aboriginal cricket team in England. Wikimedia Commons
Indirect evidence of Aboriginal visitors to Britain and their agency in collecting specimens is also evident in some museum collections. The Natural History Museum, for instance, has plant specimens collected by botanist George Caley in New South Wales. His field collecting was greatly assisted by “Dan”, referring to Daniel Moowattin, an Aboriginal man from the Parramatta region, who came to London with Caley in 1810–11 to work on naturalist Joseph Banks’s collection.
The collecting of Ancestral Remains was a practice that began in the earliest days of the colony in Sydney and continued well into the 20th century. A number of the remains collected were of well-known individuals killed in frontier violence, whose heads became trophies. Throughout most of the 19th century, there was a particular interest in obtaining Tasmanian Aboriginal remains as the people were then believed to be becoming “extinct”.
Both their bones and hair were keenly sought after. While there are large numbers of unidentified Ancestral Remains in British collections, traces of named individuals can be found.
Collectively, they illustrate the violence of the colonial frontier and the wide-ranging medical and other networks of 19th-century collectors reaching from Britain to Australia.
Heads lost and found
Joseph Banks, who visited Australia once as part of Cook’s first voyage, used his extensive contacts in Sydney to seek out both Aboriginal artefacts and Aboriginal human remains. In the early 1790s, Governor Arthur Phillip sent Banks two Aboriginal skulls from “New Holland”, that were destined for Johann Friedrich Blumenbach at the University of Göttingen, Germany.
In ensuing frontier violence, the resistance of Pemulwuy, from the Botany Bay region, resulted in Governor Philip Gidley King issuing an order for his capture in November 1801, and in June 1802 Pemulwuy and another man were shot dead. Pemulwuy’s head was preserved in spirits and was among the “desiderata” sent back by King to Banks in the ship Speedy.
In 1802, the Museum of the Royal College of Surgeons in London noted a gift of “two heads” at that time, although erroneously labelled as coming from Tahiti. Banks’s acquaintance with surgeon John Hunter (whose collections were the foundation of the museum) was likely why the heads arrived at the Royal College of Surgeons.
In August 1818, British artist James Ward, a prolific painter of people and animals, was granted permission by the College of Surgeons to “make Drawings from the two heads in the Museum of Natives of New South Wales”. His journal (October 24 1818) notes: “Begin a study at the College of Surgeons from 2 heads of Botany Bay men”.
Ward’s sketches were exhibited at his house in Newman Street, London, in 1822, and described as:
No. 8. A Native of New South Wales. This order of men is considered as the lowest of human species. The head from which this specimen is taken is preserved in spirits in Surgeon’s College. He was a distinguished chief of a tribe of troublesome marauding predators, a kind of Three-fingered Jack of Botany Bay, which rendered it necessary to put a price upon his head. No. 32 is another view of the same head, with another of the same tribe.
Portrait of James Ward, circa 1835. Wikimedia Commons
In 1829, these works appear to be listed for sale again in an auction catalogue from Christie’s. In recent decades, numerous attempts have been made to find Pemulwuy’s remains but without success.
The Royal College of Surgeons was bombed in World War II and the head, which had been preserved in spirit and so perhaps kept only as a skull, may have been destroyed then.
Heads of recently and naturally deceased Aboriginal people were also obtained through institutions’ and surgeons’ interests. John Shinall (c.1809–39) lived much of his life with a white family near Hobart in Tasmania and worked as a farm labourer. After his death his body was mutilated and his severed head preserved in alcohol.
Dr John Frederick Clarke, Inspector General of Hospitals in Hobart, presented it to the Museum of the Royal College of Surgeons in Dublin about 1845–6. It was later photographed and published in 1899 in Henry Ling Roth’s The Aborigines of Tasmania. After tracking it down and seeing it displayed in Dublin in 1985, the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre negotiated to have Shinall’s head returned and he arrived home in 1990.
Yagan was a Nyungar man from the Swan River (Perth) region of Western Australia who, like Pemulwuy on the other side of the continent, had resisted the settlers. He was once captured but escaped from custody. In 1833, a price was offered for his head after two settlers were killed following the shooting of a group of his own Nyungar people.
Yagan was subsequently killed and his head was taken to England in the luggage of Lieutenant Robert Dale, who tried to sell it. It was displayed for 12 months by Thomas Pettigrew, a surgeon and antiquarian interested in phrenology. Dale later gave it to the Liverpool Royal Institution, in the town where he lived.
In 1964 it was disposed of, among other remains, as it was badly deteriorated. Following decades of searching by Nyungar people, in 1993 it was identified in an unmarked grave in Liverpool and eventually returned by Aboriginal Elders to WA in 1997.
Yagan Square in Perth, WA. Richard Wainwright/AAP
A ‘trophy’
The Bunuba people of the Wunaamin Milliwundi Ranges (previously named the King Leopold Ranges) region of northwestern WA are still looking for Jandamarra. In the 1890s, he worked for some time as a tracker for the police but later led a rebellion against European colonists. He was eventually tracked down and killed with help from another Aboriginal man in 1897.
As Bunuba woman June Oscar stated in 2015, the carnage of Aboriginal people at that time devastated Bunuba society. After his death, Jandamarra’s head was taken to England, and was last seen in the 1960s, displayed as a trophy in Greener’s gun factory in Birmingham, which had a museum housing birds, animals and objects relating to shooting.
The factory subsequently relocated and the whereabouts of Jandamarra’s skull today remains unknown.
An anonymous cranium, likely that of a prisoner from the East Kimberley region of WA, was among the collection of 38 Aboriginal objects obtained by Dr James Albert Wetherell of Stokesley and donated to the Dorman Museum in Middlesbrough in 1904. The skull has a handwritten label attached stating
Skull of West Australian aboriginal Native. Observe contracted low, retreating forehead denoting diminished intellectual faculties.
Born in Middlesbrough in 1862, Wetherell trained in medicine at Edinburgh, graduating in 1886. He arrived in WA in 1892 and registered as a doctor, working at Bridgetown and Bunbury before being appointed in June 1892 as a justice of the peace and resident magistrate of the East Kimberley. As Chris Owen has discussed in his book Every Mother’s Son is Guilty, this was an era when police could be disciplined for not shooting Aborigines.
In early 1893, in his capacity as resident magistrate, Wetherell sent out an expedition to punish “savage outlaws” after the attempted spearing of a policeman. He resigned in late 1894 and eventually returned to live in Hull. Newspapers reported that he failed to take care of prisoners in the gaol with many dying, the food he provided being unfit for consumption.
Those released from prison were forced to walk over 200 kilometres home to their country without provisions, some dying on the road. Newspaper accounts relate that Wetherell performed autopsies just outside the gaol in view of the prisoners and kept portions of bodies as curios.
As the other objects in his collection came from the Kimberley region, the cranium likely originated in the Wyndham police district and possibly from an autopsy he carried out. In 2019, the Dorman Museum took steps to initiate its return to the Kimberley.
Fanny Smith’s hair
In mid-to late 19th-century Britain, issues of racial origins and human evolution were hotly debated. In this context, not only human remains but also hair samples of different peoples were valued specimens for study and exchange.
Samples from Tasmania were highly sought after, particularly after the death of Trukanini (or “Truganini”) in 1876, who was then often erroneously referred to as “the last Tasmanian”. A hair sample from an unknown Tasmanian was bought by Dr Malcolm of the Wellcome Historical Medical Museum in London from Dr Richard Berry in Bristol for £25 in 1930.
Container for a sample of Tasmanian Aboriginal hair. Bought by Dr. Malcolm from Prof. R.A..J. Berry, Bristol, in 1936. Wellcome Collection
Written in ink on the label of the container is “V Luschan”, indicating an association with Vienna-based doctor and ethnographer Felix von Luschan, who amassed a large collection of human remains.
Trained in Edinburgh, Berry also had a huge collection of Aboriginal Ancestral Remains and while at the University of Melbourne had studied crania robbed from graves in Tasmania, before moving to work in Bristol in 1930.
There he was associated with the eugenics movement, proposing a lethal chamber for “low grade defectives”. The hair sample he sold to the Wellcome Museum has since been returned to Tasmania, as part of a long campaign by the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre for the return of Ancestral Remains.
The skeleton and hair of my grandmother’s grandmother, Fanny Smith, were objects of desire for anthropologist and collector Henry Ling Roth of Halifax while she was still alive. In the 1880s and 1890s, it was debated whether Fanny was in fact the “last” Tasmanian Aborigine, and she was particularly noted for her recording of Aboriginal songs on wax cylinders.
Fanny Smith depicted here surrounded by photographer J.W. Beattie, graphophone proprietor Mr Fisher, SubInspector of Police John Cook, museum curator Alex Morton, solicitor and historian James Backhouse Walker, her grandson Gus (erroneously noted as her nephew) and Tasmanian government statistician R.M. Johnstone. Photo: National Library of Australia.
Ling Roth sought help in Tasmania from Quaker James Backhouse Walker and Edinburgh-born photographer and antiquarian James Watt Beattie of Hobart to obtain a photograph of Fanny and a lock of her hair.
Backhouse Walker wrote to Ling Roth on December 20 1891 indicating he “believes Fanny Cochrane Smith is a ‘half-caste’” and advising he might be able to get photographs of her and would ask for a sample of hair, but added, that he “doubts her husband would allow her dissection in the event of her death”.
Fanny lived at a distance from Hobart and there was ongoing difficulty in obtaining the photograph and hair, which was not given up by Fanny until 1894. It was then dispatched by Beattie to Ling Roth.
In 1908, at the request of anatomist Sir William Turner of the University of Edinburgh, Ling Roth sent this sample to him where its physical appearance was discussed along with hair samples from Trukanini and others in a paper concerning “the classification of races based on the colour and characteristics of the hair”.
In the 1990s, following much correspondence between the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre and the Anatomical Museum at the University of Edinburgh, which had told the centre to “desist from further correspondence”, the hair sample was eventually located and returned.
Traces of Australian ‘kings’: ‘King’ McIntyre and ‘King’ Tiger
As Aboriginal societies had important leaders but no “kings” or singular “chiefs”, European settlers and officials sometimes gave breastplates or “king” plates to chosen individuals in their district, as a means of enlisting their help in dealing with other Aboriginal people.
The earliest example noted was given to Bungaree in Sydney in 1815, and by the 1820s they were in common use. Due to the history of collaboration with settlers, such “king” or “queen” plates elicit mixed feelings among Aboriginal people today.
Perhaps surprisingly, few such plates are in British collections. National Museums Scotland in Edinburgh has one given to “Sandy, King of Coringori Australia” and another in Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery belonged to “King” McIntyre, a senior man of the Manilla region in northern NSW.
A newspaper account in 1874 suggests the reason McIntyre was given the plate was due to his twice saving the life of Mr Thomas Hoskisson of Bareeba Station. He and his family were consequently “made life pensioners, to the extent of a full ration daily”.
“Tiger, King of Mines Lawn Hills” was a senior man living at or near Lawn Hills Station, a place of copper mining inland from Burketown in northwest Queensland in the early 1900s.
One report suggests he died circa 1930 when he was about 60 to 70 years old by drinking water from a can once containing poison. Subsequently his grave was desecrated and breast plate removed by the station owner of Gregory Downs.
His skull and his king plate were sent to the Wellcome Historical Medical Museum in 1935 by Agnes Dorothy Kerr, matron of the Burketown Hospital. Born in England, Kerr had trained as a nurse and worked in New Zealand before serving in the first world war in Egypt and Serbia.
Judy Watson, page 17 from artist’s book skullduggery (2021). Courtesy Judy Watson, digital image Michael Phillips.
Interested in anatomy from her nursing training she sent a number of human remains from northwest Queensland to Sir Henry Wellcome for his collection in London. In 1936, she received a letter indicating Sir Henry would be very glad to have this plate, making a valuable addition to his collections.
The theft of Tiger’s cranium and breastplate and associated correspondence with Kerr was the inspiration for an artwork and publication titled “skullduggery” by Waanyi artist Judy Watson in 2021, bringing attention to the Ancestral Remains and artefacts still abroad.
Judy Watson, title page from artist’s book skullduggery (2021). Courtesy Judy Watson, digital image Michael Phillips.
The return to Country of Ancestral Remains is a continuing aspiration for Aboriginal people and Torres Strait Islanders across Australia. Some museums in Britain still retain Aboriginal human remains but work to return them is ongoing.
Two cremation ash bundles from Tasmania were returned by the British Museum in 2006; it still retains two modified crania requested by Torres Strait Islanders but refused for return by the museum trustees in 2012.
This work is emotionally difficult for those Aboriginal people and Torres Strait Islanders involved, but programs of repatriation continue, albeit sometimes slowly.
Gaye Sculthorpe receives research funding from the Australian Research Council through an agreement with the Australian National University and the British Museum. The British Museum is the publisher of the book in which the full version of this article appears.
In a sensational end to a grotty final 2021 sitting week, former Liberal staffer Rachelle Miller’s claim a minister had acted violently towards her was carefully timed to underline Kate Jenkins’ scathing indictment of the parliamentary workplace.
Education Minister Alan Tudge was forced to stand aside after Miller – who returned to Parliament House to make her statement – accused him of kicking her out of bed when her phone rang at 4am.
She said it happened during a 2017 work trip, when she and Tudge were in a hotel in Kalgoorlie, where then-PM Malcolm Turnbull was also staying.
Miller was Tudge’s media adviser. The two had what Miller has described as a consensual affair, but now says was more complicated. “It was [an] emotionally and on one occasion, physically abusive relationship.”
It’s notable how different Scott Morrison’s reaction has been to this Miller allegation, compared with her earlier complaints about Tudge, made last year on the ABC’s Four Corners.
Morrison pushed those aside, dismissing them as history that had been dealt with. In this instance, he immediately referred the matter to an investigation, to be conducted by Vivienne Thom, former inspector-general of intelligence and security.
Admittedly Miller has now gone a step further in accusing Tudge – who flatly denies the claim – of violence.
But the political difference is the timing. Miller’s allegation follows all that has come out this year about bad behaviour in Parliament House, triggered by Brittany Higgins’ allegation she was raped in 2019, and now documented in the 452-page Jenkins report.
On issues relating to women, Morrison walks among landmines. Thursday’s Miller claim showed how dangerously and unexpectedly one can detonate.
It’s hard to know the extent to which Morrison’s so-called “women’s problem” will cost him votes at the election. But one seat where woman power might be significant is the Sydney marginal electorate of Wentworth, where independent candidate Allegra Spender (the late Carla Zampatti’s daughter) is being backed by female corporate high-flyers including Christine Holgate, the former Australia Post boss.
Holgate accused Morrison of bullying with his extraordinary parliamentary attack on her over rewarding employees with Cartier watches. What goes around comes around.
The Sex Discrimination Commissioner’s description of a noxious political workplace was on show at every turn this week.
Immediately after Tuesday’s release of her report, opposition and government indulged in mutual sledging in question time.
In the Senate, Victorian Liberal David Van was accused of making dog noises when independent Jacqui Lambie was speaking. He apologised for interjecting but denied he’d made any animal sound.
On Wednesday Greens senator Lidia Thorpe made a particularly offensive remark to NSW Liberal Hollie Hughes, saying during an altercation, “at least I keep my legs shut”.
Hughes on Thursday said she took from this “that had I kept my legs shut, I wouldn’t have a child with autism”. Thorpe, who’d apologised, denied the suggestion she was referring to Hughes’ family.
Hughes told Sky: “Everyone – MPs, senators, staffers, everybody – needs to hold themselves to account. We’re adults. This is a professional working environment and people should behave that way.”
To which one might say, “If only.” And, more to the point, one might ask: “Well, why don’t they?”
The Jenkins report has multiple recommendations, based on a forensic review of the culture of the parliamentary workplace.
Both government and opposition loudly lamented the situation she documented, but neither has committed to full implementation of what she has proposed.
Jenkins digs down to the many drivers and risk factors contributing to bullying and sexual harassment, which she identifies as including power imbalances, gender inequality, lack of accountability, bad leadership, confusion about standards, long hours, stress, alcohol, travel and a work-hard-play-hard mentality.
Miller’s account of the Kalgoorlie night appears to have involved a number of these.
But explanations are not excuses, and it’s hard to go beyond a very basic point.
While many parliamentarians – who are at the centre of the Parliament House “ecosystem” – behave well, too many simply don’t believe they need to follow the standards the community has the right to expect of them.
If they conducted themselves properly as well as setting high standards for their staff, Parliament House would be on its way to becoming a half-decent workplace.
One point that’s been made is that politicians, in taking on staff and running their offices, are their own small businesses, but they don’t have the skill set to run these businesses.
That task might be unfamiliar for them, but surely not that hard to get on top of. At least that might be the view of many small-business people around the country, who have to confront their own (albeit different and often more difficult) challenges.
And as for the bad conduct in the chambers, there is just no excuse. It shows massive disrespect to those who pay the parliamentarians’ salaries.
For Scott Morrison the past fortnight has been deeply frustrating, as well as politically risky.
Coalition rebels helped stymie the government’s legislate program, such as it was.
A House of Representatives vote on the Religious Discrimination Bill had to be put off to prevent a revolt by moderate Liberals. This bill will now face two inquiries over the summer.
The government’s promise to introduce legislation for an integrity commission has been turned into a farce by the PM. On the back of the ICAC investigation of former NSW premier Gladys Berijiklian, Morrison has dug in behind the unrevised model, indicating he won’t bring in the legislation because Labor won’t agree to that model, which is widely criticised as flawed.
After everything that has happened this week, and what hasn’t been able to happen, you’d wonder why the government would want parliament to sit again before the election.
Sittings never work politically for this government, and unless it could get its two rebel senators and the two Hanson senators to lift their boycotts on government legislation – they are protesting against the refusal to override state vaccine mandates – and calm other rebels, legislation that was contested wouldn’t get through.
Queenslander Liberal Gerard Rennick, asked on Thursday whether he would continue his boycott into next year, said it would depend on what the federal government did on the mandates between now and then. Hanson’s spokesman had a similar message.
The draft sitting calendar for 2022, issued this week, has parliament returning in February, and a March 29 budget. Morrison can always tear this up in favour of a March election but he’d obviously prefer a budget to set him up for a May poll.
But Health Minister Greg Hunt and former minister Christian Porter were taking no chances, this week both announcing they are not running again.
It might have been a momentous week – in a bad way – but the conversation will abruptly change on Friday, when Labor finally releases its much-awaited climate policy.
It’s stating the obvious to say this is a big day for the opposition, which has had an internal debate over whether to make the policy small target (only a little different from the government’s) or go for something bolder, to amp up the differentiation on the climate issue.
On Sunday Anthony Albanese will hold a rally, with a likely further policy announcement.
“We will make sure we are kicking with the wind in the fourth quarter,” Albanese likes to say. Between now and mid-December, when he is intending to go on holidays, the crowd will be watching how well the opposition leader connects boot and ball.
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.
Charities were relieved to see this, as many faced the prospect of having to pull back on certain advocacy activities.
But this week brought the bad news, with changes to electoral laws passed by parliament that will impose more regulation on charities and other organisations that engage in the electoral process.
Despite intense lobbying by a coalition of charities, a last-minute deal between the Morrison government and the opposition led to the bill’s passage, albeit with some amendments that slightly lessen its negative impact.
What the new law does
One of the main changes in the new law is the introduction of a lower threshold for organisations having to register as a so-called “political campaigner”.
Previously, an organisation had to register as a political campaigner if it exceeded $500,000 in electoral expenditure (money spent on campaigns, advertising and any other advocacy work seeking to influence voters in an election) in any of the past three years. The bill sought to lower this threshold considerably to $100,000.
As part of the deal between the government and opposition, this threshold was changed to $250,000 in the final version of the bill that was passed. This is an improvement on the original proposal of $100,000, but it still means many charities will be captured by the change.
More charities will now be required to register as political campaigners and be subject to the additional reporting obligations this entails, including identifying their larger donors.
Opponents of the bill fear it will act like a spending cap, with charities stepping back from campaigning to not trigger the additional requirements that come with being a political campaigner.
In addition to lowering the threshold, the bill also broadens the type of expenditure that is relevant for determining if an organisation is subject to any reporting and other obligations.
Now, any expenditure related to “preparing for, or participating in, an election” must be counted, but there is no guidance as to what this actually means. This is a significant source of uncertainty for charities, and again may lead many to be more cautious when engaging in the democratic process.
Another problematic element of the bill is the fact it will apply retrospectively to money already spent by an organisation. Charities will have to look back at their spending and see if it constitutes an “electoral expenditure” using the more vague definition now in place, and determine whether this places them in the category of a political campaigner.
Pages and pages of legal advice will be needed, but lawyers won’t have much to go on given the scant detail provided in the bill.
One positive outcome, however, is that “political campaigners” will actually no longer be referred to by this name – the term will change to “significant third parties”.
This is a welcome change, given the term “political campaigner” could lead to people conflating charities and other organisations with political parties – despite the fact they are not seeking elected office and focus on issues-based campaigning.
Advocacy by charities is important and already regulated
Ultimately, the bill is a problem because it will hinder the advocacy activities of charities. And advocacy is one of the key ways that charities can address the root causes of the social and environmental challenges they seek to ameliorate. This often requires changing government policy.
Charities can lobby and campaign to do this – provided they stop short of endorsing and supporting particular parties or candidates.
Advocacy activities can still take place in the context of an election, though. For example, charities can take out advertisements outlining or critiquing the positions of different political parties on issues as diverse as climate change or the amount of JobSeeker payments.
Charities are already regulated when they incur “electoral expenditures”, with the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 imposing various obligations on them (and any other organisations similarly involved in the electoral process).
A certain level of such regulation is necessary, in the interests of promoting transparency and integrity in elections. The problem with the bill is that it takes things too far.
A poor process leads to a poor outcome
Otto Von Bismarck is believed to have once said, “Laws are like sausages. Better not to see them being made.”
The statement rings true given the developments this week. The changes to electoral laws were rushed through parliament, without even being referred to a committee inquiry to examine the details of the bill and its implications.
A last-minute deal saw some of the problematic elements of the bill wound back, but what was passed remains deeply flawed.
More charities will now be subject to additional reporting and other obligations under the electoral laws, and there is now more uncertainty about what spending counts as “electoral expenditure”.
This may mean charities will be more reluctant to engage in advocacy, especially where any link can be made between their work and an election. This would lead to less debate about the various social and environmental challenges we confront as a nation.
We need more engagement in our democratic process in Australia, not less, and this bill represents a setback in that regard.
Krystian Seibert was an adviser to a former Australian Assistant Treasurer between 2012 and 2013, where he oversaw the establishment of the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission and its regulatory framework, including the Charities Act 2013. He has provided advice and support to Hands Off Our Charities, an alliance of charities that opposed the bill.
Education minister Alan Tudge has stood aside from his portfolio while a claim by his former staffer Rachelle Miller that he abused her in their relationship, including kicking her out of bed, is investigated.
Miller, who revealed her consensual affair with Tudge on the ABC Four Corners last year, returned to parliament house on Thursday – the final day of the parliamentary year – to make a fresh sensational allegation.
She told of an incident when she and Tudge were in Kalgoorlie in 2017 with then Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull to announce the cashless welfare card. After a long day Miller, who was media adviser, and Tudge “drank a lot until very late”. About 4am “my mobile phone started ringing. I woke up in the pitch black dark and reached for my phone” to take a call from a media producer about a story that had been lined up for that day.
The producer was seeking an interview with Tudge and “I started to talk to her to arrange a time but I was still half asleep. Then I felt someone kicking me on the side of my hip and leg as I tried to sit up in bed.
“It was the minister – he was furious, telling me to get the fuck out of his bed.”
Miller said she told the producer she’d call back. “Then I realised I was completely naked. He continued to kick me until I fell off the side of the bed and ended up on the floor. I searched around in the dark for my clothes. He was yelling at me that my phone had woken him up. He needed to get some more sleep.
“He told me to get the fuck out of his room and make sure that no one saw me.”
Miller said she had no idea where her room key was, and had to ask reception to cut her a new key.
“I asked him to remind me where my room was,” she said.
When she got to her room, “I sat at my desk in yesterday’s clothes and started answering and making phone calls and emails to arrange the media for the minister that day.
“We had to meet the PM’s team in the foyer in an hour or so. The PM was in the hotel that night.
“I could not remember a single thing from the night before. I don’t remember how we ended up in his room. I don’t remember leaving the bar. I don’t remember if we had sex. I don’t remember if we used protection. I still don’t and I was too afraid to ask if he remembered.”
The next day, after she and Tudge arrived in Melbourne late at night, Tudge did not wait for her or offer her a lift in his car to her hotel. “No thanks. No goodbye,” she said, adding that she had been “completely shattered” by what had happened. She said her allegation was “not about revenge. it has never ever been about that. I still sometimes feel sorry for him. It’s about ensuring that no one else goes through this in this workplace ever again,” Miller said.
“This relationship was defined by significant power imbalance. It was emotionally and on one occasion, physically abusive relationship.”
She looked forward to the people in his seat of Aston “holding minister Tudge to account at the election. Or perhaps the prime minister might show some leadership before that, for it’s his job to hold his ministers to account for their unacceptable behaviour.”
Tudge immediately rejected the allegation. “I completely and utterly reject Ms Miller’s version of events. Ms Miller and I had a consensual affair in 2017 as both of us have publicly acknowledged. This is something I deeply regret,” he said.
In parliament before question time Morrison said that Tudge would stand aside while there was an inquiry.
Morrison said the issues raised were “deeply concerning,” and distressing for Miller, Tudge, and the families affected.
He had discussed Miller’s statement with Tudge who “refuted the allegations”.
Morrison said given the seriousness of the claims, it was “important these matters be resolved fairly and expeditiously”. The issues would be looked at by the prime ministers department through an independent process, using Vivienne Thom, former Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security
The Prime Minister said the inquiry would enable the department to advise him “regarding any implications for the ministerial standards”. Stuart Robert will be acting education minister.
In a subsequent statement Tudge said, “I have accepted responsibility for a consensual affair that should not have happened many years ago. But Ms Miller’s allegations are wrong, did not happen and are contradicted by her own written words to me.
“I regret having to say these things. I do not wish Ms Miller ill but I have to defend myself in light of these allegations, which I reject.
“The contradictory written evidence will be referred to a full, independent review. I welcome such a process and will make available both myself and all materials, and co-operate in every way.
“I would note that a previous set of claims were also considered and rejected through an independent investigation.”
Last year Miller made a formal complaint about Tudge’s behaviour, alleging he acted in ways that made her feel humiliated and belittled. The finance department investigation, with which she did not participate on legal advice – found insufficient to substantiate claims of inappropriate behaviours.
Michelle Grattan 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.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adam Taylor, Early Career Research Leader, Emerging Viruses, Inflammation and Therapeutics Group, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University
Researchers around the world are trying to work out whether existing COVID vaccines protect us from the latest variant, Omicron.
The worst-case scenario is the virus has mutated so much in the crucial parts of its genome that it can escape COVID vaccines designed to protect us from earlier versions of the virus – with devastating consequences globally.
But it’s too soon to panic. And vaccines may end up protecting us against Omicron after all, as they have done with earlier variants.
The World Health Organization (WHO) says it will take us another two to four weeks to figure out what’s going on. Here’s what scientists around the world are racing to find out.
The reason Omicron has caused global alarm is due to the number of new mutations throughout the genome of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID.
This data, coupled with real world data on the rapid rise in Omicron cases in South Africa, prompted the WHO to designate Omicron a “variant of concern” on November 26.
We’ve already seen some Omicron mutations in other variants.
Individually, some of these mutations have been associated with resistance to neutralising antibodies. In other words, these mutations help the virus evade recognition by an immune system primed with a COVID-19 vaccine.
Some of these individual mutations have also been linked with increased transmissibility of the virus from one person to another.
However, Omicron has many unique mutations. For instance, on the spike protein, the protein used in many current vaccines, Omicron has about 30 mutations compared with the virus that came out of Wuhan. Delta has only ten mutations in its spike protein. So you get an idea of the scale of change.
Investigating the way these multiple mutations interact with one another, rather than individually, will be key to understanding how Omicron behaves compared with other variants.
Looking at these interactions will tell us more about Omicron’s ability to infect cells, cause disease and escape vaccines. And experiments are under way to investigate these mutations and their impacts.
While we wait for the results, we heard this week from some of the vaccine manufacturers. Moderna said its vaccine would be less effective against Omicron than against Delta. Meanwhile, Pfizer/BioNTech said its vaccine would still protect against severe disease. Both companies said they could produce tweaked booster vaccines, if needed.
Why will it take weeks to get answers?
Here’s what researchers around the world are working on and why we won’t have answers for a few weeks.
Growing the virus
Researchers are taking samples of Omicron from infected people and growing the virus in laboratories. This gives them working stocks of the virus to conduct experiments. This can take time as you’re often starting with tiny amounts of virus from a swab.
This process also relies on access to the right types of cells to grow the virus in.
Finally, this needs to be done in laboratories that offer a high level of biosafety, to contain the virus. Not all researchers have access to these facilities.
Make your own ‘virus’
Researchers can also use genetic tools to produce the virus in the laboratory, requiring only the genome sequence of SARS-CoV-2 to begin production. This removes the reliance on patient samples.
They can also produce genetically engineered viruses, called pseudotyped viruses, in the laboratory. These carry only the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2.
Researchers can also express small portions of the spike protein on the surface of other organisms, such as yeast.
All of these options take time to set up, optimise and be used in the types of studies outlined below.
Both methods are useful
Initial studies will look at how Omicron’s mutations impact the fitness of the variant – its transmissibility and ability to evade vaccine-induced immunity.
For instance, initial experiments will look at Omicron’s ability to infect cells. These studies will tell us how well Omicron’s spike protein interacts with the ACE2 receptor, the gateway to infecting our cells. Further studies will investigate how well Omicron can replicate in cells after gaining entry.
Neutralisation studies will investigate how well antibodies – induced by current SARS-CoV-2 vaccines – can neutralise Omicron, or prevent it from infecting cells. Such studies rely on access to serum from vaccinated people and are likely to compare the neutralising capacity of Omicron against other SARS-CoV-2 variants.
Studies are also likely to investigate the effect of vaccine booster regimes and earlier SARS-CoV-2 infection on how well antibodies neutralise Omicron.
So what can we expect? Until we get the results of these experiments, it’s difficult to say for certain.
Studies of how effective COVID-19 vaccines are against other variants show they are generally less able to induce the type of antibody response we’d like to see (neutralising antibodies). However, when previous variants have emerged, vaccines have continued to protect against severe disease.
Vaccine protection is not all or nothing. We are unlikely to get a perfect neutralising antibody response against Omicron, or no response, rather something in between.
Currently fewer than 200 genetic sequences of Omicron have been compiled compared with more than 2.8 million Delta sequences. Delta remains the most dominant variant. So we should continue to use vaccines and therapies we know work against Delta.
It’s also essential we continue with public health measures, such as wearing masks and social distancing, alongside continued vaccination, to combat the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and the emergence of further variants.
“Tik-a-Tok-a-Who?”, was Adele’s response to her management’s suggestion to promote her music to younger audiences on Tiktok, the video-sharing platform owned by Chinese company ByteDance.
“If everyone’s making music for the TikTok, who’s making music for my generation?”, she asked.
Adele might resist, but the platform has nonetheless been popularising and promoting her song Easy on me, with creators using it in almost one million videos in the first month after its release, making it viral on the app alone.
That’s because creator culture on TikTok is changing the way hits are made, how music is promoted, and how the world discovers music, even for those artists who choose not to engage with it.
Living at his sister’s house and feeling bit lonely, in December 2018 he had bought a simple beat for US $30, recorded a song, half country and half rap, and posted it on Soundcloud and social media. The artist made news because Billboard magazine had removed the song from its country charts, after it took off in popularity, entering both the country and general Hot 100 charts.
The artist’s name was Lil Nas X and the song Old Town Road, which has since become the most successful song of all time, the first ever song to reach 15 times platinum. Much of this success can be credited to the song becoming an early TikTok “meme”, picked up by millions of users.
Old Town Road has become the origin story for a remarkable series of viral musical successes on TikTok. In each case artists have shot to popularity, because their songs were used by millions of TikTok users in their videos.
Virality on TikTok is powerful yet unpredictable. Some of 2021’s biggest global hits gained little traction when they were initially released to small audiences. Africa’s most successful pop song ever, CKay’s Love, Nwantiti, was released in 2019, but shot to fame only in 2021 and has now been used in more than 7 million TikTok videos.
Similarly, Australia’s Masked Wolf found himself in the spotlight in 2021, making Barrack Obama’s summer playlist and having been nominated for five ARIA awards. While his song Astronaut in the Ocean became a global hit more than a year into the COVID-19 pandemic, it was released two years prior by a small Australian label. It has since been used in more than 18 million TikTok videos.
And while many artists, like Lil Nas X, create for virality on TikTok, others go viral even when unaware of the platform. We spoke to Masked Wolf who admitted:
I never made Astro to be on TikTok. I didn’t even know what TikTok was when I released Astronaut.
But it is not just new songs. Old songs are making remarkable comebacks with entirely new audiences. When a man named Nathan Apodaca went viral after he posted a video of himself gliding down a highway on his long board, casually drinking cranberry juice from a bottle, he was lip-syncing to Dreams, the 1977 Fleetwood Mac hit. Dreams was subsequently used by millions of TikTok creators and re-entered the Billboard Hot 100 more than 40 years after its original release.
How it works
Videos created on the TikTok app are short. Most videos are less than 15 seconds long (though videos of up to 60 seconds are possible). Music plays a big part in these videos, many show dance moves or lip syncing, though there are others where users talk, even giving financial advice. When users create their videos, they will usually choose a song and select a short clip, often the catchiest bits of a song, like the chorus or beat drop.
Users can upload their own sound clips, but the app will detect copyrighted material that its owners do not allow on the platform and mute the sound. Instead, the app has in recent years put together an extensive catalogue of music authorised by big music labels, who have come on board due to TikTok’s role in producing global hits.
Behind this virality are so-called challenges, in which often millions of users create their own versions of a visual story or dance move set to the same music clip, and promoted by the platform using hashtags. For example, in the #yeehaw challenge that brought Old Town Road to fame, people dressed in normal clothes and danced until the beat changed in the clip, when they would instantly transform into cowgirls or cowboys.
But videos on TikTok do not directly contribute to chart success. However, there is a direct correlation between a song going viral on TikTok and it gaining in popularity on music streaming platforms such as Spotify, Apple Music or YouTube, all of which in turn contribute to the Billboard charts.
What it means for artists, listeners and the music industry
In our research, we spoke to Ole Obermann, Global Head of Music for TikTok and ByteDance, about the impact for artists, the music industry and music lovers. Ole points to the diversity of music on TikTok and new opportunities for finding music far beyond one’s usual taste.
He also stresses TikTok’s role in discovering artists from all corners of the globe: “I do see a pretty profound impact on the global nature of music as a result of TikTok but also music streaming overall. It’s so much more possible for a song that comes out of Australia or India or Korea or Japan or Saudi Arabia. To end up becoming a global hit and to be listened to by audiences all over the world.”
The recent successes of Love Nwantiti and Astronaut in the Ocean are just two examples to make this point.
TikTok is an excellent platform for listeners to gain exposure to new and different music. TikTok’s self-learning algorithm serves up new videos as a seemingly endless stream, allowing users to be exposed to a large amount of new music quickly, given videos are very short. When a user likes a particular song, with a simple tap they can instantly watch more videos set to the same clip.
The music industry is also coming on board, convinced by the viral success the platform produces. Ole Obermann again:
I think the acceptance has come now because that’s what the fans want. And it’s a way to create more engagement with the music, but there was a lot of resistance for many years, because it was just not the way that the music industry has traditionally worked.
The initial resistance is not surprising, given TikTok presents a significant shift from the industry’s understanding of recorded music as something to be listened to, to be passively consumed. Engagement with music on TikTok is very different, because music becomes a material for creation, for creative expression.
Importantly, what we see today is likely only the beginning, both in terms of new forms of creative expression, and promoting and marketing music in new ways.
But success also attracts investment, and creating on TikTok will likely become more commercialised over time. So far much of the virality has happened organically. But music labels increasingly hire professional influencers to use their music, or work with consultants to make songs more “TikTokkable”, in an attempt to engineer the next viral trend.
It remains to be seen if this will crowd out organic creativity, or if artists will feel pressure to create for TikTok virality, as foreshadowed by Adele.
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.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Erin Smith, Associate Professor in Disaster and Emergency Response, School of Medical and Health Sciences, Edith Cowan University
As Australia braces for another bushfire season, new research from Edith Cowan University has revealed how our volunteer firefighters are still reeling from the effects of the catastrophic 2019/20 bushfires.
Of the nearly 65,000 responders who helped during the Black Summer bushfires in NSW, 78% were volunteers. In our study, 58 of the responding volunteer firefighters shared how the experience had impacted their mental health.
Nearly half reported living with post-traumatic stress symptoms such as flashbacks, nightmares, and anxiety. Some 11% had been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). And 5.5% revealed they had made suicide plans. One described a suicide attempt.
Our findings support other Australian research that found 4.6% of volunteers who responded to the Black Summer bushfires had seriously considered ending their life in the year following the fires.
Yet many don’t seek help. As one volunteer firefighter said:
If the organisation don’t care enough to ask, why am I going to tell them?
Volunteer firefighters felt pressure to seem immune to trauma. Jacob Carracher, Author provided
A cumulative mental toll
Volunteer firefighters described the cumulative impact of repeated exposure to bushfire.
It was a prolonged period of nothing but fire activity, nothing but focusing on that next deployment, that next fire, with very little time to rest and recover. And with each new fire, I noticed that my mental state was taking a bigger hit.
The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare recently reported that in the aftermath of the 2019–20 bushfires, more than half of Australian adults felt anxious or worried about the bushfires and there was a 10–15% increase in calls to the Lifeline crisis support hotline.
But despite the clear impact on well-being among the volunteer firefighters we spoke to, less than half had sought mental health support in the year following the fires. This reveals a lack of progress in supporting the mental health and well-being of emergency responders. One firefighter expressed a feeling of hopelessness:
I haven’t thought about suicide. But I also don’t really care if I live.
Volunteer firefighters felt more supported when they could speak to someone who ‘got it’. Shutterstock
Employee assistance isn’t enough
Experience from the 2009 “Black Saturday” bushfires in Victoria showed the mental health impact on those who respond to major bushfire events is often complex and protracted.
Firefighters and other support personnel were at increased risk of developing PTSD, depression, anxiety and complicated grief compared to the general public and when these issues were inadequately treated, they carried an increased risk of suicide.
Yet some ten years later, firefighter volunteers are still dealing with the same problems.
We saw it with Black Saturday. We saw it again with Black Summer. How many more times do we need to see it? How many more of us need to be injured? How many more of us need to lose our jobs? Our families? Our lives? What will it take for our them [the organisations] to actually value us?
The majority of volunteer firefighters we spoke to felt their organisation hadn’t provided enough of the “right type” of support, with many simply providing a link to an Employee Assistance Program.
While such programs have a role to play, they risk being seen as tokenistic; especially when they are outsourced away from responders who share similar experiences. The duration of access was also a problem; many volunteers reported they could only access three free counselling sessions before having to seek alternative support.
A toxic masculine culture is also associated with many emergency service organisations. Seeking help for mental health is still seen as weak, career-limiting, or even career-ending.
The one time I did actually admit I was struggling, I was told by someone in a leadership position that if I couldn’t hack it, I should hand in my uniform.
There is a perceived need for firefighters to be impervious to the impact of trauma exposure. Only 15% of the volunteers we spoke to who sought help did so via their organisations.
When we asked what would be most helpful for supporting well-being, the message was clear: volunteer firefighters wanted to talk about what they had gone through with someone who “got it”.
The sharing of lived experience offers a different kind of support for many responders who had not benefited from more traditional counselling programs.
The idea of peer support is to harness people’s own lived experience to support others. Peer support has long been provided informally by friends and family and through community support groups and grassroots organisations.
But in recent years, we’ve seen lived experience shared through more formal methods such as clinical settings and community suicide prevention. Research has shown patients supported through the sharing of lived experience are less likely to be readmitted to hospital following acute mental health issues.
A key lesson from the Black Summer bushfires is the need to empower local communities and volunteer organisations to safely and effectively provide peer support.
Leaders need help too, so they can confidently build mental health understanding and foster a psychologically safe culture in their workplace or organisation.
Part of building a psychologically safe environment is reflected in how people show up for one another. For volunteer organisations to be healthy and equitable places where everyone can thrive and feel valued, leaders must focus on creating an environment that reflects these values.
Bushfires will continue to have a devastating impact on our natural environment in the summers to come. We must work to ensure those responding to them don’t suffer the same fate.
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.
About 650 metres beneath the Latrobe Valley, the heart of Victoria’s coal country, lies a little-known, naturally hot 65℃ pool of water in an enormous aquifer.
This aquifer is a source of geothermal energy – a renewable source of heat or electricity that is, so far, being used to heat an aquatic centre in the town of Traralgon. They chose it – over natural gas, coal-fired power or even emissions-free solar and wind – because geothermal energy is now the cheapest option for heating.
The hot aquifer was first reported as long ago as 1962, when government geologist J.J. Jenkin noted many “occurrences of high temperature waters in East Gippsland”. We now know the hot water underlies about 6,000 square kilometres of Gippsland, from Morwell in the west to Lakes Entrance in the east, and holds the equivalent of A$30 billion of heat at today’s natural gas price.
But with natural gas flowing from Bass Strait, and vast reserves of brown coal in the Latrobe Valley, there has been little incentive to develop alternative energy sources. With the coal era now drawing to a close, it’s time we made better use of this vast, clean source of energy to help cut national emissions and ease the energy transition.
Geothermal energy around the world
The core of the Earth is about the same temperature as the surface of the sun. That vast internal heat is like a hotplate warming natural groundwater from below. Beneath the Latrobe Valley, thick coal layers act like a blanket, which makes the underlying aquifers hotter than aquifers in other locations.
The result is unusually hot natural water without needing to burn any fossil fuels – emissions free. At deeper depths we can capture natural steam, and use it to turn turbines for a generator.
In many parts of the world, natural hot water already provides sustainable, low emissions heat to a wide range of residential and industrial consumers.
In carrying out a recent global scan of energy production from hot aquifers, I learned large parts of suburban Paris are heated by geothermal energy from a hot (56–85℃) aquifer between 1,600 and 1,800m beneath the city.
In the Netherlands, industrial scale greenhouses are replacing their natural gas heating systems with geothermal heat from aquifers, 1,800-2,200m below the surface.
Beijing is one of the world’s leading urban centres using geothermal energy. Wells as deep as 2,600m produce up to 70℃ water for many industrial purposes, from winter heating for hotels and factories, to greenhouse cultivation, to public geothermal bathing pools visited by as many as 50,000 people per day.
On a smaller scale, a town in Hungary circulates natural hot water (64–72℃ from 1,450–1,700m depth) through a network of distribution pipes. And Perth, Western Australia, uses natural hot water (40–52℃ from 750–1,150m) to heat at least 14 leisure and aquatic centres.
Importantly, in almost every case, the water itself is returned to the aquifer after delivering its heat. In other words, water is not consumed in the production of geothermal energy, making it renewable and sustainable.
When compared to geothermal systems around the world, it’s obvious natural hot water beneath the Latrobe Valley, at only 650m depth, is a truly world class geothermal energy resource that has, until now, been largely overlooked.
Beijing is a world leader in geothermal energy use. Shutterstock
A cheaper alternative to gas
It’s a lot cheaper to drill a 650m bore than a 1,500m or deeper bore. This means it’s cheaper to produce geothermal energy in the Latrobe Valley than many places where geothermal energy already provides economic advantage.
In fact, geothermal heat is very likely a much cheaper alternative to natural gas. Since Australia began exporting liquified natural gas out of Queensland in 2015, the wholesale price of natural gas in eastern Australia has roughly tripled and is projected to rise further and remain high.
The higher price of natural gas affects the economy across the whole of Australia. The federal government estimates 40% of energy Australian households use is for heating and cooling, and a further 23% is for water heating. A 2019 report commissioned by the Australian Renewable Energy Agency found 52% of energy used by the nation’s industrial sector is consumed as heat.
But there are other long-term benefits the geothermal energy resource could deliver to the Latrobe Valley.
Victoria’s heavy reliance on natural gas for heat also presents a huge challenge for the state to meet its legislated greenhouse gas emission reduction targets of net zero by 2050.
Under this plan, the remaining coal-fired power plants in the Latrobe Valley are all scheduled to close in the coming years and decades, requiring support for workers to be reskilled.
Producing geothermal energy from hot aquifers can help on both fronts: by avoiding greenhouse-gas emissions and by reemploying skilled workers into new industries.
I’m working closely with a number of stakeholders – including the Latrobe City Council, the Latrobe Valley Authority, the Geological Survey of Victoria, local businesses and community groups – to help realise the potential of this massive, undervalued source of clean energy.
The untapped potential for geothermal energy in the Latrobe Valley.
We seek to better understand and sustainably develop this resource to help Australia meet it’s emissions reduction targets, and to bring the price of energy down.
This includes projects such as mapping, investigating the potential for power generation from deeper hotter rocks, and identifying and clearing policy and regulatory barriers.
The lessons we learn in the Latrobe Valley will carry across to other parts of Victoria and Australia – such as the Mornington Peninsula, Otway coast, and the Great Artesian Basin spanning NSW, Queensland and South Australia – where hot water is known to lie deeper, but still very accessible.
Graeme Beardsmore is a Director of the Australian Geothermal Association and Secretary of the Asia Western Pacific Regional Branch of the International Geothermal Association. He has previously received funding from Regional Development Victoria and the Latrobe Valley Authority to research the geothermal energy potential of the Latrobe Valley.
A View from Afar with Paul G. Buchanan and Selwyn Manning - December 2, 2021.
A View from Afar
PODCAST: Buchanan and Manning Consider the Global Issues that Define 2021
/
RSS Feed
Share
Link
Embed
A View from Afar – In this podcast, political scientist Paul Buchanan and Selwyn Manning consider and analyse the most significant global issues that define 2021. The topics include:
– Leadership: Trump, Putin, Xi, Biden,
– Pandemic: Impact of Covid-19 & variants on global security
You can comment on this debate by clicking on one of these social media channels and interacting in the social media’s comment area. Here are the links:
Threat.Technology placed A View from Afar at 9th in its 20 Best Defence Security Podcasts of 2021 category. You can follow A View from Afar via our affiliate syndicators.
The final days of parliament for 2021 have been marked by a spate of floor crossings.
This includes Tasmanian Liberal Bridget Archer who backed Independent Helen Haines’ integrity commission bill and conservative Coalition MPs voting in favour of a One Nation bill against vaccine mandates. Meanwhile, a group of moderate Liberals spoke out against the the religious discrimination bill, to support LGBTIQA+ rights.
The media have seized on these incidents as a sign of worrying political instability, or rather “a state of chaos”, in a “rudderless” nation.
But this wasn’t always the case. Elected officials crossing the floor on matters of principle used to be seen as a reassuring sign of the health of Australian democracy. What happened?
Missen in action
As part of research I am doing on children rights, I came across former Liberal Alan Missen, who sat in the Senate from 1974 to 1986.
Missen crossed the floor on no less than 41 occasions, mostly in support of civil liberties and human rights, during his parliamentary career.
A group of Coalition senators including Concetta Fierravanti-Wells voted against the government, to support a One Nation bill last week. Mick Tsikas/AAP
This was reported matter-of-factly, with headlines reading “6 cross floor” or “3 cross floor”. Floor crossing in 1977 over “immoral and illogical” policy on East Timor was also soberly reported.
In media accounts of these debates, floor crossing was not equated with instability – as “shambolic”, as one journalist wrote last week. The media assumed elected officials only crossed the floor on questions of principle.
Or as Archer put it, “I don’t take this decision lightly at all. I take this decision very seriously”.
Floor crossing has declined
According to a 2020 study by the Parliamentary Library, there has been a recent decline in floor crossing. In the last 15 years, crossing the floor has not changed the outcome of a single bill or resolution.
Between 1950 and 2019, approximately 23% of MPs and senators crossed the floor at some point in their parliamentary careers, including 295 individual floor crossers. This includes 185 individual Liberals, and 80 Nationals. Only 29 Labor politicians crossed the floor in the period covered by the study, which is perhaps unsurprising, given Labor actively discourages the practice.
The last Labor MP to cross the floor was Harry Quick, who (although a division had not been called), asked that his name be recorded in Hansard as dissenting to draconian anti-terrorism laws in 2004. In the Hawke years, two Labor MPs crossed the floor. Both were promptly suspended from the party.
Harold Holt saw the greatest number of floor crossings compared to any recent Australian prime minister – with 11% of all divisions featuring single or multiple crossings of the floor. Holt is followed by prime ministers John Gorton (7% of divisions) and Robert Menzies (5% of divisions).
In a candid interview in 2005, Fraser told the ABC that even when the Liberals had the numbers in the Senate, they couldn’t be counted on as an “automatic majority”.
What happened?
Floor crossing fell into political disrepute in tandem with John Howard’s rise to power. Though Howard pictured himself as an heir to Menzies, this picture did not include Menzies tolerance for dissent in the ranks of his own party.
Under Howard, MPs crossed the floor in only nine divisions, or 0.3%. In comparison, 0.6% crossed the floor under Tony Abbott, and 3% under Malcolm Turnbull.
This shift was largely a product of the infamous “kneecapping” pre-selections of the late 1980s and 90s, with the right pushing out the so called “wets” or moderates.
Perhaps the most famous of these revolts were those led by Ian Macphee – who crossed the floor in support of the Hawke government’s non-discriminatory immigration policy in 1988. As Macphee later recounted: “most of us [who crossed the floor] lost our party preselection the following year”.
From then on, floor crossing was largely confined to maverick right-wingers and Nationals, such as Barnaby Joyce and Bob Katter.
Perhaps this is how media perceptions of dissent changed. Floor crossing appeared to be a madcap stunt, rather than an ethical stance.
Until principled MPs such as Archer decided they would cross the floor on questions of integrity.
Camilla Nelson receives funding as EG Whitlam Research Fellow at the Whitlam Institute.
Opposition leader Matthew Wale has rejected the prime minister’s claim that he and other opposition members were behind last week’s rioting in the Solomon Islands capital of Honiara.
Wale claimed that the false statements were aimed towards diverting the public’s attention from Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare’s “own failures” in dealing with the crisis.
Wale said Sogavare “must recognise his role in this tragedy”.
“These recent events are the culmination of the prime minister’s leadership style which stretch back throughout his tenure,” the opposition leader said.
Wale said he had repeatedly made calls for the prime minister to initiate dialogue with the restless province Malaita.
“I have stated on several occasions the need for the prime minister to have constructive dialogue with Malaita,” he said.
“In light of the deteriorating relationship between the province and national government, I specifically urged the prime minister last year to lead a delegation to Malaita to deal with their issues’.
Sogavare had failed to do this.
‘Negative attitude’ “His negative attitude to deal with these issues is also reflected in the recent events when he ran away and refused to engage in dialogue with the people who marched to Parliament.”
Reflecting on the damage from the rioting, Wale said that what had happened in the last few days was truly a tragedy.
“As a leader, I lament with the people who have suffered losses and condemn what has happened.
“Because of the large damage that has occurred these past days, the public’s impulse to blame someone is understandable.”
The Central Bank of Solomon Islands (CBSI) estimated the loss to the local economy at $US28 million. Three people died in the Chinatown fires.
The prime minister must not take advantage of this and divert the public’s attention from his actions and omissions which had directly contributed to the problem, Wale said.
The opposition leader called on the prime minister to “stop blaming others” for his own failures and “take responsibility as a true leader”.
NZ peacekeepers RNZ Pacific reports that the New Zealand government is deploying dozens of Defence Force and police personnel to Honiara in the coming days “to help restore peace and stability”
Since rioting and looting started in the Solomon Islands last week, Australia, Fiji and Papua New Guinea have sent about 200 troops and police to help keep the peace there.
From Auckland Tāmaki Makaurau in Aotearoa New Zealand to Paris, France, and from Wellington Te Whanganui-a-Tara to Jayapura and far beyond, thousands of people across the world today raised the Morning Star flag — banned by Indonesian authorities — in simple acts of defiance and solidarity with West Papuans.
They honoured the raising of the flag for the first time 60 years ago on 1 December 1961 as a powerful symbol of the long West Papua struggle for independence.
One of the first flag-raising events today was in Wellington where Peace Movement Aotearoa and Youngsolwara Pōneke launched a virtual ceremony online with most participants displaying the banned flag.
Green MP Teanau Tuiono … indigenous solidarity for West Papuans. Image: APR screenshot
Hosted by Victoria University Pacific studies lecturer Dr Emalani Case, a Hawai’an, many young Pacific Islanders spoke of the indigenous struggle in West Papua and their hopes for eventual independence.
“Here in Aotearoa, we have the opportunity and the privilege of being able to raise the flag without being punished for it,” Dr Case said.
Two Green MPs — Teanau Tuiono and Eugenie Sage — were also among the “flag-raisers”, declaring their solidarity with the Papuan self-determination struggle.
Asia Pacific Report editor Dr David Robie and Del Abcede were among those who spoke.
In six decades of brutal civil conflict, hundreds of thousands of lives have been lost through combat and deprivation, and Indonesia has been criticised internationally for human rights abuses, reports Stefan Armbruster of SBS News.
In Australia, the Morning Star flew in activist Ronny Kareni’s adopted hometown of Canberra.
Asia Pacific Report’s Dr David Robie and Del Abcede … messages of West Papuan support. Image: APR screenshot
“It brings tears of joy to me because many Papuan lives, those who have gone before me, have shed blood or spent time in prison, or died just because of raising the Morning Star flag,” Kareni, the Australian representative of the United Liberation Movement of West Papua (ULMWP), told SBS.
“Commemorating the 60th anniversary for me demonstrates hope and also the continued spirit in fighting for our right to self-determination and West Papua to be free from Indonesia’s brutal occupation.”
West Papua’s Ronny Kareni … “Commemorating the 60th anniversary for me demonstrates hope and also the continued spirit in fighting for our right to self-determination.” Image: SBS
Indonesia’s diplomats regularly issue statements criticising the flag protests, including two years ago when the flag was raised at Sydney’s Leichhardt Town Hall, as “a symbol of separatism” that could be “misinterpreted to represent support from the Australian government”.
No response to questions about the flag’s 60th anniversary had been received by SBS News from the Indonesian embassy this year and community members and groups declined to comment.
“It’s a symbol of an aspiring independent state which would secede from the unitary Indonesian republic, so the flag itself isn’t particularly welcome within official Indonesian political discourse,” said Vedi Hadiz, an Indonesian citizen and director of the Asia Institute at the University of Melbourne.
“The raising of the flag is an expression of the grievances they hold against Indonesia for the way that economic and political governance and development has taken place over the last 60 years.
“But it’s really part of the job of Indonesian officials to make a counterpoint that West Papua is a legitimate part of the unitary republic.”
The history of the Morning Star After World War II, a wave of decolonisation swept the globe.
The Netherlands reluctantly relinquished the Dutch East Indies in 1949, which became Indonesia, but held onto Dutch New Guinea, much to the chagrin of President Sukarno, who led the independence struggle.
In 1957 Sukarno began seizing the remaining Dutch assets and expelled 40,000 Dutch citizens, many of whom were evacuated to Australia, in large part over The Netherlands’ reluctance to hand over Dutch New Guinea.
The Dutch created the New Guinea Council of predominantly elected Papuan representatives in 1961 and it declared a 10-year roadmap to independence, adopted the Morning Star flag, the national anthem — “Hai Tanahku Papua” or “Oh My Land Papua” — and a coat-of-arms for a future state to be known as “West Papua”.
The Dutch and West Papuan flags fly side-by-side in 1961. Image: SBS
The West Papua flag was inspired by the red, white and blue of the Dutch but the design can hold different meanings for the traditional landowners.
“The five-pointed star has the cultural connection to the creation story, the seven blue lines represent the seven customary land groupings,” Kareni told SBS.
The red is now often cited as a tribute to the blood spilt fighting for independence.
Attending the 1961 inauguration were Britain, France, New Zealand and Australia — represented by the president of the Senate Sir Alister McMullin in full ceremonial attire — but the United States, after initially accepting an invitation, withdrew.
Morning Star raised for first time The Morning Star flag was raised for the first time alongside the Dutch one at a military parade in the capital Hollandia, now called Jayapura, on December 1.
On December 19, President Sukarno began ordering military incursions into what he called “West Irian”, which saw thousands of soldiers parachute or land by sea ahead of battles they overwhelmingly lost.
With long supply lines on the other side of the world and waning international support, the Dutch sensed their time was up and signed the territory over to UN control in October 1962 under the “New York Agreement”, which abolished the symbols of a future West Papuan state, including the flag.
The Morning Star flag in Paris, France. Image: AWPA
The UN handed control to Indonesia in May 1963 on condition it prepared the territory for a referendum on self-determination.
The so-called Act Of Free Choice referendum in 1969 saw the Indonesian military round up 1025 Papuan leaders who then voted unanimously to become part of Indonesia.
The outcome was accepted by the UN General Assembly, which failed to declare if the referendum complied with the “self-determination” requirements of the New York Agreement, and Dutch New Guinea was incorporated into Indonesia.
In 1971, the Free Papua Movement (OPM) declared the “republic of West Papua” with the Morning Star as its flag, which has gone on to become a potent binding symbol for the movement.
“It’s a milestone, 60 years, and we’re still waiting to freely sing the national anthem and freely fly the Morning Star flag so it’s very significant for us, ” Kareni said.
“We still continue to fight, to claim our rights and sovereignty of the land and people.”
Morning Star flag-raising at a public lecture by Professor David Robie at Griffith University’s Brisbane campus before the in October 2019 before the Melanesian Media Freedom Forum (MMFF) conference. Image: Griffith University
Incoming new vice-chancellor for Te Wānanga Aronui o Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland University of Technology (AUT) Toelesulusulu Dr Damon Ieremia Salesa is keenly aware that he has broken through another glass ceiling.
The son of a factory worker made New Zealand history last week, as the first Pacific person to be appointed to the eminent leadership position in academia at a New Zealand university.
“I’m really excited to be the AUT vice-chancellor and with that excitement comes a sense of its significance with the sector which I work in and have given much of my life to, actually looking like the people it serves. So I’m really excited to be part of that story,” Toelesulusulu told Asia-Pacific Report.
“AUT is a place where talent can find opportunity and I would hope that lots of other people would want to express that excitement by wanting to come to AUT,” he says.
“What matters more is the work of the whole institution, that the university itself embraces its many different communities, its Māori students, its Pacific students and already AUT is a little bit known for that and what we can do is to build even more deeply on that.”
Professor Steven Ratuva, director of the Macmillan Brown Centre for Pacific Studies at the University of Canterbury, says Dr Salesa’s appointment is a significant milestone for the Pacific.
“It is something he richly deserves, and he has been working hard for and it is a good career choice, it is good for the Pacific academic community, and I congratulate him for his contribution to Pacific education.”
South Auckland priority Currently pro-vice-chancellor Pacific at the University of Auckland (UOA), Dr Salesa takes up his new role as vice-chancellor at AUT in March.
From just up the hill at UOA, he has observed AUT, and likes what he saw.
“I’ve really admired the way AUT prioritised and served its students, particularly the students of South Auckland and mature students, and that is one of reasons I was really interested in the job,” he says.
“Just because those communities of learners for whom education really matters, AUT has really embraced them and that is part of what is exciting about AUT — that is why I wanted to come across and join AUT.
“There is no question that the campus down south and campus on the shore bring universities into the communities that they serve and as well as being global institutions they are local institutions.
“If you have heart to service and you keep the students at the very centre of the decisions you make, you get great results like you see AUT deliver in South Auckland and the North Shore,” he says.
Strengthening Māori and Pacific research Pacific and Māori research is one area he wants to strengthen as well as build relationships with other institutions in the Pacific.
“Certainly, one of the things I have as a priority is to make sure that AUT is in all of the partnerships that it needs to be in, that we are serving our communities and our partners as well in a reciprocal relationship from which everyone grows.
“That will mean we have to be a little bit selective, but it will also mean that Pacific partnerships and other partnerships are critical to the very centre of the university, and they are not seen as being marginal because we’re a university in the middle of the South Pacific.
“We need to honour that and be connected to our whanau around the Pacific.
Toeolesulusulu Dr Damon Salesa … ““We need to honour … and be connected to our whanau around the Pacific.” Image: RNZ
“It is absolutely important that we are having those conversations, we need to understand how we can support the University of the South Pacific (USP) and their work, how we can find benefit and value for New Zealand and AUT students and staff from those relationships, so certainly we will be taking that seriously.
“But certainly, USP is a special institution in our region, so we need to be strategic in how we support and partner with them.”
Associate Professor Shailendra Singh, head of journalism at USP, says “as many have pointed out, the appointment is well deserved. He was not given any preference as a Pacific Islander. He was picked on merit.
A Pacific ‘trailblazer’ “As a trailblazer, he will inspire many Pacific Islanders and Pacific people beyond New Zealand as the vice-chancellor of one of the finest universities in our region.
“Through my association with the Pacific Media Centre (PMC), I have participated in AUT journalism-related workshops, seminars, and conferences.
“I have a high regard for the AUT and the PMC, long a flagship of the university for its cutting-edge research and publications in Pacific journalism.
“I hope the PMC is revived as journalism in the region has been struggling due to economic and political factors. Pacific journalism needs support and leadership and AUT can become the beacon it was,” Associate Professor Singh says.
Dr Salesa was in the dark about the PMC which has now been in hiatus for almost a year for unknown reasons.
“I’d have to learn more about that, I don’t know the ins and outs of that situation, but these are things that have to be collaborative, they have to be built with the kind of collective will and expertise of the university especially.
“There is no question that AUT will be prioritising Māori research and Pacific research among its other amazing specialisations,” Dr Salesa says.
AUT ‘anchored in Pacific’ “AUT will always be anchored in the Pacific region and obviously has a long history of educating people from the Pacific region and we hope to continue and deepen that.
“Those partnerships will speak directly to AUT’s future, and this is a period in time where everyone is just hoping for the best possible outcome for USP, and we will be looking to support in ways that make sense for them and AUT.”
Dr Salesa is testament to the fact that people of a Pacific background or ethnicity can succeed and excel — not just in sport, but in every facet of society.
“I think we’ve always known, as the saying goes, talent is everywhere, but opportunity isn’t — and what AUT is the story of, is making opportunity available to diverse groups of talented people.
“We know if you make opportunities available to those who have been denied them, they will flourish if they are supported in the right way.
“I have no doubt what people will see in my own story is that the kinds of diverse talent we have in New Zealand that too often we haven’t made the most of, can come to AUT and thrive.
“I hope that people see in that all kinds of stories because I am also the son of a factory worker, and I am also a first-generation university attendee people can understand that when talent gets opportunity and support it drives them and that’s what I am hoping you’ll see and that is what success at AUT is all about and its story,” the Auckland suburb of Glen Innes-raised Dr Salesa says.
Education pathway A strong advocate for education, he wanted young Māori and Pasifika people to pursue that pathway rather than young school leavers joining the workforce.
“We know that education is one of the proven pathways to wellbeing and prosperity for families, and that at the same time we know that many families need their young people to go out and work.
“So, it is absolutely critical that we find ways to get talented young Pacific, Māori and other students into high value employment and education is one of the ways of doing that.
“What we need is for them to be ambitious, to have high expectations of themselves and their families and it is for AUT and other universities to deliver that transformational learning which is the secret to those strong and prosperous futures,” Dr Salesa says.
Transformative learning allowed people to change and have more than one career.
“We know all of us are living in the most uncertain and highly changeable times. In the old days everyone imagined they would have just one career and many people now are realising they might not only change jobs but change careers and they have also come to realise that in many, many of our jobs technology sits at the centre of opportunity and the ability to be effective.
“AUT is the kind of institution that is built for these times, it offers all sorts of flexible learning offerings and a truly diverse student body and it is New Zealand’s tech university.
Transformative learning “So transformative learning is the kind of learning that actually transforms individual students lives where you can see outcomes writ large and that’s what I’m hoping to support further development at AUT so that people understand AUT is a great place to go, to study and get a great job but also prepare themselves for a great future,” Dr Salesa says.
Then there was the inevitable vexed question, whether it was time for another university, namely AUT, to start a new medical school? To which he played with a straight bat.
“At the moment AUT is one of the great providers of the health workforce in New Zealand and certainly for the short term we will be focusing on doing an even better job of doing that.
“Delivering a health workforce and the health researchers that New Zealand needs. That is obviously a critical contribution in the age of the pandemic, but again that will be built collaboratively with my colleagues at AUT.
“I think it is a very challenging time for universities across the board and particularly where next year is going to be where students have had two years of lockdown learning in Auckland so we have to make sure that the university can support them in their ambitions to be successful at AUT.
“That is going to be one of the great challenges, not just facing AUT, but all the tertiary providers that have suffered lockdowns in Auckland.”
The New Zealand government is deploying dozens of Defence Force and police personnel to Honiara in the coming days “to help restore peace and stability”.
Since rioting and looting started in the Solomon Islands last week, Australia, Fiji and Papua New Guinea have sent troops to help keep the peace there.
An initial NZDF team of 15 will join them tomorrow, followed by a larger group of 50 at the weekend.
New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said the response was short-term and to help restore peace and stability.
“New Zealand is committed to its responsibilities and playing its part in upholding regional security.
“We are deeply concerned by the recent civil unrest and rioting in Honiara, and following yesterday’s request of the Solomon Islands government, we have moved quickly to provide urgent assistance.
Samoan police are also on standby to send personnel to assist peacekeeping forces.
Unrest stemmed from protest The unrest stemmed from a protest calling for the removal of Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare that spilled over into rioting and left major destruction in the capital.
A government statement said the destruction of local businesses was done by “heartless people with selfish agendas”.
It warned that instigators were planning a next phase of unrest, including the declaration of Malaita province as an independent state.
Malaita’s provincial Premier Daniel Suidani, whose administration has fallen out with the national government, denies claims that he instigated the unrest.
Malaitans played a central role in last week’s protest before opportunists and looters co-opted the mobilisation into major unrest.
Premier Daniel Suidani of Malaita province … denies claims that he instigated the unrest. Image: Daniel Suidani/Provincial Facebook/RNZ
Ringleader statements on Facebook The government statement said it was aware of reports that ringleaders behind the unrest were openly stating on Facebook that “in order to build a new house, the old house must be first destroyed”.
“Such statements are not helping the volatile situation we are currently experiencing in Honiara,” the statement said.
“To the peace loving and right minded Malaitans, we should ask ourselves whether we are comfortable with the violent advocators to lead our people to an independent state.”
However, the national government said it was encouraged by “the wisdom of the majority of our citizens not to employ violence, looting or threatening tactics to impose one’s evil plan of decimating Honiara city, the capital of Solomon Islands”.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Fiji is the latest regional country to announce it is sending security forces to Solomon Islands where major unrest rocked the capital.
Days of rioting in Honiara by mobs who torched buildings and looted shops prompted the government to call for outside help.
In what’s shaping up as a Pacific regional response, Fiji yesterday deployed 50 soldiers to help keep the peace in Honiara, with 120 more troops on standby.
They follow last week’s deployment of more than 100 Australian defence force and police personnel, as well as 37 Papua New Guinea police and correctional service forces.
Canberra has been playing a co-ordinating role with the other Pacific nations. New Zealand is also part of the conversation, although its role appears minimal at this stage.
Signs from both Australia and PNG indicate that, provisionally, their forces are expected to be in Solomon Islands no longer than a month.
The Fiji military unit is deploying as part of a reinforcement platoon embedded with the Australian contingent in Honiara.
120 troops on standby According to the Fiji government, another 120 Fijian troops are on standby if required.
Over three days last week, many buildings were torched in Honiara’s east, particularly its Chinatown area — leaving at least three people dead.
The unrest had spiralled from a protest against Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare last Wednesday.
By the weekend, law and order was largely restored in Honiara due to the reinforcement of local police capabilities due to the peacekeepers from Australia and Papua New Guinea.
On Monday, the Solomons Parliament met briefly — amid tight security — to pass two motions. One was for the routine extension of the State of Public Emergency in place since the start of the covid-19 pandemic.
The other was to authorise expenditure for the massive loss and damage caused by the riots — estimated at US$28 million.
Despite the resignation of four government MPs last week, and calls for him to stand down to restore control in the country, Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare still commands a clear majority in the House.
Solomon Islands Parliament … still a clear majority for Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare. Image: Koroi Hawkins/RNZ
‘Melting pot of the country’ The MP for Central Guadalcanal, Peter Shanel Agovaka, who is also Communications and Aviation Minister, said each time a group of people from outer provinces who were unhappy with the government, they tended to come to Honiara and destroy local business houses.
“I think people from other provinces should respect that as hosts of this capital we allow people of all provinces, and all denominations and all races, to come here.
“This is the melting pot of the country, and to see it in ruins like this is really very sad.”
According to Shanel, a lot of households had been affected.
“Eighty to 90 percent of Chinatown is burnt down. This is really sad, because these are innocent people,” he said.
“The way to remove a prime minister is through the parliamentary process. It’s not through the burning of businesses or private properties and looting them.”
Capital’s schools close All schools in the Solomon Islands capital have been ordered to close early as a result of the widespread destruction caused by last week’s unrest in Honiara.
Education Secretary Dr Franco Rodie said the decision was reached after consultation with the heads of various schools and taking into consideration parents concerns for the safety of their children.
Dr Rodie said thankfully most major exit examinations had already been conducted and in class assessments will have to be taken into consideration for everyone else.
State of emergency Forty-one out of 49 members of Parliament on Monday yesterday voted in favour of the four-month-extension, as proclaimed by the Governer-General, Sir David Vunagi.
Opposition leader Matthew Wale asked for clarification on the covid status of emergency personnel from Australia and Papua New Guinea brought in because of last week’s riots.
Health Minister Culwick Togamana said all foreign security personnel were double vaxxed and tested negative for covid-19 upon departure and again on arrival in the country.
Togamana also expressed disappointment in the poor uptake of vaccines with less than 20 percent of the population fully vaccinated.
Clean-up time after the riots in Honiara. Image: Fijian community, Honiara/RNZ
Clean-up underway The clean-up in Honiara is underway and church and community groups are turning up to clear the wreckage from last week’s rioting.
However, the riots have created a shortage of food and RNZ Pacific correspondent Elisabeth Osifelo said there had been long queues for the shops that were open, as well as for petrol and at ATMs while banks remain closed.
“The prices have sllightly gone up with rice and so it just depends on where the shop is,” she explained.
“I found out towards the eastern parts of Honiara because I think the shops are very limited that the prices have gone up and varying on different items as well.”
Solomon Islands police have confirmed the identity of the three bodies recovered from a building burnt in Chinatown during the violence — an adult and two children.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
When New Zealand switches to the COVID-19 Protection Framework tomorrow, people will have to present vaccine passes to access many public spaces and venues.
At this point, more than 2.4 million people have downloaded their official vaccine passes, which represents almost 70% of the 3.6 million people who are fully vaccinated.
The transition will likely exacerbate inequities that have already emerged during the vaccine rollout itself, and discriminate against vaccinated but “digitally excluded” people who have limited access to email or phone apps to carry a vaccine pass. People can now get their passes in person at some pharmacies, which helps but does not fully solve the problem.
Another major concern is the integrity of how we use and verify vaccine passes. Businesses and venues have different choices in how strongly they verify the legitimacy of the pass itself and whether or not they request an ID to verify the identity of the vaccine pass holder. This can make all the difference in how effective the system will be in reducing the spread of the virus.
Verifying vaccine passes
Last week, the government passed legislation under urgency to enact a “traffic light” system, which places regions under certain settings. Under red and orange settings, many venues will only be open to fully vaccinated people who can present proof of vaccination.
The vaccine pass includes a QR code which can be presented on paper or on a smartphone. So far, the government has said the minimum requirement is only to visually check the pass. The next level of verification would be for staff to use the official NZ Pass Verifier app to scan the QR code to ensure the pass is legitimate, and that the details printed on the pass match the details encoded in the QR code.
But the highest level of verification is to ask for a photo ID to make sure the person carrying the pass is the person named on it. Taking all three steps provides the highest confidence the person is vaccinated.
Almost 70% of fully vaccinated New Zealanders have downloaded their vaccine passes. Phil Walter/Getty Images
Understandably, some venues will consider this too much hassle or impractical. Requiring a photo ID will also discriminate against people who are fully vaccinated but may not have an ID (such as under-18s or people who have no need for one) or those who may not have a photo ID in their preferred name.
In my opinion, venues that are required to check for vaccine passes need to scan the QR code to lift confidence that the pass is legitimate. Otherwise, it is simply too easy to fake a vaccine pass.
Another challenge is that individuals also need to continue scanning in with their contact-tracing app (preferably NZ COVID Tracer). These apps are generally designed as anonymous systems and all of the data stays on the user’s device.
The vaccine pass verifier app inherently needs to know the identity of the person, and it operates on the venue’s device, which doesn’t store any of the data and works offline. This is why the two apps and functionalities cannot be combined into one.
Inevitably, people will have to provide a vaccine pass and possibly a photo ID to confirm they are allowed to enter. Then the visitor will also have to scan in to keep their own record for contact tracing. It might be annoying, but that’s what we have to do to keep ourselves safe.
The official pass verifier app does not store any data, but there might be some exceptions in which certain businesses create their own apps.
Examples include ticketing, where a person’s vaccination status may have to be verified at the time of purchase rather than entry to the venue. Businesses with repeat customers, such as gyms, may also want to keep a record of their customers’ vaccination status to avoid having to check their pass each time they enter.
The COVID-19 protection framework legislation includes privacy protection that ensures information about people’s vaccination status can only be collected, used or disclosed for the purposes of managing COVID-19, with heavy penalties for breaches.
Are vaccine passes effective?
One major question is whether the passes actually mitigate the risk to public health.
Evidence from other jurisdictions suggests vaccinated people transmit COVID-19 less than unvaccinated people, hence the effort to prevent unvaccinated people from entering venues to avoid the spread of the virus. But in a New Zealand context, it remains to be seen whether or not the vaccine passes are effective at suppressing the reproduction rate.
The government has been using vaccine passes as an incentive for people to get vaccinated by preventing unvaccinated people from accessing venues they might otherwise want to enter. But this motivation expires when we reach a sufficient percentage of people who are vaccinated – and simply aiming for a vaccination percentage raises ethical issues.
We should keep coming back to the public health reasons for why we need people to be vaccinated and why we separate vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. And to uphold that, we have to make sure vaccine passes are used effectively.
This means, at the very least, scanning the QR code to check the passes are legitimate. And we have to reduce the barriers for people to get their vaccine pass so they aren’t excluded for the wrong reasons.
Vaccine passes come at a cost. It’s a cost financially to the government and taxpayers in developing the system. But there’s also a cost socially in terms of exacerbating inequities, and a cost ethically in terms of privacy and restrictions on people’s freedom of movement.
If we were to weaken the system to the extent that people can easily fake a vaccine pass, then we aren’t separating vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals effectively and make no progress towards mitigating public health risk. That would mean the existence of vaccine passes is not justified.
Andrew has provided independent advice to the Ministry of Health and the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet as an academic but is not paid by them.
