Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Charles Livingstone, Associate Professor, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University

The New South Wales government has embraced a sweeping set of reforms to the state’s massive poker machine business. These reforms are centred on a “cashless gaming” system linked to pre-commitment. This system will require those who wish to use pokies in NSW to register for an account, provide high-integrity ID, set a limit for their pokie losses, and link this to a personal bank account.

Why is this needed?

NSW is effectively the heartland of Australia’s pokie business. In 2022, the 89,000 poker machines in NSW’s clubs and pubs are expected to rake in A$7.5 billion.

Much of this money comes from areas of significant disadvantage. In western and south-western Sydney, the local government areas of Fairfield and Canterbury-Bankstown, for example, are on track to contribute over $1.2 billion of that alone, or an average of $2,785 per adult.

Pokies, or gaming machines, are now clearly recognised as Australia’s most harmful gambling form. A recent research paper calculates that pokies are responsible for between 52% and 57% of Australia’s serious gambling harm. Pokies in pubs and clubs are also responsible for 51% of gambling losses overall – $13 billion per year.

Other gambling forms lag far behind this distressing calculus. Wagering on races and on sports, for example, contributes between 20% and 25% of the gambling harm total.

What does pre-commitment do?

Pre-commitment involves a requirement that every person who registers for an account to use pokies in NSW must set a personal limit on their pokie losses, tied to a certain period of time – a day, week, month or year. Limits may be lowered at any time, but only increased once every seven days.

The Tasmanian government recently announced it would roll out such a system from 2024. In Tasmania, there will be pre-set limits. These are $100 per day, $500 per month, and $5,000 per year.

The NSW proposals do not include any pre-set limits, although this is open to consideration. An expert working group and multi-departmental taskforce will fine-tune multiple aspects of the proposal.

In any event, people need to be supported via the system software and venue staff to set reasonable limits. Staff need training and support to do this, and protection from venue managers pushing for maximum profits.

Read more:
Government’s new gambling taglines are a start, but go nowhere near far enough

Cashless systems, tied to a single bank account and requiring a high standard of identification, will make money laundering via pokies very difficult. The digital trail will ensure any suspicious activity can be red-flagged by law enforcement authorities. Subject to a warrant, police can identify and investigate data for individuals concerned.

This will be the only way such data can be used. Neither government nor venues will have access. Individuals will be able to see their own records. This of itself is an important harm-minimisation initiative.

A cashless system on its own won’t help people with harmful gambling habits better manage, or stop, their gambling. NSW Opposition Leader Chris Minns has repeatedly asserted that cashless gaming will lead to more problems. He has referred to Victorian research that he claims demonstrates this.

However, the research in question was focused on moving to cashless gaming on its own, in the context of Victorian regulators permitting “tokenisation” of gambling credits. It did not consider the merits of linking pre-commitment to such systems. Indeed, the report found:

Many of the benefits of cashless gaming have been conflated with the benefits of other gambling harm-minimisation tools (e.g. player tracking, pre-commitment effects have been confused with the effects of cashless gaming).

However, linking pre-commitment and a cashless system will be a major step towards reducing gambling harm and eliminating this form of money laundering.
The system will also require regular breaks in pokie use (for example, a 15-minute break after 90 minutes of use). We know from the first round of tobacco restrictions some years ago that taking a break allows time for reflection. When people are “in the zone” on a poker machine, their rationality is suspended. But away from the machine, reality has a chance of intervening.

Pre-commitment, in effect, gives people a new tool to manage their gambling. It’s important to remember that even those suffering under the influence of a serious gambling addiction have lucid moments – away from the machines.

The new system will allow people to give effect to their best intentions, including includes those who wish to stop gambling. The new system will be linked to a statewide self-exclusion register, meaning those who wish to self-exclude can do so effectively for the first time. This is a major breakthrough in itself.

If the system is “future proofed”, as it should be, it must have capacity to incorporate regular reminders of how much the user has lost over their sessions of pokie use. Where gambling activity demonstrates a likely pattern consistent with increasing harm, that should be flagged, and players should be sent an automated text or email suggesting avenues for assistance.

Regular statements of activity need to be available (as with online gambling) and tailored warning messages may be much more effective than bland requests to “gamble responsibly”. All of these should be available via this system.

There is also $350 million on offer to encourage clubs to diversify their revenue sources and to provide incentives to join the rollout of the new system. Large clubs in NSW often rely on poker machines for 80% or more of their total revenue. This is a major reason clubs are reluctant to embrace reform.

Old machines need to be replaced

The new system is to be rolled out over a five-year time-frame. This is almost certainly longer than needed. The majority of pokies in NSW can be retrofitted with hardware and software to make the system work as intended.

However, there are 30,000 or so machines that are too old. This will include machines that continue to allow $10,000 to be inserted at once – perfect for money laundering. Such machines need to be replaced as a high priority. Unless this is achieved quickly, they will be magnets for money laundering’s last hurrah through pokies.

Pokies in NSW are all linked by a statewide monitoring system. This is used mostly to protect revenue, but can be enhanced as necessary to incorporate the proposed system.

Read more:
Pubs and clubs – your friendly neighbourhood money-laundering service, thanks to 86,640 pokies

So … will it work?

The technical issues are serious, but not overly difficult. Victoria has been running a voluntary pre-commitment system for years without technical problems. Unfortunately, because it’s voluntary, it is little used.

A universal system is far preferable. Strong evidence from Norway indicates it will reduce gambling harm. It is almost certain it will produce a dramatic reduction in pokies-based money laundering.

If implemented (a big if, relying on the Perrottet government’s re-election) these reforms will be highly significant. For the first time in NSW since pokies were introduced in 1956, pokie gamblers will be able to manage their gambling effectively. And money laundering at the local pub or club will become a thing of the past.

Charles Livingstone has received funding from the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation, the (former) Victorian Gambling Research Panel, and the South Australian Independent Gambling Authority (the funds for which were derived from hypothecation of gambling tax revenue to research purposes), from the Australian and New Zealand School of Government and the Foundation for Alcohol Research and Education, and from non-government organisations for research into multiple aspects of poker machine gambling, including regulatory reform, existing harm minimisation practices, and technical characteristics of gambling forms. He has received travel and co-operation grants from the Alberta Problem Gambling Research Institute, the Finnish Institute for Public Health, the Finnish Alcohol Research Foundation, the Ontario Problem Gambling Research Committee, the Turkish Red Crescent Society, and the Problem Gambling Foundation of New Zealand. He was a Chief Investigator on an Australian Research Council funded project researching mechanisms of influence on government by the tobacco, alcohol and gambling industries. He has undertaken consultancy research for local governments and non-government organisations in Australia and the UK seeking to restrict or reduce the concentration of poker machines and gambling impacts, and was a member of the Australian government’s Ministerial Expert Advisory Group on Gambling in 2010-11. He is a member of the Lancet Public Health Commission into gambling, and of the World Health Organisation expert group on gambling and gambling harm.

– ref. NSW pokies reforms will do much to limit problem gambling and money laundering – https://theconversation.com/nsw-pokies-reforms-will-do-much-to-limit-problem-gambling-and-money-laundering-199382

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hal Pawson, Professor of Housing Research and Policy, and Associate Director, City Futures Research Centre, UNSW Sydney

The Albanese government’s housing package moved a step closer to delivery with the recent release of draft legislation. The bills are expected to be tabled in parliament soon. After a decade of general federal disengagement from housing policy (first home ownership being the main exception), this is more than welcome.

At the same time, the proposed laws don’t give enough priority to the need for a coherent approach to a complex housing system. Multi-faceted problems such as homelessness, unaffordable rents, mortgage stress and a lack of social housing demand joined-up solutions. Housing knowledge and policy-making capacity within government have been badly eroded and must be restored.

The draft legislative package comprised three bills (and a helpful explanatory memorandum):

• National Housing Supply and Affordability Council Bill

• Housing Australia Future Fund Bill

• Treasury Laws Amendment (Housing Measures) Bill.

Beyond this, the National Housing and Homelessness Plan now being developed by the government should provide the vital strategic framework that has been so glaringly absent. This means it could be even more important than the measures in the draft bills. Arguably, the plan should also be enshrined in law.

Read more:
Homeless numbers have jumped since COVID housing efforts ended – and the problem is spreading beyond the big cities

What’s good about the package?

In our submission on the draft package, we commend the progress towards reasserting Commonwealth leadership on housing. State and territory commitments and actions are vital, too, in confronting Australia’s mounting and complex housing challenges. But federal engagement and ambition are essential to make any significant and lasting progress.

The National Housing Supply and Affordability Council promises to restore the foundation for evidence-based policy once provided by the former National Housing Supply Council.

Similarly, after more than ten years of negligible investment in new social and affordable housing, the $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund is certainly a laudable commitment. However, the aim of building 30,000 new social and affordable housing units over five years is relatively modest. We estimate current unmet need for social housing equates to 437,000 households.

The recent National Housing Accord on expanded construction output could also play a meaningful role. Full details are yet to be released.

Read more:
1 million homes target makes headlines, but can’t mask modest ambition of budget’s housing plans

And what will it take to fix the housing system?

As argued in our book, the declining performance of Australia’s housing system is not just a matter of historically miserly government funding. It’s also a result of policymaking failure.

That failure reflects the long-term deterioration and fragmentation of governmental capacity in this realm. At both federal and state levels, the past 25 years have seen the progressive disappearance or downgrading of ministerial housing portfolios and associated departments. At the same time, housing policy has been increasingly viewed as a narrowly defined subset of welfare policy.

These changes have eroded housing policy knowledge and policymaking capacity within government. They’re an aspect of the hollowing out of government across many policy fields in Australia and overseas. Arguably, it has had particularly far-reaching impacts on housing in Australia.

Partly for these reasons, the proposed upgrading of the National Housing Finance and Investment Corporation to a national housing agency, Housing Australia, is another commendable aspect of the legislation.

What more should the government do?

Potentially more of a game-changer than the measures in the draft bills is the promised National Housing and Homelessness Plan. Since housing is a complex and interactive system, micro-measures targeting selected aspects of that system are liable to have minimal or even counter-productive impacts. Housing therefore demands strategic policymaking (rather than an incremental or reactive approach).

This is why Australia should emulate the Canadian government by enshrining the National Housing and Homelessness Plan in law. Doing so would reduce the risk of a future administration emasculating or abandoning the structure.

As for the three draft bills, a crucial enhancement would be to strengthen the status, capacity and responsibilities of Housing Australia.

Here we again take inspiration from across the north Pacific. The Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) has played a crucial strategic role as a national housing agency over decades. The UK’s Scottish Homes (1989-2001) and Housing Corporation (1964-2008) were similarly influential in informing, co-ordinating and delivering housing policy. Importantly, they also championed housing within government.

Read more:
The market has failed to give Australians affordable housing, so don’t expect it to solve the crisis

With these examples in mind, there is a strong case for Housing Australia to be:

• given a wider analytical and research role to inform policymaking and support the National Housing Supply and Affordability Council

• tasked with formulating the National Housing and Homelessness Plan and co-ordinating its implementation and review

• made responsible for the progress and oversight of the National Housing Accord

• charged with informing the re-negotiation of the National Housing and Homelessness Agreement between the Commonwealth, states and territories.

In short, to boost the chances that the current housing policy impetus can be sustained, the proposed institutional reforms must be both strengthened and embedded.

Hal Pawson receives funding from the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, the Australian Research Council, the Queensland Council of Social Service and Crisis UK. Hal Pawson is a Board Director of Community Housing Canberra

– ref. Albanese government tackles housing crisis on 3 fronts, but there’s still more to do – https://theconversation.com/albanese-government-tackles-housing-crisis-on-3-fronts-but-theres-still-more-to-do-198509

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Blaxland, Professor, Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, Australian National University

The United States’ shooting down of a Chinese spy balloon off the coast of South Carolina over the weekend points to international security affairs being on a knife edge.

It follows a surge in crises and tensions over the past few years, including Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, prompting the Albanese government to commission an accelerated Defence Strategic Review in August 2022. This is expected to be handed to the government as early as this week, and the government’s response to the review is expected in March.

Albanese is also scheduled to meet with US President Joe Biden and UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak in the US next month to deliver the much anticipated AUKUS announcement, detailing Australia’s submarine plans. A US Congressman has recently suggested it could provide Australia with a jointly-operated submarine while we wait for the eventual acquisition of nuclear-powered subs.

So how did we get here, and what can we expect from these upcoming announcements?

How did we get here?

In 2007, Kevin Rudd, sensing the need to bolster Australia’s defence, initiated the Defence White Paper, which was published in 2009. This called for replacement submarines, but the Global Financial Crisis derailed the plan.

Another White Paper was released in 2016 under Tony Abbott, then again in 2020 under Scott Morrison.

By then, the rhetoric was sharper-edged and more regionally focused, recognising “grey zone” competition in the air, sea and land, as well in space and online.

Read more:
‘Hybrid warfare’: Nord Stream attacks show how war is evolving

Yet for all that, Australia has little to show for it, with no new submarines and a boutique defence force that looks much like that retained over the preceding half century.

The Department of Defence appears to have had little sense of urgency to muscle up, belying the rhetoric of official pronouncements on increased defence spending. Some acquisitions have occurred, but essentially they’ve replaced like for like, with only incremental increases.

The assumption has long been that there’s no real threat to Australia within the next ten years. Failing this, Australia would look after itself and its immediate neighbourhood and make only niche and carefully calibrated force contributions to calls for support further afield.

But this thinking is now being challenged. There’s growing recognition of the need for urgency to prepare for potential threats in a dynamic and more uncertain security environment.

Accepting the Morrison legacy

The federal government has accepted the defence legacy of the Morrison government, including

• the Pacific Step-up, increasing Australia’s diplomatic presence in the region

• the Quadrilateral network (“the Quad”), which involves India, Japan, Australia and the US collaborating in tackling security, economic and health issues, and contesting China’s regional dominance

• and AUKUS, a technical agreement between Australia, the US and UK to supply Australia with nuclear-powered submarines and other hi-tech military systems.

Advanced surveillance technology has meant diesel electric submarines can no longer undertake long transits without being detected. A partial surfacing for a “snort” to recharge batteries is unavoidable, even for transits between Australian ports, but is now detectable. Without stealth, a submarine is redundant. That’s why there’s a push for nuclear-powered subs, which can operate underwater for far longer than their diesel electric counterparts.

The Albanese government accepts the rationale for these initiatives. But it’s had to recover from the collateral damage caused by Morrison’s blunt implementation of AUKUS and the Pacific Step Up that downplayed regional environmental concerns, offended France, upset Indonesia, and infuriated China.

Confronting China and Russia

While the new Labor government has adopted a less antagonistic tone, it remains wary of China’s aggression and its “no limits” friendship with Russia.

The rationale for the Defence Strategic Review was reinforced by events including

• Russia’s invasion of Ukraine
• a fiery display of Chinese military might around Taiwan
• a series of ballistic missile firings from North Korea
• ongoing Chinese assertiveness in the South China Sea
• a surprise China-Solomon Islands security pact
• and a series of cyber attacks targeting Australia’s industries, government entities, media, civil society, and educational institutions.

Chinese President Xi Jinping’s rhetoric calling for preparations for war over Taiwan suggests his patience is wearing thin.

Though its assertive displays of power doesn’t mean it wants war, at least not yet. Its approach seems inspired by notions of “unrestricted warfare”, referring to media, political and legal warfare (perhaps best described as “unrestricted competition”), as opposed to conventional military battle.

Its reminiscent of ideas espoused by ancient Chinese strategist Sun Tzu, who said “To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill”.

Read more:
China does not want war, at least not yet. It’s playing the long game

Defence’s acquisition stasis

In light of these challenges, the Albanese government is right to make the Defence Strategic Review a priority. The key questions are, of course: what will it recommend, how quickly will it be enacted, and how much will it cost?

Defence industry insiders have suggested to me privately that the Department of Defence is in stasis, waiting for the report to be endorsed by government before proceeding – a process which may take years.

Few expect a dramatic surge in funding.

Meanwhile, plans to acquire armed drones and armoured vehicles have been cancelled or delayed rather than accelerated.

There seems to be a freeze on purchasing decisions in anticipation of the results of the review. The problem is reinforced by issues with Defence’s acquisition arm, which struggles to deliver efficient, effective and timely projects.

The recently announced purchase of new Blackhawk helicopters and high mobility artillery rocket systems suggest otherwise, but they were decisions that effectively predate the review.

Meanwhile, the Australian ship building industry faces a “valley of death” experience. Australia has planned to build nine new warships in South Australia as part of the future frigates program, but the industry is waiting for a not-yet finalised design to materialise.

Major multinational corporations can sustain this process. But Australian-owned small to medium enterprises, so critical for a sustainable defence industry, are buffeted by the uncertainty and delays.

What’s next?

The Defence Strategic Review is expected to emphasise the AUKUS nuclear-powered submarines as a priority, along with guided weapons and explosives.

As the government weights up its options, it should consider all aspects of national security, including climate change and governance problems. It should also consider mounting a national and community service scheme to more inclusively engage a broad element of society in response to the suite of emerging challenges.

John Blaxland has previously received funding from the Australian Signals Directorate in the Defence portfolio for an official history, but that was cancelled in 2020.

– ref. Two major announcements about Australia’s defence force are imminent. Here’s what to expect – https://theconversation.com/two-major-announcements-about-australias-defence-force-are-imminent-heres-what-to-expect-198511

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Paul Liknaitzky, Head of Clinical Psychedelic Research, Monash University

A few days ago, the Australian drug regulator – the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) – surprised experts around the world when it announced the approval of certain psychedelic treatments.

From July this year, the TGA will permit authorised psychiatrists to prescribe psilocybin (found in “magic mushrooms”) for treatment-resistant depression, and MDMA (found in “ecstasy”) for post-traumatic stress disorder.

I head up Australia’s first clinical psychedelic lab, where we develop psychedelic-assisted therapies for treating various mental illnesses, test their safety and effectiveness, explore how the treatments work, and train therapists.

I’ve witnessed, up close, the rapidly accelerating developments within the field and in positive public sentiment, over a few short years. But this surprising announcement may have devils – and angels – in the detail.

Read more:
AI maps psychedelic ‘trip’ experiences to regions of the brain – opening new route to psychiatric treatments

In from the wilderness

Just a few years ago, Australia had no psychedelic research, almost no professional interest, and negligible public awareness of the clinical potential of these treatments.

The first psychedelic trial in Australia was approved in 2019. We established the country’s first clinical psychedelic lab in 2020. And by the end of 2023 there will be more than 15 active clinical psychedelic trials nationwide.

While the TGA’s announcement was hailed as groundbreaking, there are actually a handful of places where psychedelic-assisted therapies have been approved for very limited clinical use outside of research trials (for example, compassionate or expanded access programs in the United States, Canada, and Israel, and a version of authorised prescribers in Switzerland).

But this is the first time a government has changed the way these drugs are formally classified (“scheduled”). This may turn out to be a distinction without difference, as only so-called “authorised prescribers” will be approved to use these drugs outside of trials; or instead, it may turn out to be be a watershed moment with dramatic effects on the field globally.

Emerging evidence

Emerging evidence shows that, when used alongside psychotherapy, certain psychedelic drugs can be safe to administer and produce large, rapid and sustained benefits for a range of addiction and mental health conditions. These include post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, end-of-life distress, alcohol use disorder, and nicotine dependence.

While there are some important research limitations associated with these studies, the results have been compelling.

Read more:
Alberta’s new policy on psychedelic drug treatment for mental illness: Will Canada lead the psychedelic renaissance?

Cautious optimism

Since the announcement, I’ve spoken with numerous clinicians and researchers working in psychedelic trials in Australia, and all have expressed mixed reactions to the TGA news.

There’s excitement: about drug policy progress; about potential access for more people in need; about the prospect of being able to offer patients more suitable and tailored treatment without the constraints imposed by clinical trials and rigid protocols.

And then there are concerns: that evidence remains inadequate, and moving to clinical service is premature; that incompetent or poorly equipped clinicians could flood the space; that treatment will be unaffordable for most; that formal oversight of training, treatment, and patient outcomes will be minimal or ill-informed.

Many professionals working at the coalface are concerned that soon-to-be prescribers, therapists, and decision-makers probably don’t know that they don’t know about some of the essential elements of safe and effective psychedelic therapy.

Read more:
Latest trials confirm the benefits of MDMA – the drug in ecstasy – for treating PTSD

Angels or devils

The TGA announcement cites promising evidence as the basis for its decision. However, its approach does not appear to account for factors that may be key to this evidence base, and leaves some critical questions unanswered. Here are a few things to watch:

Who treats?

The TGA decision permits only authorised psychiatrists to administer this treatment, and states “the product must not be supplied to other practitioners who prescribe or administer the product”.

While psychiatrists are an important part of a collaborative care model, they will need substantial psychedelic training to deliver this complex form of drug-augmented psychotherapy. What will constitute adequate psychedelic training is unlikely to be clarified, nor is there a requirement for practitioners to be supervised by psychedelic experts.

Psychedelic therapies are so dissimilar to general psychiatry that simply trusting that psychiatrists “have the training and expertise […] to appropriately treat” patients using psychedelics is ill-informed.

Moreover, any requirement to have psychiatrists attend all treatment sessions (dosing days typically last eight hours and a typical treatment model involves about 40 hours of therapy) will make this even less affordable.

Any prospective authorised prescriber will need extensive training and ongoing supervision from credible professionals who have experience delivering psychedelic therapy, and should establish collaborative care teams with qualified psychologists and psychotherapists.

Who is treated?

The evidence for safe and effective psychedelic treatments comes from trials with very strict eligibility criteria. Over 90% of applicants to these trials are typically excluded.

Trials are cautious, in part because we know these treatments can destabilise people, exacerbate certain symptoms, and increase suicidality. The excellent track record of safety across almost all modern psychedelic trials has been established in the context of extensive screening.

Authorised prescribing will open up the eligibility to a greater diversity of help-seekers. This is a good step, but should be well-informed, and taken with caution and transparency.

What does treatment involve?

Since 1999, clinical psychedelic trials have delivered psychotherapeutic support before, during, and after the drug administration, with one to three dosing sessions. The TGA decision does not mandate any of this, advising “there does not currently appear to be any established treatment protocols”.

This is a misunderstanding. While treatment protocols across trials are not all the same, they certainly exist, and there is considerable overlap in the therapeutic approaches used. Improved protocols will be developed over time, but a sensible approach is to start with an approximation of what has been done in trials that have shown safe and effective outcomes.

Are patients informed before they consent?

Practitioners need to make informed decisions about any departure from precedent, and be transparent about those details with patients.

For example, if a prescriber does not provide therapy, does not have psychedelic training or supervision, or offers more than three dosing sessions, patients need to know which aspects of their treatment sit outside the evidence base.

Wider prescribing will effectively entail a “community-based experiment”, and a basic right of all patients is that they are able to make informed decisions about their treatment.

A brave new world?

There are many other questions worth grappling with over the next five months, including those regarding appropriate oversight and patient protection, affordability and reimbursement, and public expectations and awareness.

I feel cautiously optimistic that many more Australian patients may be able to access safe and effective psychedelic treatments, and that the Australian mental health care sector has an opportunity to learn how best to deliver them.

To those planning to work in this space in Australia, I urge you to start or continue climbing the steep learning curve with curiosity, to organise reputable training, support, and resources from those already doing the work, and to establish appropriate systems of governance, oversight, and transparency.

There’s so much potential here, plenty at stake, and work to be done.

If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14.

Paul Liknaitzky has received research funding from Incannex Healthcare Ltd, Dr Nigel Strauss, and the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies. He is a member of the Medical Advisory Board of Incannex Healthcare Ltd.

– ref. The TGA has approved certain psychedelic treatments: the response from experts is mixed – https://theconversation.com/the-tga-has-approved-certain-psychedelic-treatments-the-response-from-experts-is-mixed-199290

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kimberley Crofts, Doctoral Student, School of Design, University of Technology Sydney

The decline of the coal industry means 17 mines in the New South Wales Hunter Valley will close over the next two decades. More than 130,000 hectares of mining land — nearly two-thirds of the valley floor between Broke and Muswellbrook — will become available for new uses.

Restoring and reusing this land could contribute billions of dollars to the Hunter economy, create thousands of full-time jobs and make the region a world leader in industries such as renewable energy and regenerative agriculture that improves soil and water quality and increases biodiversity and resilience. But to unlock these future opportunities, we must first clean up the legacy of the past.

Last year community organisation Hunter Renewal asked people across the Hunter Valley about their priorities. They told us they want the Hunter to become a thriving natural environment, a more vibrant and attractive place to live with connected communities, and a diverse and resilient economy.

These community priorities, and their implications for land use planning, are outlined in a report published by Hunter Renewal today: After the coal rush, the clean-up. A community blueprint to restore the Hunter. This blueprint could be a model for other Australian communities planning their transition away from fossil fuels.

Read more:
NSW’s biggest coal mine to close in 2030. Now what about the workers?

How were priorities identified?

We began by analysing more than 170 documents from government, academia and industry about post-mining land use, planning and related issues. From this, a first draft of principles and recommendations for action was created.

The draft was put to a panel of ecological, social and technical experts from the University of Newcastle. Wanaruah/Wonnorua Elders and other First Nations peoples also advised on this draft.

Hunter community members then reviewed and revised a second draft through a series of workshops, interviews and an online survey. They included land holders, students, business owners, mine rehabilitation experts, Indigenous knowledge holders and renewable energy workers.

Read more:
3 local solutions to replace coal jobs and ensure a just transition for mining communities

Rehabilitation and restoration

Hunter residents want mined lands to be restored to support biodiversity and clean industries such as regenerative farming, renewable energy, and other industries that regenerate rather than extract.

To ensure this restoration happens, stronger legal obligations would ensure mining companies cannot walk away from their obligations, leaving voids in the landscape that become a perpetual hazard to human and environmental health. As one resident said:

Mining companies shouldn’t be allowed to have a free pass at everything and get as much funding via subsidies as they do from the government.

Planning and governance

People said that for the Hunter landscape to be restored at the scale required, planning and policy mechanisms will have to be well co-ordinated. An independent and locally based Hunter Rehabilitation and Restoration Commission could do this. It could work alongside the already proposed Hunter Valley Transition Authority.

The community suggested increasing coal-mining royalties to pay for this co-ordinated work. Mining companies would then be the ones that foot the clean-up bill.

In NSW, the royalty rate for open-cut coal is just 8.2% of the resale value. That’s too low for what is required. As another resident said:

We shouldn’t underestimate the size of the task and true cost and effort of rehabilitation of multiple large mines over decades. This is an opportunity to repurpose the land and the physical and social infrastructure.

Read more:
How to transition from coal: 4 lessons for Australia from around the world

Community involvement

Successful mine closure and relinquishment requires that affected communities and stakeholders are meaningfully involved at every stage of planning and implementation. Yet true involvement is rare

People in the Hunter want to see greater community involvement mandated to ensure new developments benefit their communities for the long term. As one Hunter resident said:

The mines have privatised all the profits and socialised all the costs […] We want to be involved from the beginning as equals.

Read more:
‘We want to be part of that movement’: residents embrace renewable energy but worry how their towns will change

First Nations

In Australia all mines are on Indigenous land and over 60% of mines are near to Indigenous communities. Yet Indigenous people are less likely to benefit economically from mining operations than non-Indigenous people.

Hunter residents said this needs to change. One way to do this is to return mining land to Traditional Owners, especially unmined buffer lands.

Making decisions with First Nations people from the outset for new projects will help to overcome the systemic disadvantage in Australia since colonisation. It will also build a knowledge base for change. As one Hunter resident said:

There is so much to be gained in recognising and understanding the land management practices of the local Aboriginal people, based on 60,000 years of observation and science dealing with the oldest continent on the planet.

Read more:
Australia’s next government must start talking about a ‘just transition’ from coal. Here’s where to begin

Climate and environment

Plants and animals need connected ecosystems that allow them to move, adapt and survive. People in the Hunter want a region-wide system of biodiversity corridors. The transition from coal is an opportunity to set up a system that will give the region’s native species a fighting chance in a warming world.

As one resident told us:

Rehabilitating the land to ensure biodiversity is restored is the most important thing to ensure the native plant species can grow back and allow the native animals to return. We need to restore the land to try and reverse the human impacts on the site as much as possible.

Dawn of a cleaner future

The coal industry has had it pretty good in this region for generations. We need a focus now on cleaning up the mess so a new, cleaner future can emerge. This requires a new approach to planning and development in partnership with local communities.

The consultative approach behind the Hunter community blueprint demonstrates the value of including a wide range of perspectives in planning for a post-coal future.

What this set of prioritised recommendations shows is that the people of the Hunter understand the complexity of the task and want to be part of planning it. It will require new laws and well-resourced public agencies capable of managing restoration and ensuring coal companies pay their dues and clean up after themselves.

Kimberley Crofts contributed to the Community Blueprint discussed in this article.

Liam Phelan contributed to the Community Blueprint discussed in this article.

– ref. ‘We need to restore the land’: as coal mines close, here’s a community blueprint to sustain the Hunter Valley – https://theconversation.com/we-need-to-restore-the-land-as-coal-mines-close-heres-a-community-blueprint-to-sustain-the-hunter-valley-198792

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sarah Jefferson, Senior Lecturer in Education, Edith Cowan University

The first signs were the half-eaten lunches coming home from high school. This was in stark contrast to the primary school years, where the box looked as if a demolition team had run through it with only a few crumbs left.

The problem was finally disclosed over a quiet chat before bedtime when we did our routine of “best, worst, funniest” thing that day. My child confided they really didn’t like their new maths class and because they were so anxious about it, they’d stopped eating lunch.

Irrespective of whether it’s daycare, preschool, primary or high school, the news your child doesn’t like their new school, teacher, class – or all of the above – is always tough. Research also shows a child’s sense of belonging at school affects their motivation, engagement and wellbeing. So it is important not to dismisss your child’s concerns.

How should parents approach this situation?

Try debriefing and reviewing

Many businesses and organisations use after action reviews to debrief after an event or project and learn from them.

A modified version of this tool can help you take an objective approach to the news your child is very unhappy with an element of their school life. You can adjust the level of your language and discussion based on the age of your child.

1. What is happening?

Asking your child to describe what is going on prompts them to think through what is actually happening and gives you some useful context. If, for instance the class is happening late on a Friday afternoon, that may go some way to explaining why people are not their best selves at this time.

2. What went well?

This can tell you what your child can continue doing or what they are enjoying at school. Perhaps it was mat time at primary school, or they liked the person they sat next to in history class.

3. What went wrong?

This helps identify the area for improvement or what specifically needs fixing.

Perhaps your child is still getting used to changing classrooms and classes at high school. Or the can’t keep up with what the teacher is saying. Maybe there was a miscommunication.

What not to do

Unless there is a safety or serious wellbeing issue, it is highly unlikely changing your teacher and/or opting out of certain lessons will be your answer.

While avoiding might seem like a straightforward answer, like many things with anxiety, this reinforces a reward pathway in the brain that simply makes the anxiety worse and often harder to resolve down the track.

Generally it’s useful to take a watch-and-see approach. This is particularly the case at the start of the school year where so many things and people are new.

Read more:
You can’t fix school refusal with ‘tough love’ but these steps might help

Also think about these things

Think about making time to talk to your child’s teacher (not to say your child doesn’t like them, but to note they are struggling to get into the school year). A nicely-worded email is another way to approach this.

It is helpful for teachers to know if one of their students isn’t happy or at ease in their class. If the teacher doesn’t know about an issue, they can’t work to fix it.

Also consider encouraging social events after school or on weekends with other kids and parents (depending on your child’s age). Building social networks outside school can ease anxiety in school.

Read more:
Back-to-school blues are normal, so how can you tell if it’s something more serious?

In rare instances, there may be a serious issue that needs significant intervention. If that’s the case, your school has senior teachers – such as year-level coordinators or the principal – you can contact. It will also have other support processes, such as access to school counsellors.

In the case of my child, it turned out some well-timed group activities over the next few lessons helped them make a new friend. The lunchbox starting coming home empty again.

In most cases, simply listening to and not dismissing your child’s concern will go a long way to help them through this time. As American education writer, Parker J Palmer notes:

The human soul doesn’t want to be advised or fixed or saved. It simply wants to be witnessed — to be seen, heard and companioned exactly as it is.

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

– ref. Whether it’s a new teacher or class – here’s what to do when your child is not loving it – https://theconversation.com/whether-its-a-new-teacher-or-class-heres-what-to-do-when-your-child-is-not-loving-it-199288

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Daryl Sparkes, Senior Lecturer (Media Studies and Production), University of Southern Queensland

When it was released 25 years ago, James Cameron’s Titanic was enormous. It made stars of its two leads, Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet. Reviews overwhelmingly heaped praise not only on the technical aspects of the film but also the acting and storyline.

In 1997, Titanic was, in the oft-quoted line from the film, “king of the world!”

At the time we were all swept up in the romantic tale of Jack Dawson and Rose DeWitt Bukater, the star-crossed lovers whose infatuation on the doomed ship ended when Jack made the ultimate sacrifice, freezing in the icy Atlantic to save his truly beloved.

But over the years, critics and audiences alike have re-examined the film and found, like the ship itself, it is a bit of a wreck.

When it was originally released, a small number of critics deeply disliked Titanic.

Today, more and more people are re-evaluating their originally positive response to the film and are changing their opinions. From the characters, to the story, to the ending, there are a number of issues with Titanic that appear questionable at best, and deeply unsettling at worst.

It’s even gone far enough that some critics are calling it the worst film ever made – but that may be taking it too far.

An unhealthy obsession

At the beginning of the film, we find upper-class Rose being forced into marriage with “Cal” Hockley by her widowed mother, Ruth, to save the family fortune and keep their status in society. So unhappy with her situation, Rose decides to jump from the ship. She is rescued by the penniless drifter, Jack.

So begins the plot of the film as the pair constantly run and hide from the authorities to be together.

Jack’s relentless pursuit of Rose around the ship is obsessive. We learn virtually nothing about the character of Jack Dawson apart from him being a poor orphaned artist, he wants Rose, and he will do anything to have her – even though they’ve only known each other for a few days.

Is this a healthy relationship?

Rose is only 17 years old and possibly too inexperienced to identify a stalker or manipulator. Influenced by Jack’s charm, Rose turns against her mother, fiancé and pretty much everyone else in her life. And how could she not? On board the Titanic, almost every wealthy and upper-class person is portrayed as a villain while the people in third class, or steerage, are shown as a salt-of-the-earth, decent and virtuous. Rose’s fiancé is at every turn just a mean, callous man who cares nothing for Rose or for anyone but himself.

Even when the ship is sinking, the officers on board discriminate against the steerage passengers, ensuring only the well-to-do board the lifeboats – just one of the many historical inaccuracies.

All of the upper-class characters we meet on Titanic get little screen time, apart from when they are being desultory, cruel or malicious. They appear two-dimensional, lacking meaningful emotions.

Read more:
Titanic on screen – why A Night to Remember is the definitive film on the ship

True love?

One of the main themes of the film, that true love goes on beyond death, also appears overly sentimental and simplistic in modern times. We understand young teens often lack maturity in relationships and often mistake lust or infatuation for love.

Would Jack and Rose’s relationship have lasted if Jack had survived? He was broke with no visible means of support. She was 17. Their love affair is a fantasy of no responsibility while on board the ship. Where would it have gone in the real world?

This directs us to another issue. Rose survives the sinking and goes on to marry another man and have a family with children and grandchildren. However, when Rose dies at the end of the film her “spirit” descends to the wreck of the ship where she is reunited with the “love of her life” Jack.

Surely this is a slap in the face to her deceased husband and family. She lived her entire life with these people, yet the film ends up with Rose in the afterlife with someone she knew for a few days.

Filled with holes

Often, critiquing films with modern sensibilities can be unfair. However, Titanic includes a fair number of issues that, even considered with the social mores of the time in which it was made, appear problematic.

This does not take away from the enjoyment many people have gained from the film over the years, and its technical brilliance. But it does give increased weight to the critics who spoke against the film in 1997.

Like the ship itself, the film Titanic is a relic of a different time. Revisiting it can make you wonder why you never noticed the holes in it in the first place.

Read more:
Titanic at 25: how James Cameron captured 1990s anxieties with pure golden-age Hollywood style

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

– ref. Titanic at 25: like the ship itself, James Cameron’s film is a bit of a wreck – https://theconversation.com/titanic-at-25-like-the-ship-itself-james-camerons-film-is-a-bit-of-a-wreck-199171

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

As well as her interviews with politicians and experts, Politics with Michelle Grattan includes “Word from The Hill”, where she discusses the news with members of The Conversation’s politics team.

In this podcast Michelle and politics + society editor Amanda Dunn discuss the Reserve Bank’s latest (but not last) interest rate rise, Lidia Thorpe’s defection to the crossbench, which potentially benefits Jacqui Lambie, the reintroduction of alcohol bans in Alice Springs and other Northern Territory communities, and Peter Dutton’s tactics on the Voice.

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

– ref. Word from The Hill: Government should set date for Voice to start talking – https://theconversation.com/word-from-the-hill-government-should-set-date-for-voice-to-start-talking-199404

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

Australia’s cash rate has hit 3.35%, after the Reserve Bank raised interest rates for the ninth time in a row – and signalled more interest rate pain ahead. The 0.25 percentage point rise adds A$90 a month to a $600,000 variable mortgage.

Ahead of Tuesday’s statement from the Reserve Bank board, there was talk of just one more 0.25 point rate hike this year.

That was the view of traders in the money market, who had priced loans on the basis that the bank’s cash rate would climb just 0.35 points further after being lifted to 3.35% on Tuesday, before plateauing and then falling.

No longer. The statement released after Tuesday’s board meeting included this carefully-considered plural:

The Board expects that further increases in interest rates will be needed over the months ahead to ensure that inflation returns to target and that this period of high inflation is only temporary.

The reference was to “increases”, not an “increase”, and to those increases in the months ahead, implying (at least) two more increases within months.

Within minutes, traders adjusted their prices to a peak in the cash rate of 3.9%, rather than 3.7% – which coincidentally was around the average forecast of participants in The Conversation’s economic survey at the start of the week.

Read more:
Higher interest rates, falling home prices and real wages, but no recession: top economists’ forecasts for 2023

The bank is lifting rates even though it thinks inflation is heading down.

In a preview of its full set of forecasts to be released on Friday, it said it expected inflation to slide from its present 7.8% to 4.74% by the end of this year, and to around 3% by mid-2025, which is also in line with the forecasts of the Conversation’s panel.

The steam is coming out of inflation partly because of interest rate hikes here and overseas, and partly because the global effects of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine are fading.

Last Wednesday, the head of the US Federal Reserve Jerome Powell (the equivalent of Australia’s Reserve Bank Governor Philip Lowe) began talking about “disinflation”.

“We can now say, I think for the first time, that the disinflationary process has started,” he told a press conference, and to underline the point he used the word “disinflation” ten more times in 44 minutes.

US inflation has been falling since the middle of last year, from a peak of 9.1% in June to 6.5% in December.

Powell says inflation is falling mainly because the global shortages of goods and commodities caused by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine have been “fixed”.

But inflation is also falling because of the work Powell has done. In the US, the Federal Funds rate (similar to our Reserve Bank cash rate) has climbed from something near zero to 4.5% in the space of a year, denting consumer spending.

Disinflation abroad, weak wage pressure at home

In Australia, figures released by the Bureau of Statistics on Monday show spending fell in the three months to December – not in absolute dollar terms, because December is always a big month, but compared to what would have been expected given the end of the year.

Continuing to hold up inflation in the US and in the UK – but not in Australia – has been very high wages growth. Higher prices have become baked into higher wages, which have been fed into higher prices, which have in turn fed back into higher wages.

Not here. Whereas in the US and the UK wage growth has topped 6%, here it is officially 3.1% – way below what would be needed to hold up inflation.

Read more:
‘Zombie’ wage deals have hurt Australians for years. Here’s how new industrial relations laws could finally end your wage pain

In part, we’ve a former Labor government to thank for the absence of a wage-price spiral.

Prime Minister Paul Keating steered Australia toward enterprise bargaining at the start of the 1990s, locking many of us into wage agreements that are only struck once every three or so years, and are unable to respond quickly to prices.

So why is the Reserve Bank determined to whack inflation further, rather than watch it slowly die?

Perhaps to send a message that it is really, really serious, and that it is not a good idea to get relaxed about spending, thinking the worst will soon be over.

Bleak times ahead

Between the lines though, the bank is hinting it’s likely to soon ease off.

Its statement says rate increases affect the economy “with a lag” and that Australians on fixed-rate mortgages have yet to feel the full effect of the cumulative increases since May.

The bank’s assessment of the economy after the increases are over is bleak.

It says it expects GDP growth to slow to only 1.5% during 2023 and 2024, which is an even more dismal forecast than the International Monetary Fund’s, which has economic growth of just 1.6% this year, climbing to a historically-low 2.2% by 2026. The Conversation’s forecasters expect 1.7%, climbing to 2.5%.

The RBA’s forecast would mean income per person barely increases for years to come (although the unemployment rate would stay below 5%), a condition that before COVID was known as secular stagnation.

Read more:
Politics with Michelle Grattan: Treasurer Jim Chalmers answers critics of his ‘values-based capitalism’

This would mean the economic resources Australian governments needs to provide the services we’re likely to need (such as to get to net zero emissions, and to deal with climate change) are going to be harder to come by.

It’s what Treasurer Jim Chalmers intends to spend much of 2023 readying us for.

Later this month Chalmers will release a revamped tax expenditures statement, setting out the scope to wind back tax breaks, including those for profits made selling high-end family homes. That’s something Chalmers says he isn’t considering, but which the IMF has recommended.

And then later in the year, he will release the first intergenerational report to properly spell out the financial costs of climate change – right through to 2063.

2023 is going to be quite a year.

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

– ref. RBA warns of at least 2 more interest rate rises in coming months, as the economic outlook worsens – https://theconversation.com/rba-warns-of-at-least-2-more-interest-rate-rises-in-coming-months-as-the-economic-outlook-worsens-199272

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hannah Della Bosca, PhD Candidate and Research Assistant at Sydney Environment Institute, University of Sydney

While the days of overt climate denial are mostly over, there’s a distinct form of denial emerging in its stead. You may have experienced it and not even realised. It’s called implicatory denial, and it happens when you consciously recognise climate change as a serious threat without making significant changes to your everyday behaviour in response.

Much research has focused on how we intellectually distance ourselves from the unpleasant realities happening around us. What requires greater attention is how we may engage in climate denial by seeking out spaces of sensory comfort and using them to shield ourselves as the world unravels outside our window.

Denial, thought of in this way, is entirely sensible. My colleagues and I asked residents around the Western Sydney suburb of Penrith – famously the hottest place on Earth during the Black Summer of 2019-20 – about their experiences during heatwave conditions. Unsurprisingly, sensory denial is central to how they cope with extremes – primarily by using air conditioning.

Those without access to aircon resorted to wetting towels, or using fans and spray bottles. While these low-cost strategies are actually more sustainable than aircon, people don’t like them as much. Given the opportunity, we’re likely to engage in sensory climate denial as a way to insulate ourselves from experiences of climate change.

Why do our sense matter when it comes to climate denial?

We tend to think of climate denial as a delaying tactic used by fossil fuel advocates. This is not wrong, given climate denial was strategically created and fostered by politicians and coal, oil and gas companies with vested interests in stalling action and deflecting responsibility.

Researchers have historically linked climate denial to inadequate knowledge, sociopolitical biases or emotional defence. Other researchers have focused on beliefs, psychological barriers, and moral disengagement.

Read more:
Climate change hits low-income earners harder – and poor housing in hotter cities is a disastrous combination

But focusing on how and why we think overlooks the main way we actually respond to our environments: our bodies. The role of our senses and their influence on our everyday behaviour tends to be overlooked in social and political thought. Reckoning with climate change inaction demands we return to our senses. Here, we find climate denial is more than just a political tool.

Within our communities, it’s the way in which different segments of society are able to maintain a physical sense of normalcy and comfort, while others bear the brunt of climate disasters.

A heatwave in Western Sydney in 2016-17 reflects this clear divide, as colleagues and I found in earlier research.

People who lived in households without aircon were hit hard by the heat. It affected their bodies and emotions, making them fatigued, sometimes nauseous, anxious and stressed. It was hard for them to do anything other than swelter or seek out spaces of relief where possible. In contrast, people with aircon were far less affected, or even unbothered by the heat. They knew there was a heatwave, but it didn’t directly affect them.

One resident told us of trying to sleep without aircon:

If you only get maybe three or four hours sleep – and it’s not good sleep – … it’s like, “I can cope today.” (By) the third sleep, it’s like, “Please keep away from me” … And every day after that just gets worse and worse.

Another resident told us of the relief she felt at being able to leave her overheated house, taking her kids and staying at a friend’s house with both air conditioning and a pool. “It was like a holiday,” she said.

Both groups were being entirely rational in seeking relief from the overwhelming heat in whatever ways they could. Those without aircon longed for the relief it would bring.

For those with aircon, their main concern was the cost of running it. While this is a burden, the fact this was their main worry indicates aircon worked. Their relative wealth shielded them.

Why does this matter?

If we use technologies like aircon to avoid dealing with the root causes of climate change, we are in denial.

As the world heats up, demand for air conditioning has skyrocketed. The International Energy Agency has estimated that by 2050, up to two-thirds of the world’s households will have installed aircon, particularly in China, India and Indonesia.

As a privatised answer to a public problem, aircon reliance has been normalised to the point of invisibility. When we use our air conditioners to fend off a heatwave, we can overwhelm the power grid and trigger local blackouts. Worse, with today’s energy sources, our need for sensory comfort causes yet more emissions to be pumped into the atmosphere. On a street level, air conditioners make your house colder and the outside air warmer still.

This pattern of sensory comfort for wealthier people is systemically reinforced in for-profit housing developments, while lower-income rentals and public housing are legally and financially excluded. These residents are forced to rely instead on evacuation shelters or spending hours in airconditioned shopping centres.

This kind of denial, then, is tied to forms of privilege. To be able to literally shut out climate disruption and pretend everything is normal speaks to our universal desire to live in comfort and without pain. But as the climate warps, this is possible only for some.

If you had the opportunity, of course you would shut yourself and your loved ones away from the disruption, discomfort and danger of heatwaves, floods and bushfires.

The risk is we anaesthetise ourselves to what’s really going on. Inequality is rampant in Australia and worldwide, and people without the means to insulate themselves will suffer the most.

To tackle sensory climate denial means understanding that immunity to climate disruption is a temporary fantasy. As our ecosystems and climatic stability crumble, this kind of denial will inevitably vanish.

Read more:
High energy costs make vulnerable households reluctant to use air conditioning: study

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

– ref. The new climate denial? Using wealth to insulate yourself from discomfort and change – https://theconversation.com/the-new-climate-denial-using-wealth-to-insulate-yourself-from-discomfort-and-change-199101

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mark Quigley, Associate Professor of Earthquake Science, The University of Melbourne

A pair of huge earthquakes have struck in Turkey, leaving more than 3,000 people dead and unknown numbers injured or displaced.

The first quake, near Gaziantep close to the Syrian border, measured 7.8 in magnitude and was felt as far away as the UK. The second occurred nine hours later, on what appears to be an intersecting fault, registering a magnitude of 7.5.

Adding to the devastation, some 3,450 buildings have collapsed, according to the Turkish government. Many of the modern buildings have failed in a “pancake mode” of structural collapse.

Why did this happen? Was it simply the enormous magnitude and violence of the quake, or is the problem with the buildings?

Read more:
Turkey-Syria earthquake: a seismologist explains what just happened

Thousands of years of earthquakes

Earthquakes are common in Turkey, which sits in a very seismically active region where three tectonic plates constantly grind against one another beneath Earth’s surface. Historical records of earthquakes in the region go back at least 2,000 years, to a quake in 17 CE that levelled a dozen towns.

The East Anatolian Fault zone that hosted these earthquakes is at the boundary between the Arabian and Anatolian tectonic plates, which move past each other at approximately 6 to 10 mm per year. The elastic strain that accumulates in this plate boundary zone is released by intermittent earthquakes, which have occurred for millions of years. The recent earthquakes are thus not a surprise.

Despite this well-known seismic hazard, the region contains a lot of vulnerable infrastructure.

Read more:
Earthquakes don’t kill, our collapsing structures do. So how can we build them to stay up?

Over the past 2,000 years we have learnt a lot about how to construct buildings that can withstand the shaking from even severe earthquakes. However, in reality, there are many factors that influence building construction practices in this region and others worldwide.

Poor construction is a known problem

Many of the collapsed buildings appear to have been built from concrete without adequate seismic reinforcement. Seismic building codes in this region suggest these buildings should be able to sustain strong earthquakes (where the ground accelerates by 30% to 40% of the normal gravity) without incurring this type of complete failure.

The 7.8 and 7.5 earthquakes appear to have caused shaking in the range of 20 to 50% of gravity. A proportion of these buildings thus failed at shaking intensities lower than the “design code”.

There are well-known problems in Turkey and elsewhere with ensuring safe building construction and adherence to seismic building codes. Similar building collapses have been seen in past earthquakes in Turkey.

In 1999, a huge quake near Izmit saw some 17,000 people dead and as many as 20,000 buildings collapse.

After a quake in 2011 in which hundreds of people died, Turkey’s then prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, blamed shoddy construction for the high death toll, saying: “Municipalities, constructors and supervisors should now see that their negligence amounts to murder.”

Reconstruction

Even though Turkish authorities know many buildings are unsafe in earthquakes, it is still a difficult problem to solve. Many of the buildings are already built, and seismic retrofitting may be expensive or not considered a priority compared to other socio-economic challenges.

However, reconstruction after the quake may present an opportunity to rebuild more safely. In 2019, Turkey adopted new regulations to ensure buildings are better equipped to handle shaking.

While the new rules are welcome, it remains to be seen whether they will lead to genuine improvements in building quality.

In addition to substantive loss of life and infrastructure damage, both earthquakes are likely to have caused a myriad of environmental effects, such as ruptured ground surfaces, liquified soil, and landslides. These effects may render many areas unsafe to rebuild on – so reconstruction efforts should also include planning decisions about what can be built where, to lower future risks.

For now, aftershocks continue to shake the region, and search and rescue efforts continue. Once the dust settles, reconstruction will begin – but will we see stronger buildings, able to withstand the next quake, or more of the same?

Read more:
Earthquake in Turkey and Syria: how satellites can help rescue efforts

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

– ref. Earthquake footage shows Turkey’s buildings collapsing like pancakes. An expert explains why – https://theconversation.com/earthquake-footage-shows-turkeys-buildings-collapsing-like-pancakes-an-expert-explains-why-199389

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Robin Gauld, Pro-Vice-Chancellor and Dean, University of Otago

As New Zealand’s COVID cases rose in 2021, we were warned the virus would put significant pressure on our health system. But, in reality, New Zealand’s medical system has been struggling for a long time.

Over and over again, the media have put the spotlight on the struggling health-care system and the impact these issues have on individual patients and their families as well as, of course, staff.

In some situations, waiting list delays, stretched services and overworked staff have resulted in serious outcomes, including death. For New Zealanders who are missing out on treatment, or facing years-long delays, the insufficient care can cause significant stress and inhibit their ability to contribute to our economy and society.

For others, our struggling public health system can take a financial toll, by forcing people to gather all the money they can to pursue treatment in the private sector.

The long wait

Recently, the media focus has turned to New Zealand’s worsening access to non-urgent surgery.

As of last October, 30,000 people were waiting longer than four months for surgery, up from 27,500 in May when the Planned Care Taskforce was formed to cut national surgical waiting times.

At the same time, a further 38,000 New Zealanders had been waiting longer than the four-month target for being seen by a specialist for an initial assessment, up from 35,000 in May.

On the upside, there had been a reduction from 5,500 to 3,500 in those waiting over a year for surgery.

The enduring postcode lottery

The data highlighted major differences in access and care by region – the so-called “postcode lottery”.

The situation is unacceptable and was never anticipated or expected in a country with universal access as a fundamental guiding principle for health care. This principle means everyone should be treated in a timely manner without any barrier to or inequality in access.

These rising waiting lists, lengthy emergency department waiting times and uneven access can’t be blamed on COVID-19 alone. The pandemic has simply added to the pressures and revealed more starkly the multiple cracks in our health system.

A history of pressures

The issues across our health system are long-standing and attempts over the past three decades to resolve the fundamental issues have had mixed results.

In the early 1990s, the government set up the Committee on Core Health Services. The goal of the committee was to ensure patients with non-urgent needs were treated in order of priority. Assessment involved scoring patients based on need. The committee also aimed to eradicate the postcode lottery.

Read more:
NZ’s medical licensing system is still a major hurdle for desperately needed foreign-trained doctors

Since then, subsequent governments have made significant changes to the health system, including introducing district health boards (DHBs) in 2001 and then the dismantling of these boards with the creation of Te Whatu Ora in 2022.

While there have been periodic improvements to the system with these changes, the basic problems recently highlighted by the media have persisted thanks to a constant and reactive game of catch-up.

Underlying problems

To be clear, the professionals providing care in New Zealand are outstanding and superbly trained. They work within a context, however, that persistently lets them down and is deeply stressful for all.

The basic issue is lack of long-range planning or solid investment in health care, affecting the entire public health-care system and all who rely on it.

Planning is usually reactive rather than establishing a solid foundation for the future.

Investments in hospitals and workforce are largely within a short-term framing, dictated by funding availability and yesterday’s needs. This means facilities are often inadequate and workforce shortages are ongoing. Hospital staff have been regularly asked to reduce expenditure to prevent budget blowouts.

It is also no secret that New Zealand is historically heavily reliant on foreign-born-and-trained health professionals.

There is no specialised long-range health planning group working in government; we badly need one, with deep expertise and connections to global networks.

System-wide solutions

There is also a historic lack of focus on system-wide solutions. We should be looking at how we use all resources in the health system – public and private – to collectively deliver on needs.

Moving to a system-wide approach would have wide-ranging implications, from how we fund health care through to health professional training.

This could mean lifting the lid on health professional regulation and allowing different professionals to take on work that is currently limited to specialists, for example.

Read more:
ACC’s policy of not covering birth injuries is one more sign the system is overdue for reform

General practice also needs strengthening within the health system, along with hospitalists – specialists trained in hospital general practice.

Finally, there is a pressing need to embrace “operational excellence”, a set of practices aimed at systematically improving the quality and organisation of services. If anything, New Zealand’s health system and services currently exhibit the direct opposite of operational excellence.

The health reforms under way, led by Te Whatu Ora, offer the opportunity to address our health-care system’s key weaknesses by embracing long-range planning and operational excellence. Let’s hope we achieve this for the sake of our patients, health professionals and future generations.

Robin Gauld receives funding from the Health Research Council of New Zealand.

– ref. NZ’s health system has been under pressure for decades. Reforms need to think big and long-term to be effective – https://theconversation.com/nzs-health-system-has-been-under-pressure-for-decades-reforms-need-to-think-big-and-long-term-to-be-effective-198495

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kalinda Griffiths, Scientia lecturer, UNSW Sydney

Cancer figures provide stark evidence of the gap between the health of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and non-Indigenous people in Australia. The difference is confronting – and it’s increasing over time.

Cancer is the leading broad cause of death for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, accounting for 3,612 deaths (23% of deaths). Indigenous Australians are 14% more likely to be diagnosed with cancer. They are 20% less likely to survive at least five years beyond diagnosis.

While the likelihood of dying from cancer in the general population declined by 10% from 2010 to 2019, it increased by 12% for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

These figures highlight major challenges for the federal government’s stated aim to close the life expectancy gap in a generation. But data will also be critical to meeting this goal.

Accurate and relevant data

There continues to be limited visibility in the needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with cancer.

The recent World Cancer Day, with its theme to “Close the care gap”, comes at a pivotal moment in our nation’s history, with momentum building towards a Voice to Parliament.

Makarrata – treaty or agreement-making – has the potential to have a profound and positive impact on the health and healing of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. At both the federal and state levels, the dialogue, yarning and truth-telling arising from this process acknowledges the history and trauma of dispossession, and its impact on generations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

Much of this discussion is embedded in the need for constitutional recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ unique and enduring cultures, and better supporting leadership in their own affairs.

Viewing these aspirations through the prism of cancer care reveals a complex array of barriers to recognition and leadership. Systemic racism and limitations in appropriate, culturally safe health-care services continue to negatively impact Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ experiences and outcomes.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people experience limited access to health services within Western systems, as well as discrimination within those systems. This results in a lack of trust when dealing with governments and service providers.

Part of the solution will be gaining a more accurate picture of cancer outcomes. While statistics tell us the proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with cancer who die is increasing, the reality is likely far worse. Research shows Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cancer reporting is underestimated. One reason is the lack of identification of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in official health data.

A New South Wales study found 16% of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people were not reported on official hospital admissions data. There is a range of reasons for this, including whether or not services ask the required Standard Indigenous Question and the propensity or willingness for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to identify in the services they attend.

There have been a range of efforts to improve Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander identification within the data, including linking multiple official data sources. But this is still yet to be appropriately implemented by governments.

Read more:
The first Indigenous COVID death reminds us of the outsized risk NSW communities face

Tracking everyone’s cancer experiences

Appropriate measures that reflect the experiences and needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with cancer are desperately needed.

There have been some promising developments in this area, including the What Matters 2 Adults study, which identifies factors important to the wellbeing of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. There’s also been work to measure the cancer care experiences of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. But these tools are not used routinely in health-care services, which limits culturally relevant assessment of patients to improve their care.

Bridging the care gap requires health and cancer care services to provide culturally competent and safe health-care systems.

There have been some notable developments since the first review into Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cancer research and reporting in 2003. These include Cancer Council Australia convening the first ever round table on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cancer in 2004, followed by the first national round table on Priorities for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cancer Research in 2010.

The latter brought together leading experts, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cancer survivors and community members, and representatives from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander-controlled organisations.

At the policy level, the Optimal Care Pathways for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders was released in 2018 along with an implementation plan in 2020.

The ongoing development of the Australian Cancer Plan by Cancer Australia is informed by the Leadership Group on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cancer Control. The National Aboriginal Community Controlled Organisation is also developing a national cancer plan, and there are state and territory plans in development to better support the community-controlled sector.

Read more:
Aboriginal people near the Ranger uranium mine suffered more stillbirths and cancer. We don’t know why

Embedding equity

If we are going to change the trend and close the cancer care gap, we need to embed equity as a core element within health systems and services. This will ensure appropriate resources are allocated to identify Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in the data, as well as developing measures important to their cancer care.

We need to work to better understand and eliminate the barriers and challenges Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people face. We can do this through supporting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voices and leadership in research, education and health.

Read more:
Explainer: what are cancer clusters?

Kalinda Griffiths receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council and the Australian Research Council. She is also Thinker in Residence at the Australian Health Promotion Association. She is Research and Education Lead, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health at the Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre Alliance.

– ref. The cancer gap between First Nations and non-Indigenous people is widening – but better data could help – https://theconversation.com/the-cancer-gap-between-first-nations-and-non-indigenous-people-is-widening-but-better-data-could-help-199186

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

Alcohol bans are being reimposed on Northern Territory Indigenous communities, as the federal and territory governments grapple with intractable problems in Alice Springs and elsewhere in the NT.

The situation in Alice Springs and the surrounding communities has come into the national news at the same time as debate ramps up about this year’s referendum for an Indigenous Voice to Parliament.

In this podcast, Michelle talks with Malarndirri McCarthy, Labor senator for the Northern Territory and Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians. McCarthy is a former journalist and also served in the territory parliament, including as minister for children and families.

McCarthy argues for the bans, which the NT government previously described as “race-based”. “What we’ve witnessed over the last few weeks in particular are scenes that show us that the urgency that’s required does need a circuit breaker […] there is no doubt we do have issues with alcohol across the Northern Territory, but I’m also seeing it on our borders as well with Western Australia and also with Queensland.

“There’s a deeper issue here about what is the future for these Australians who require jobs, who require hope for what the future looks like, but also require a safe place for their children and families to grow up in.”

Asked her perspective, as a former minister for children, on the dilemma involved in deciding whether and when to remove Indigenous children at risk, McCarthy says: “One of the things I worked very closely on when I had the portfolio in the Northern Territory government as families minister was the absolute importance of the kinship structure. That when a child is in a dire situation with their mother, with their father, that they have other options within their family network […] It’s something I do. I look after three children in a very kinship environment. You know, an eight year old and twins who are nine.

“Of course, if a child is at risk, whatever that risk, they must be removed to be safe.”

Is this the right time for a referendum and how confident is she about its passing? “This is the right time, 2023, to embark on this journey. I know it’s going to be tough. It’s already started out that way […] but I do believe that in the goodness of our country. I have this deep abiding optimism that no matter how tough it gets, you know, I do essentially believe Australians are good people at heart and that we will get to the other side of this.”

“Treaty” was a theme of the recent Invasion Day protests. How quickly would the government pursue a treaty after it passed the Voice? “We’ve already begun conversations around a Makarrata Commission and what that may possibly look like, we’ve been engaging with state and territory ministers or premiers and chief ministers about the work they’re doing towards treaty in their respective jurisdictions.”

If the referendum succeeds, there has been a suggestion the Voice might not be operating until 2025. Pressed on the timetable McCarthy is blunt. “Well, it’s been a long time over the last ten years for this process, and I think people have been very patient and very particular about their research and about the work that they’ve done. I would think that 2025 would be better than 2035.”

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.

– ref. Politics with Michelle Grattan: Senator Malarndirri McCarthy on Alice Springs and the Voice. – https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-senator-malarndirri-mccarthy-on-alice-springs-and-the-voice-199306

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By C Raina MacIntyre, Professor of Global Biosecurity, NHMRC Principal Research Fellow, Head, Biosecurity Program, Kirby Institute, UNSW Sydney

The question of whether and to what extent face masks work to prevent respiratory infections such as COVID and influenza has split the scientific community for decades.

Although there is strong evidence face masks significantly reduce transmission of such infections both in health-care settings and in the community, some experts do not agree.

An updated Cochrane Review published last week is the latest to suggest face masks don’t work in the community.

However there are problems with the review’s methodology and its underpinning assumptions about transmission.

The Cochrane Review combined randomised controlled trials (RCTs) using meta-analysis. RTCs test an intervention in one group and compare it with a “control” group that doesn’t receive the intervention or receives a different intervention. A meta-analysis pools the results of multiple studies.

This approach assumes (a) RCTs are the “best” evidence and (b) combining results from multiple RCTs will give you an average “effect size”.

But RCTs are only the undisputed gold standard for certain kinds of questions. For other questions, a mix of study designs is better. And RCTs should be combined in a meta-analysis only if they are all addressing the same research question in the same way.

Here are some reasons why the conclusions of this Cochrane Review are misleading.

It didn’t consider how COVID spreads and how masks work

COVID, along with influenza and many other respiratory diseases, is transmitted primarily through the air.

Respirators (such as N95s) are designed and regulated to prevent airborne infections by fitting closely to the face to prevent air leakage and by filtering out 95% or more of potential infectious particles.

Read more:
High-filtration masks only work when they fit – so we created a new way to test if they do

In contrast, surgical masks are designed to prevent splatter of fluid on the face and are loose-fitting, causing unfiltered air to leak in through the gaps around the mask. The filtration of a surgical mask is not regulated.

In other words, respirators are designed for respiratory protection and cloth and surgical masks are not.

The review starts with an assumption that masks provide respiratory protection, which is flawed. An understanding of these differences should inform both studies and reviews of those studies.

The studies addressed quite different questions

A common mistake in meta-analysis is to combine apples and oranges. If apples work but oranges don’t, combining all studies in a single average figure may lead to the conclusion that apples do not work.

This Cochrane Review combined RCTs where face masks or respirators were worn part of the time (for example, when caring for patients with known COVID or influenza: “occasional” or “targeted” use) with RCTs where they were worn at all times (“continuous use”).

Because both SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses are airborne, an unmasked person could be infected anywhere in the building and even after an infectious patient has left the room, especially since some people have no symptoms while contagious.

Most RCTs of masks and N95s included in the review have not had a control arm – therefore finding no difference could indicate equal efficacy or equal inefficacy.

Studies examining wearing a surgical mask or respirator (such as an N95) only when in contact with sick people or when doing a high-risk procedure (occasional use) have generally shown that, when worn in this way, there is no difference.

An RCT comparing occasional versus continuous use of respirators in health care workers showed N95 respirators and surgical masks were equally ineffective when only worn occasionally by hospital workers. They had to wear them all the time at work to be protected.

We also combined only apples and apples in a meta-analysis of two RCTs conducted in exactly the same way and measuring the same interventions and outcomes. We found N95 respirators provide significant protection against respiratory infections when surgical masks did not, even against infections assumed to be “droplet spread”.

Most trials addressed only half the question

Face masks and respirators work in two ways: they protect the wearer from becoming infected and they prevent an infected wearer from spreading their germs to other people.

Most RCTs in this Cochrane Review looked only at the former scenario, not the latter. In other words, the researchers had asked people to wear masks and then tested to see if those people became infected.

Read more:
As viral infections skyrocket, masks are still a tried-and-true way to help keep yourself and others safe

A previous systematic review found face masks worn by sick people during an influenza epidemic reduced the risk of them transmitting the infection to family members or other carers. Preventing an infection in one person also prevents onward transmission to others within a closed setting, which means such RCTs should use a special method called “cluster randomisation” to account for this.

Data from a RCT of N95 respirator use by health workers showed even their unmasked colleagues were protected. Yet some of the trials included in the review did not use cluster randomisation.

The new paper combined health and community settings

This is another apples-plus-oranges issue. Different settings have widely differing risks of transmission, since airborne particles build up when sick patients are exhaling the virus in underventilated, crowded settings especially if many infected people are present (such as in a hospital).

A genuine protective effect of masks or respirators shown in a RCT in a high-risk setting will be obscured if that trial is combined in a meta-analysis with several other RCTs that were conducted in low-risk settings.

A large RCT in the community in Bangladesh found face masks reduced the risk of infection by 11% overall and 35% in people over 60 years. In contrast, in hospitals, N95 reduce risk by 67% against bacterial infections and 54% against viral infections.

Viruses like influenza also vary substantially from year to year – some years there is very little influenza, and if a RCT is conducted during such a year, it will not find enough infections to show a difference. The review failed to account for such seasonal effects.

But did they actually wear the mask?

The authors of the Cochrane Review acknowledged compliance with masking advice was poor in most studies. In the real world, we can’t force people to follow medical advice, so RCTs should be analysed on an “intention to treat” basis.

For example, people who are prescribed the active drug but who choose not to take it should not be shifted to the placebo group for the analysis. But if in a study of masking, most people don’t actually wear them, you can’t conclude that masks don’t work when the study shows no difference between the groups. You can only conclude that the mask advice didn’t work in this study.

There is a great deal of psychological evidence on why people do or don’t choose to comply with advice to mask and how to improve uptake. The science of masking needs to separate the impact of the mask itself from the impact of the advice to mask.

Mask-wearing goes up substantially to over 70% if there is an actual mandate in place.

It didn’t include other types of research

A comprehensive review of the evidence would also include other types of study besides RCTs. For example, a large systematic review of 172 various study designs, which included 25,697 patients with SARS-CoV-2, SARS, or MERS, concluded masks were effective in preventing transmission of respiratory viruses.

Well-designed real-world studies during the pandemic showed any mask reduces the risk of COVID transmission by 50–80%, with the highest protection offered by N95 respirators.

Read more:
Which mask works best? We filmed people coughing and sneezing to find out

Many lab-based studies have shown respirators are superior to masks at preventing airborne respiratory infections and the incremental superiority from a single to two layered cloth mask to a three-layered surgical mask in blocking respiratory aerosols.

Yes, masks reduce the spread of COVID

There is strong and consistent evidence for the effectiveness of masks and (even more so) respirators in protecting against respiratory infections. Masks are an important protection against serious infections.

Current COVID vaccines protect against death and hospitalisation, but do not prevent infection well due to waning vaccine immunity and substantial immune escape from new variants.

A systematic review is only as good as the rigour it employs in combining similar studies of similar interventions, with similar measurement of outcomes. When very different studies of different interventions are combined, the results are not informative.

C Raina MacIntyre receives funding from mask manufacturer Detmold for testing of their masks and is on an advisory board for mask manufacturer Ascend. She receives funding from Sanofi for investigator-driven influenza research, and from NHMRC and MRFF. She has been an expert advisor for Ontario Nurses Association (ONA) In the matter of a proceeding under the Labour Relations Act, 1995 between ONA and Hamilton Health Sciences Corporation.

Abrar Ahmad Chughtai had testing of filtration of masks by 3M for his PhD. 3M products were not used in his research. He also has worked with Paftec on research in respirators (no funding was involved).

Dr Fisman has served as an expert witness for the Ontario Nurses Association and the Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario in legal challenges related to safer working conditions in healthcare and schools. Dr. Fisman has served on advisory boards for Pfizer, Astrazeneca, Merck, Seqirus and Sanofi vaccines against SARS-CoV-2, influenza, and S. pneumoniae. He holds current funding from the Canadian Institutes for Health Research and Health Canada.

Trish Greenhalgh receives funding from UK National Institute for Health and Care Research and the NIHR School for Primary Care Research. She is affiliated with University of Oxford and University of Oslo. She has served as an unpaid adviser tot he philanthropic fund BALVI and is a member of Independent SAGE.

– ref. Yes, masks reduce the risk of spreading COVID, despite a review saying they don’t – https://theconversation.com/yes-masks-reduce-the-risk-of-spreading-covid-despite-a-review-saying-they-dont-198992

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ian Mackinnon, Professor and Director, Centre for Clean Energy Technologies and Practices, Queensland University of Technology

For most of us, transmitting power is an invisible part of modern life. You flick the switch and the light goes on.

But the way we transport electricity is vital. For us to quit fossil fuels, we will need a better grid, connecting renewable energy in the regions with cities.

Electricity grids are big, complex systems. Building new high-voltage transmission lines often spurs backlash from communities worried about the visual impact of the towers. And our 20th century grid loses around 10% of the power generated as heat.

One solution? Use superconducting cables for key sections of the grid. A single 17-centimetre cable can carry the entire output of several nuclear plants. Cities and regions around the world have done this to cut emissions, increase efficiency, protect key infrastructure against disasters and run powerlines underground. As Australia prepares to modernise its grid, it should follow suit. It’s a once-in-a-generation opportunity.

What’s wrong with our tried-and-true technology?

Plenty.

The main advantage of high voltage transmission lines is they’re relatively cheap.

But cheap to build comes with hidden costs later. A survey of 140 countries found the electricity currently wasted in transmission accounts for a staggering half-billion tonnes of carbon dioxide – each year.

These unnecessary emissions are higher than the exhaust from all the world’s trucks, or from all the methane burned off at oil rigs.

Inefficient power transmission also means countries have to build extra power plants to compensate for losses on the grid.

Labor has pledged A$20 billion to make the grid ready for clean energy. This includes an extra 10,000 kilometres of transmission lines. But what type of lines? At present, the plans are for the conventional high voltage overhead cables you see dotting the countryside.

System planning by Australia’s energy market operator shows many grid-modernising projects will use last century’s technologies, the conventional high voltage overhead cables. If these plans proceed without considering superconductors, it will be a huge missed opportunity.

How could superconducting cables help?

Superconduction is where electrons can flow without resistance or loss. Built into power cables, it holds out the promise of lossless electricity transfer, over both long and short distances. That’s important, given Australia’s remarkable wind and solar resources are often located far from energy users in the cities.

High voltage superconducting cables would allow us to deliver power with minimal losses from heat or electrical resistance and with footprints at least 100 times smaller than a conventional copper cable for the same power output.

And they are far more resilient to disasters and extreme weather, as they are located underground.

Read more:
Explainer: what is a superconductor?

Even more important, a typical superconducting cable can deliver the same or greater power at a much lower voltage than a conventional transmission cable. That means the space needed for transformers and grid connections falls from the size of a large gym to only a double garage.

Bringing these technologies into our power grid offers social, environmental, commercial and efficiency dividends.

Unfortunately, while superconductors are commonplace in Australia’s medical community (where they are routinely used in MRI machines and diagnostic instruments) they have not yet found their home in our power sector.

One reason is that superconductors must be cooled to work. But rapid progress in cryogenics means you no longer have to lower their temperature almost to absolute zero (-273℃). Modern “high temperature” superconductors only need to be cooled to -200℃, which can be done with liquid nitrogen – a cheap, readily available substance.

Overseas, however, they are proving themselves daily. Perhaps the most well-known example to date is in Germany’s city of Essen. In 2014, engineers installed a 10 kilovolt (kV) superconducting cable in the dense city centre. Even though it was only one kilometre long, it avoided the higher cost of building a third substation in an area where there was very limited space for infrastructure. Essen’s cable is unobtrusive in a metre-wide easement and only 70cm below ground.

Superconducting cables can be laid underground with a minimal footprint and cost-effectively. They need vastly less land.

A conventional high voltage overhead cable requires an easement of about 130 metres wide, with pylons up to 80 metres high to allow for safety. By contrast, an underground superconducting cable would take up an easement of six metres wide, and up to 2 metres deep.

Read more:
The national electricity market is a failed 1990s experiment. It’s time the grid returned to public hands

This has another benefit: overcoming community scepticism. At present, many locals are concerned about the vulnerability of high voltage overhead cables in bushfire-prone and environmentally sensitive regions, as well as the visual impact of the large towers and lines. Communities and farmers in some regions are vocally against plans for new 85-metre high towers and power lines running through or near their land.

Climate extremes, unprecedented windstorms, excessive rainfall and lightning strikes can disrupt power supply networks, as the Victorian town of Moorabool discovered in 2021.

What about cost? This is hard to pin down, as it depends on the scale, nature and complexity of the task. But consider this – the Essen cable cost around $20m in 2014. Replacing the six 500kV towers destroyed by windstorms near Moorabool in January 2020 cost $26 million.

While superconducting cables will cost more up front, you save by avoiding large easements, requiring fewer substations (as the power is at a lower voltage), and streamlining approvals.

Where would superconductors have most effect?

Queensland. The sunshine state is planning four new high-voltage transmission projects, to be built by the mid-2030s. The goal is to link clean energy production in the north of the state with the population centres of the south.

Right now, there are major congestion issues between southern and central Queensland. Strategically locating superconducting cables here would be the best location, serving to future-proof infrastructure, reduce emissions and avoid power loss.

Read more:
A clean energy grid means 10,000km of new transmission lines. They can only be built with community backing

Ian Donald Richard Mackinnon receives funding from the Australian Renewable Energy Agency and serves on the Queensland Government Hydrogen Task Force.

Richard Taylor receives funding from the DMTC and is the director of a superconductor startup company.

– ref. A tenth of all electricity is lost in the grid. Superconducting cables can help – https://theconversation.com/a-tenth-of-all-electricity-is-lost-in-the-grid-superconducting-cables-can-help-199001

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Munro, Professor, Faculty of Education and Arts, Australian Catholic University

Many students are returning to school this year face a renewed focus on grammar. Just before Christmas, the NSW curriculum was overhauled to include the “explicit teaching of grammar, sentence structure and punctuation in high school”.

This comes amid concerns about literacy levels, particularly among teenage boys. Last month, a major Productivity Commission report on schools also criticised nationwide literacy (and numeracy) standards.

With so many online tools now available to help us write, why is grammar still important?

What is grammar?

Grammar is the backbone of any language. We use the rules of grammar to structure words into sentences and sentences into longer speech and writing others can understand us.

Examples of grammatical rules in English are locating an adjective before the noun to which it refers, and using “who” to refer to previously-mentioned human subjects in a sentence.

There is no universal system of grammar rules. For example, in French, adjectives usually follow the noun to which they refer, and it forms the future tense differently from English. Grammar rules are only useful when all users of the language know how to use them.

In English you can also express the one idea in several different ways. Suppose you want to tell someone about an event. You could say “Bill pushed Tom”, “Tom was pushed by Bill”, “It was Bill who pushed Tom”, or “Bill pushed Tom, didn’t he?” These examples differ in the grammatical rules they use.

The actual grammatical rules we use at any time depend on the social context. How we talk about an idea with colleagues may differ from how we talk about the same idea at home. We also write and speak in different ways.

Does it matter?

Many older people will recall being explicitly taught grammar at school. But this fell out of fashion because it was judged to be relatively ineffective in enhancing the use of grammar in spoken or written communication.

You may believe that with AI tools – such as writing assistant Grammarly – and computers, we don’t need to learn grammar.

But learning grammar is as important as it always was. To use grammar, the rules need to be in our brains, not in our hands. Devices can assist our brains but not replace them.

Without grammar, it is hard to communicate effectively. We might, for example, recognise individual words in what someone says but we would be less able to understand the links between them.

Research suggests children’s grammar predicts their reading comprehension later. For example, grammatical knowledge at four years of age predicts reading comprehension two years later. It also affects children’s social competence, self-confidence and identity, because it helps them see that they can communicate meaningfully and get positive feedback for what they say.

How do children learn it?

We can learn grammar both by immersion and by explicit teaching, that is, simply by experiencing its use in specific situations and by specific instruction.

Young children learn grammatical knowledge gradually. Most children begin to say and understand strings of two and three words around the age of two, without specific teaching. They learn it by being exposed to language in their everyday environment.

The speech they hear is usually accompanied by meaningful actions in particular events. For example, they hear “more milk?” when milk is being offered. The actions help them learn how to fit the language to the meaning or function.

What they say and understand shows they can use grammatical rules or patterns. However, they are usually unable to say precisely what these rules are.

Some linguists believe immersion works because the human brain has an innate capacity to learn language.

Gradually children learn more complex grammatical structures. Older children and adults may not become aware of the explicit rules of grammar – and this isn’t necessary to use them.

Read more:
AI is changing scientists’ understanding of language learning – and raising questions about an innate grammar

How can you teach it?

Many readers may have been taught grammar by analysing random sentences into their component parts. At school, you may have had to identify the nouns or adverbs and to arrange them accordingly.

But this approach had little impact on literacy or oral language development.

There are lots of different ways to teach grammar but effective teaching today uses the following techniques:

• it takes account of the grammatical patterns and rules the child already uses

• it introduces grammatical rules in specific contexts or events that are meaningful for the child. If you are teaching the passive voice, and using the example of the “cat chased the dog” show a picture of a picture of where a cat chases a dog

• acting out sentences using a new rule as the first step in learning the new rule

• arranging a set of words into sentence using the new rule

• helping the student use the new rule in their everyday speech and writing to show they understand it.

The aim is to teach both the rules and to help students use them in their everyday communication.

If you want to help your child with grammar, talk to your child’s teacher. They can direct you to most appropriate materials (there are plenty online) that are relevant to what your child already knows and work with what is being done at school.

Read more:
4 ways to teach you’re (sic) kids about grammar so they actually care

John Munro. has in the past been a chief investigator on ARC-funded projects

– ref. Learning grammar is just as important as it always was but the way we teach it has changed – https://theconversation.com/learning-grammar-is-just-as-important-as-it-always-was-but-the-way-we-teach-it-has-changed-196285

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Debra Dudek, Associate professor, School of Arts and Humanities, Edith Cowan University

Life is full of surprises – some pleasant and some painful – but there can be no surprises without expectations. We expect the sun to come up every morning. We expect our dog to bark every time someone comes to the door. We expect to be able to leave the house without risk of a viral infection.

People tell and consume stories to understand themselves and the world in which we live. We seek stories that provide a safe place to experience fearful situations and to think about how we might respond if we were in the place of the characters.

M. Night Shymalan’s new movie Knock at the Cabin, for instance, presents a situation in which a set of parents are given a choice to save their family or to save the world. They must sacrifice one member of their family, so all humanity can survive.

No one expects to have to make this type of choice. The knock at their cabin door is not a pleasant surprise.

With Knock at the Cabin opening in Australian cinemas this week, now is a good time to reflect on some of the best narrative twists in television and film.

The ‘well-made surprise’

In her book Elements of Surprise: Our Mental Limits and the Satisfactions of Plot, cognitive scientist Vera Tobin argues that surprises in stories tell us about our biases and mental shortcuts. In other words, stories provide important clues about the way people think.

In her book, Tobin analyses what she calls the well-made surprise:

A well-made surprise plot is one that aims to produce a flash reinterpretation of events together with the feeling that the evidence for this interpretation was there all along – the surprise should be not merely unexpected but also revelatory.

Tobin suggests five interlocking ways that stories create surprise: frame shifts, the managed reveal, finessing information, burying information, and the pleasure of the text.

Some famous twists are discussed/ spoiled in this article.

The frame shift and Ned Stark’s head

A frame shift is when stories invite viewers to form an expectation about certain information, and then reveal a different frame as the correct one.

Michael Schur’s hilarious and smart series The Good Place relies on a frame shift for its famous initial narrative twist, but Game of Thrones offers up one of the most surprising televisual frame shifts.

The Red Wedding episode and the return of Jon Snow were somewhat surprising, but the tone of the series was set the moment Ned Stark was beheaded in the penultimate episode of the first season. The story set up Ned to be the hero of the series, and with the character played by the well-known actor Sean Bean, the expectation was that he would be the main character of the series. When his head hit the ground, the frame shifted. Now no characters were safe.

The managed reveal and Buffy the Vampire Slayer

The managed reveal is how stories present revelations in a way that invites audiences to accept new information as a more convincing interpretation of the events in the story than the one they had before.

The discovery in The Empire Strikes Back that Darth Vader is Luke Skywalker’s father is one of the great managed reveals. One of my favourites, however, is the heartbreaking reveal in Buffy the Vampire Slayer that Angel has lost his soul after experiencing a moment of true happiness the first time he has sex with Buffy.

His literal manifestation into a creature without a soul embodies a metaphor for everyone who experiences the unpleasant surprise of waking up one morning to find their partner transformed into someone painfully unrecognisable.

Finessing information and Poker Face

Finessing information is how stories provide seemingly false information in a way that a truer account may be revealed later.

The new television series Poker Face, starring Natasha Lyonne and created by Rian Johnson of Knives Out fame, may pay tribute to Colombo, but its finessed uncovering of clues provides multiple pleasurable twists in each episode.

Although audiences know who the killer is from the beginning of the episode, the process by which Lyonne’s Charlie Cale uncovers the clues and solves the murder takes the audience on twists and turns that include new and surprising information along the way.

Burying information and The Sixth Sense

Burying information is when stories hide information that in retrospect has been there all along. Tobin analyses The Sixth Sense most fully in her section on frame shifts – but, as she states, the film buries information too.

It is also hard to go past David Fincher’s Fight Club and Bryan Singer’s The Usual Suspects for films that bury information, which upon multiple viewings provide hints that show how the surprise twist ending has been embedded into the story.

In the final ten minutes, both films invite audiences to unravel clues about the identity of the main character.

In Fight Club, when Edward Norton’s character shoots himself in the face, Brad Pitt’s Tyler Durden disappears from the story, revealing he was an imaginary alter ego.

In The Usual Suspects, Kevin Spacey’s Verbal Kent misleads the police in a manner similar to how the film tricks the audience. As Sergeant Jeff Rabin says [about his messy desk] just before the clues are revealed, “It all makes sense when you look at it right. You gotta like stand back from it, you know?”

The pleasures of the text and Heartstopper

Pleasures of the text, or encouraging emotional involvement, is the immersive and emotional conditions of experiencing stories.

In my current research on film and TV adaptations, I point to Netflix’s Heartstopper as a story that makes emotions visible through the use of animated iconic doodles – such as leaves, hearts, and stars – from the graphic novels upon which the TV series is based. These animations float and flutter across the screen to highlight peak emotional moments of the story and provide audiences with visual surprises that twist at the heartstrings.

At the other end of the emotional spectrum is John Krasinki’s A Quiet Place. With its use of silence, the film immerses audiences into the tension of the story world, in which the smallest sound may mean death.

Read more:
Heartstopper depicts queer joy – here’s why that can bring about complicated feelings for those in the LGBTIQ community

Whether it is a knock at a cabin door, a frame shift from heaven to hell, or a boyfriend who turns evil, surprises in life and narrative twists in stories invite us to reconsider what we think we know.

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

– ref. What’s behind the door? The best narrative twists in television and film, and why we love them – https://theconversation.com/whats-behind-the-door-the-best-narrative-twists-in-television-and-film-and-why-we-love-them-198998

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Chris Greening, Professor, Microbiology, Monash University

There are more than a billion bacteria in just one litre of seawater. How do all of these organisms find the energy and nutrients they need to survive?

In the nutrient-rich waters near the surface of the ocean, the primary energy source is sunlight, which drives photosynthesis, the transformation of light energy into chemical energy. In much of the open ocean, however, a lack of nutrients limits photosynthesis, and in the deep ocean it ceases altogether as there is no sunlight.

Despite this, microbes have found a way to live throughout the vast and dark ocean. How do they do it?

As we report in Nature Microbiology, many ocean bacteria in fact gain energy from two dissolved gases, hydrogen and carbon monoxide, in a process called chemosynthesis. This hidden but ancient process helps maintain the diversity and productivity of our oceans.

When the lights go out, chemosynthesis prevails

We aimed to identify the preferred energy sources of microbes in the world’s oceans.

Humans and other animals depend on eating organic foods, while plants rely on photosynthesis. In contrast, microbes use a myriad of energy sources: solar, organic, and inorganic.

Many eat high-energy gases such as hydrogen and even carbon monoxide, which is poisonous to us. They do so by using special enzymes called hydrogenases and carbon monoxide dehydrogenases.

À lire aussi :
Antarctic bacteria live on air and make their own water using hydrogen as fuel

The world’s oceans contain quite a lot of dissolved hydrogen and carbon monoxide due to various biological and geological processes. Given this, we predicted these gases would be key energy sources for oceanic microbes.

During our five-year study, we surveyed the capabilities and activities of the microbes present in the world’s oceans. We sampled seawater from diverse sites, spanning tropical islands to subantarctic waters. Public data from the global Tara Oceans study were also analysed.

Using a technique called metagenomic sequencing, we discovered the genetic blueprints of all the microbes in our ocean samples. We also took chemical measurements during the expeditions, analysed bacterial cultures, and used mathematical modelling to understand how the bacteria were getting their energy.

In all the samples we analysed, microbes were using enzymes to gain energy from hydrogen and carbon monoxide. As we expected, photosynthesis was the main source of energy in coastal surface waters – but gas-eating microbes grew more common further away from shore and in the deeper ocean.

In nutrient-poor waters, chemosynthesis may be the main strategy for obtaining energy.

Eight distantly related groups, or phyla, of bacteria made the enzymes to use hydrogen and carbon monoxide. Clearly chemosynthesis is a far more widespread strategy in the oceans than previously thought!

Hydrogen and carbon monoxide aren’t the only chemical energy sources supporting ocean bacteria. Building on previous work by others, we found ammonia, sulfide and thiosulfate were also widely used.

Together, all these inorganic energy sources allow diverse microbes to prosper even in the darkest and most nutrient-poor regions of the ocean. As we have previously reported, chemosynthesis even allows a “microbial jungle” to form beneath the ice sheets of Antarctica.

An ancient trait that remains surprisingly widespread today

Chemosynthesis is less well known than photosynthesis, but it has much more ancient roots. Leading theories on the origin of life suggest hydrogen – produced in hydrothermal vents devoid of sunlight – was the first energy source for life. Photosynthesis likely evolved much later, providing the oxygen in the atmosphere that supports human life.

Some ecosystems still exist today that are primarily driven by chemosynthesis, most notably “black smokers”. Here, inorganic energy sources released from underwater volcanoes support complex microbially driven ecosystems, which include giant tube worms (you might have seen these on David Attenborough’s Blue Planet). But it’s conventionally thought that most ecosystems today are either directly or indirectly driven by photosynthesis.

Our findings suggest the situation is more complicated. By presenting the first report of hydrogen consumption in open oceans, we reveal unexpected similarities of marine microorganisms today to their ancient ancestors.

Chemosynthesis remains highly active today and provides a lifeline for oceanic microbes when photosynthesis is low.

The hydrogenases that modern marine bacteria use to consume hydrogen appear to be directly descended from the ancient catalysts that supported the first life. But through billions of years of evolution, they’ve adapted to the lower hydrogen and higher oxygen levels of today.

Interestingly, hydrogen and carbon monoxide appear to have distinct roles for ocean bacteria.

Hydrogen-consuming microbes grow using the slow, steady feed of energy provided by this gas. These bacteria are often ultrasmall and adapted to life with minimal energy, as reflected by our experiments with the polar bacterium Sphingopyxis alaskensis.

In contrast, carbon monoxide is primarily a “last resort” energy source for bacteria lacking light or organic carbon. It provides enough energy to survive until a better meal, but doesn’t allow for much growth. This agrees with previous work showing carbon monoxide dehydrogenase supports survival, but not growth, of various bacteria.

Bacterial survival in a changing world

Through our studies of the oceans and many other environments, it’s now clear that chemosynthesis is a universal process and microbes are actually quite flexible in their diets. Such insights improve our understanding of how ocean microbes survive, produce and consume nutrients, and adapt to their environment.

In turn, we are better able to predict how they may respond to a changing climate and other pressures. The deep ocean, often considered Earth’s “final frontier”, no doubt holds many other secrets big and small.

À lire aussi :
They say we know more about the Moon than about the deep sea. They’re wrong

Chris Greening receives funding from the Australian Research Council, National Health & Medical Research Council, Human Frontiers Science Program, Australian Antarctic Division, and Monash University.

Rachael Lappan receives funding from the Australian Research Council and Monash University.

Zahra F. Islam receives funding from the Australian Academy of Sciences and the University of Melbourne.

– ref. Bacteria use life’s original energy source to thrive in the ocean’s lightless depths – https://theconversation.com/bacteria-use-lifes-original-energy-source-to-thrive-in-the-oceans-lightless-depths-199177

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne

Senator Lidia Thorpe announced on Monday that she would be leaving the Greens. Thorpe had split with the Greens over the Indigenous Voice to parliament, which she opposes.

Thorpe was elected at the May 2022 election as a Victorian senator for a six-year term. Although she has left the Greens, she can remain a senator until her term expires in June 2028. If Thorpe resigns from the Senate, the Greens would select her replacement. But as she has resigned from the party but not the Senate, she can continue to sit on the crossbench.

This means Thorpe has resigned from the Greens over eight months after the May 2022 election and over seven months since her current six-year term began in July 2022. She still has nearly five-and-a-half years until her term expires.

The Senate has 72 state senators and four territory senators. Half of the state senators are up for election every three years, so those elected in 2019 will be up in 2025, and those elected in 2022 are up in 2028. All territory senators are tied to the three-year term of the House of Representatives.

In the Senate that was elected as a result of both the 2019 and 2022 elections, the Coalition held 32 of the 76 seats, Labor 26, the Greens 12, One Nation two, the Jacqui Lambie Network (JLN) two, David Pocock one and the UAP one.

Read more:
Final Senate results: Labor, the Greens and David Pocock will have a majority of senators

Before Thorpe’s defection, Labor and the Greens held 38 of the 76 senators, and Labor only needed one more vote to pass legislation opposed by the Coalition that the Greens supported. Labor was able to get this vote from either the JLN or Pocock.

With Thorpe’s defection, the Greens are down to 11 senators, and Labor will need two other votes to pass legislation opposed by the Coalition that the Greens support. The best options for Labor are either the JLN or both Pocock and Thorpe.

Thorpe’s defection from the Greens over opposition to the Voice has very little support with Greens voters nationally. In a Newspoll that I covered Monday, Greens voters supported the Voice by an 81-10 margin.

The one way to cut short Thorpe’s term is for a double dissolution election to occur. This requires legislation passed by the House to be rejected or unacceptably amended twice by the Senate at least three months apart. At a double dissolution, all senators are elected at the same time. The last double dissolution was the July 2016 election.

Thorpe is not the first defector from an established party in the Senate, and probably won’t be the last. Cory Bernardi defected from the Liberals in February 2017, shortly after winning a six-year term at the 2016 election. Mal Colston defected from Labor in August 1996.

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

– ref. Lidia Thorpe’s defection from the Greens will make passing legislation harder for Labor – https://theconversation.com/lidia-thorpes-defection-from-the-greens-will-make-passing-legislation-harder-for-labor-199299

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

The news of a so-called “Chinese spy balloon” being shot down over the US has reignited interest in how nation-states spy on one another.

It’s not confirmed that the balloon, seen floating over US military areas, was indeed a dedicated vessel for spying. China has claimed it was a “civilian airship” deployed for weather research and blown off-course by the wind. Nonetheless, the very threat of potential spycraft has the US up in arms.

And that makes sense. The significance of intelligence can’t be overstated. Nations make important political, economic and military decisions based on it.

While people may chuckle at the idea of using a balloon to passively float above a country to spy on it, the reality is anything goes when it comes to getting the upper hand on your adversaries. So what are some other ways nations collect intelligence today?

Read more:
Did China’s balloon violate international law?

Signals intelligence

One major intelligence collection strategy is signals intelligence. This involves using a variety of ground- and space-based technologies to target the signals and communications coming from a target’s device/s.

The results, called the “product”, often reveal highly sensitive information, which explains why signals intelligence is also the most contested form of espionage.

Countries that turn this capability inward face mounting criticism from those caught in the net, and from citizens concerned with privacy. In 2013, Edward Snowden disclosed the US National Security Agency’s use of signals intelligence for bulk data collection from the public. The US government has since worked to convince citizens the NSA’s efforts are largely focused on external collection.

The White House also recently published an executive order on this topic.

Geo-spatial intelligence

Geo-spatial intelligence concerns human activity on and beneath the ground, including waterways. It’s generally focused on military and civilian construction, human movements (such as movement of refugees and migrants) and natural resource use.

Geo-spatial intelligence exploits information obtained through satellites, drones, high-altitude aircraft and, yes, even balloons!

Spy balloons can collect not just images and signals, but also chemical analyses of the air. They aren’t common, since this approach lacks plausible deniability and (as we have seen) balloons are easily observed and shot down. On the other hand, they do offer a low radar signature, are cheap and can seem innocuous.

Imagery intelligence

Closely related to geo-spatial intelligence is imagery intelligence, which is also often conducted using satellites, drones and aircraft.

This is intelligence derived from the overhead collection of images of civilian and military activities. Imagery intelligence often focuses on the strategic movements of troops and weapons systems, and specifically targets military bases, nuclear arsenals and other strategic assets.

Measurement and signature intelligence

One highly technical form of intelligence collection – and one that’s rarely mentioned – is measurement and signature intelligence. This is intelligence derived from the electromagnetic signatures of rockets, command and control systems, radar and weapons systems, and other military and civilian equipment.

The data collection is done using high-tech instruments, designed specifically to identify and categorise the electromagnetic emanations. Among other things, this form of intelligence collection allows for the remote identification of weapons deployments and detailed information on space platforms.

Cyber intelligence

Cyber intelligence is generally lumped together with signals intelligence, but is distinct in that it uses direct human interaction (such as through hackers) to penetrate protected systems and gain access to data.

Cyber intelligence refers to the overt and covert collection of information from friendly and adversarial networks. It can be obtained through signals collection, malware, or through hackers gaining direct unauthorised access into a systems. Nations may even target their own allies’ networks.

One example of cyber intelligence was the 2015 data breach of the US Office of Personnel Management. This breach was designed to collect all the available information on US government and military personnel who had been screened for a security clearance.

Read more:
US hack shows data is the new frontier in cyber security conflict

Open source intelligence

The newest of the intelligence collection disciplines is open source intelligence. Emerging in the late 1980s, open source information comes from a variety of primary sources such as newspapers, blogs, official postings and reports, and secondary sources such as leaks on sites including WikiLeaks, The Intercept and social media.

Although this information is readily available, turning it into actionable intelligence requires specific tools such as web scrapers and data miners, as well as trained analysts who can find connections between large datasets.

Human intelligence

Human intelligence is the oldest form of intelligence collection and perhaps the most well-known. Spies are generally divided into three categories:

• declared intelligence officers (overt)
• people working under official cover, such as spies working as diplomats, military personnel and embassy/civilian support personnel
• non-official cover spies, often ostensibly working in commercial, academic and trade positions.

Human intelligence officers will recruit citizens of a country to spy, wittingly or unwittingly, and run agents (co-operating citizens of a host nation) to support the strategic objectives of their nation.

Thanks to the internet and dark net, we now have cyber-based human intelligence that allows spies to assess, recruit and operate assets and sources from the safety of their home nation. This is even happening on LinkedIn.

While intelligence collection disguised as a stray weather balloon seems rather sloppy, the latest events remind us of the constant war for information that nations are waging. Analysts following the war in Ukraine are reviewing reams of information to compare Russian, Chinese and Iranian weapon systems with those of Ukraine and its NATO supporters.

As the world continues to face new challenges, including climate change and the rapid development of new technologies, the intelligence focus of nations will likely need to expand to keep up.

Dennis B Desmond received funding from the Australian Government under an ARC linkage Grant. Dr Desmond previously worked for the US intelligence community.

– ref. Beyond spy balloons: here are 7 kinds of intelligence spies want, and how they get it – https://theconversation.com/beyond-spy-balloons-here-are-7-kinds-of-intelligence-spies-want-and-how-they-get-it-199289

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

Victorian Indigenous Senator Lidia Thorpe has defected from the Greens to sit on the crossbench, declaring she wants to fully represent the “Blak Sovereign Movement” in parliament.

The announcement by Thorpe, who has been the party’s spokesperson on First Nations issues, follows her sustained criticism and questioning of the Voice referendum. It also comes before the Greens this week formally announce their position on the Voice.

Thorpe said in a Monday statement that she was not stating her final position on the Voice – she wanted to continue her negotiations with the government.

Her departure, though a blow for the Greens, is not entirely bad news for them. While they lose a senate number, she has been a thorn in their side, and muddied their message on the Voice.

Her defection complicates the Senate position for the government. Previously, the government needed the 12 Greens plus one crossbench vote to pass contested legislation. Now it will need two crossbench votes.

The defection means the Coalition and non-Greens crossbench can form an absolute majority.

The position of crossbencher Jacqui Lambie is strengthened, including potentially on the legislation for the Voice referendum. Lambie has expressed concern about the Voice.

She said on Monday she “wanted to see the practical side – I want to see what difference this is going to make in these communities”.

Thorpe said she would vote with the Greens on climate but has not given a guarantee on other matters.

Thorpe has been a centre of controversy repeatedly.

In October she was sacked as a deputy leader of the Greens, after she failed to disclose a relationship with the former president of the Victorian Rebels outlaw motorcyle gang.

Taking the oath of allegiance at the swearing-in after the 2022 election she said: “I swear by Almighty God that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to the colonising Her Majesty Elizabeth the Second […]”. She was required to repeat the oath using only the proper words.

Thorpe entered the Senate in 2020 filling a casual vacancy left by former Greens leader Richard Di Natale. Before that, she was briefly in the Victorian parliament in 2017-18.

Read more:
Enshrining the Voice gives best chance for Closing the Gap, Albanese says

Thorpe previously indicated she would vote against the Voice if its establishment would cede First Nations sovereignty. The government insists it would not affect the sovereignty issue.

Thorpe said on Monday: “This country has a strong grassroots Blak Sovereign Movement, full of staunch and committed warriors and I want to represent that movement fully in Parliament”.

She could not do this from within the Greens, she said. “Now I will be able to speak freely on all issues from a Sovereign perspective without being constrained by portfolios and agreed party positions.”

She said Greens inside and outside parliament had told her they wanted to support the Voice. “This is at odds with the community of activists who are saying Treaty before Voice. That was the message from the January 26 street rallies, she said. “This is the movement I was raised in – my Elders marched for Treaty. This is who I am.”

Thorpe said while First Nations sovereignty was crucial, “so is saving lives today”. The government “could do that by implementing the recommendations from the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody and the recommendations from the Bringing Them Home report,” she said.

“My focus from now is to grow and amplify the Blak Sovereign Movement across the Nation. I have spent my entire life fighting for justice, to defend our Sovereignty, to save Blak lives. That is my goal.

“My strength and conviction comes from a lifetime of activism, from my Ancestors and from my Matriarchs, who continue to say to me every day, ‘keep infiltrating, keep your integrity, keep the fire burning, keep our fight alive.’”

“To my mob, I say this – your strength is my strength, your fight is my fight, your struggle is my struggle. I’m ready for what comes next in the fight for a future where our kids are with their families, where our people are not killed in custody, where the chains that the system wraps around our people are lifted”.

Greens leader Adam Bandt said he had tried to persuade Thorpe not to go. He said he hoped Thorpe and the Greens “will continue to work closely together on important issues given their strong policy alignment”.

Bandt said he had confirmed with Thorpe that under the Greens’ constitution she could vote as she wished on The Voice. If she voted differently from her colleagues “she would retain her portfolio but not be the party’s spokesperson on the referendum”.

“I’m sad to see her go, as I respect her greatly as a fighter for her people,” Bandt said.

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

– ref. View from The Hill: Lidia Thorpe quits Greens, going to crossbench to promote ‘Blak Sovereign Movement’ – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-lidia-thorpe-quits-greens-going-to-crossbench-to-promote-blak-sovereign-movement-199296

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

Victorian Indigenous Senator Lidia Thorpe has defected from the Greens to sit on the crossbench, declaring she wants to fully represent the “Blak Sovereign Movement” in parliament.

The announcement by Thorpe, who has been the party’s spokesperson on First Nations issues, follows her sustained criticism and questioning of the Voice referendum. It also comes before the Greens this week formally announce their position on the Voice.

Thorpe said in a Monday statement that she was not stating her final position on the Voice – she wanted to continue her negotiations with the government.

Her departure, though a blow for the Greens, is not entirely bad news for them. While they lose a senate number, she has been a thorn in their side, and muddied their message on the Voice.

Her defection complicates the Senate position for the government. Previously, the government needed the 12 Greens plus one crossbench vote to pass contested legislation. Now it will need two crossbench votes.

The defection means the Coalition and non-Greens crossbench can form an absolute majority.

The position of crossbencher Jacqui Lambie is strengthened, including potentially on the legislation for the Voice referendum. Lambie has expressed concern about the Voice.

She said on Monday she “wanted to see the practical side – I want to see what difference this is going to make in these communities”.
Thorpe said she would vote with the Greens on climate but has not given a guarantee on other matters.

Thorpe has been a centre of controversy repeatedly.

In October she was sacked as a deputy leader of the Greens, after she failed to disclose a relationship with the former president of the Victorian Rebels outlaw motorcyle gang.

Taking the oath of allegiance at the swearing in after the 2022 election she said: “I swear by Almighty God that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to the colonising Her Majesty Elizabeth the Second […]”. She was required to repeat the oath using only the proper words.

Thorpe entered the Senate in 2020 filling a casual vacancy left by former Greens leader Richard Di Natale. Before that she was briefly in the Victorian parliament in 2017-18.

Read more:
Enshrining the Voice gives best chance for Closing the Gap, Albanese says

Thorpe previously indicated she would vote against the Voice if its establishment would cede First Nations sovereignty. The government insists it would not affect the sovereignty issue.

Thorpe said on Monday: “This country has a strong grassroots Blak Sovereign Movement, full of staunch and committed warriors and I want to represent that movement fully in Parliament”.

She could not do this from within the Greens, she said. “Now I will be able to speak freely on all issues from a Sovereign perspective without being constrained by portfolios and agreed party positions.”

She said Greens inside and outside parliament had told her they wanted to support the Voice. “This is at odds with the community of activists who are saying Treaty before Voice. That was the message from the January 26 street rallies, she said. “This is the movement I was raised in – my Elders marched for Treaty. This is who I am.”

Thorpe said while First Nations sovereignty was crucial, “so is saving lives today”. The government “could do that by implementing the recommendations from the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody and the recommendations from the Bringing Them Home report”.

“My focus from now is to grow and amplify the Blak Sovereign Movement across the Nation. I have spent my entire life fighting for justice, to defend our Sovereignty, to save Blak lives. That is my goal.

My strength and conviction comes from a lifetime of activism, from my Ancestors and from my Matriarchs, who continue to say to me every day, keep infiltrating, keep your integrity, keep the fire burning, keep our fight alive.”

To my mob, I say this – your strength is my strength, your fight is my fight, your struggle is my struggle. I’m ready for what comes next in the fight for a future where our kids are with their families, where our people are not killed in custody, where the chains that the system wraps around our people are lifted”.

Greens leader Adam Bandt said he had tried to persuade Thorpe not to go. He said he hoped Thorpe and the Greens “will continue to work closely together on important issues given their strong policy alignment”.

Bandt said he had confirmed with Thorpe that under the Greens’ constitution she could vote as she wished on The Voice. If she voted differently from her colleagues “she would retain her portfolio but not be the party’s spokesperson on the referendum”.

“I’m sad to see her go, as I respect her greatly as a fighter for her people,” Bandt said.

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

– ref. View from The Hill: Lydia Thorpe quits Greens, going to crossbench to promote ‘Blak Sovereign Movement’ – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-lydia-thorpe-quits-greens-going-to-crossbench-to-promote-blak-sovereign-movement-199296

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jane Mills, Professor and Dean La Trobe Rural Health School, La Trobe University

It can be tough to access front-line health care outside the cities and suburbs. For the seven million Australians living in rural communities there are significant challenges in accessing health care due to serious workforce shortages, geographic isolation and socioeconomic disadvantage. This results in rural people having poorer quality of life, and long-term poor health outcomes.

Primary health care is the entry point into the health system. It includes care delivered in community settings such as general practice, health centres and allied health practices. It can be delivered via telehealth where face-to-face services are unavailable.

But there is a critical shortage of general practitioners (GPs) in rural areas. The Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP) paints a grim picture of an ageing GP workforce, a declining interest in general practice as a career choice and unequal distribution of GPs between urban and rural areas.

Experts are searching for ways to “fix the GP crisis”, but we can look at the broader picture and ask: “How else might we address the primary health care needs of rural communities?” Highly trained nurses in rural areas could be part of that response – if we support them properly.

Read more:
Medicare reform is off to a promising start. Now comes the hard part

What makes a nurse practitioner?

There are more than 2,250 nurse practitioners currently trained, qualified and registered to provide services in Australia. Nurse practitioners are the most senior and experienced clinical nurses in the health care workforce.

Nurse practitioners complete a master’s degree and have a minimum of eight years of consolidated clinical practice and expertise.

But nurse practitioners can’t access Medicare rebates or the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme unless they enter into a collaborative arrangement with a GP.

Under this arrangement, GPs effectively “supervise” the work of nurse practitioners. This fails to recognise nurse practitioners’ high levels of clinical expertise and skills, which should allow them autonomy.

Read more:
The physio will see you now. Why health workers need to broaden their roles to fix the workforce crisis

What nurse practitioners can do

In Australia, nurse practitioners are not working to their full capacity or “scope of practice” according to the Australian College of Nurse Practitioners. This scope gives them the legal authority to practice independently and autonomously, unlike registered nurses.

They can assess and diagnose health problems, order and interpret diagnostic tests, create and monitor treatment plans, prescribe medicines and refer patients to other health professionals. Nurse practitioners are qualified to admit and discharge patients from health services, including hospitals.

At the public health level, nurse practitioners can collaborate with other clinicians and health experts to improve health care access, prevent disease and promote health strategies, improving outcomes for specific patient groups or communities.

The federal government’s Strengthening Medicare Taskforce lists nurse practitioners as primary carers and puts general practice “at the heart of primary care provision”. But the RACGP and Australian Medical Association (AMA) say nurse practitioner care should be GP-led. They contend any change to this arrangement would lead to inferior care, a disruption in continuity of care, fragmentation of the health system, and increased care complexity, inefficiency and cost. We have looked closely at these arguments and found they are not supported by evidence.

Read more:
How do you fix general practice? More GPs won’t be enough. Here’s what to do

What works overseas

Nurse practitioners have been working as lead practitioners internationally for many years, which means there is a body of evidence looking at patient outcomes and satisfaction.

Experts found nurse practitioners provide equivalent and, in some cases, superior patient outcomes compared to doctors across a range of primary, secondary and specialist care settings and for a broad range of patient conditions.

Nurse practitioners were more likely to follow recommended evidence-based guidelines for best practice care and patients were more satisfied with the care they received, reporting communication regarding patient illness was better compared to GP care.

Employing nurse practitioners also resulted in reduced waiting times and costs.

Finally, these studies found while patient consultations were slightly longer for nurse practitioners and the number of return visits slightly higher compared to doctors, there was no difference in the number of prescriptions or diagnostic tests issued, attendance at Emergency Departments, hospital referrals or hospital admissions.

Clearing the way

GP practices are closing in rural communities all over Australia, leaving people without access to vital, cost-effective primary health care services. Yet the majority of nurse practitioners are ready and willing to work in rural areas, with 2019 workforce distribution data clearly showing many nurse practitioners already work in rural, remote and very remote communities.

A new way of working is required, one that includes nurse practitioners working both independently and in collaboration with health care teams in rural communities.

International evidence shows allowing nurse practitioners to lead patient care and work with greater flexibility and freedom will not fragment the primary health care system, it will enhance it.

Leesa Hooker receives funding from the Victorian Government Department of Justice and Community Safety and the Department of Jobs, Skills, Industry and Regions. She is a member of the Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation and the Australian College of Nursing.

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

– ref. With the training to diagnose, test, prescribe and discharge, nurse practitioners could help rescue rural health – https://theconversation.com/with-the-training-to-diagnose-test-prescribe-and-discharge-nurse-practitioners-could-help-rescue-rural-health-199287

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Donald Rothwell, Professor of International Law, Australian National University

Was the balloon that suddenly appeared over the US last week undertaking surveillance? Or was it engaging in research, as China has claimed?

While the answers to these questions may not be immediately known, one thing is clear: the incursion of the Chinese balloon tested the bounds of international law.

This incident has also added another layer of complexity to the already strained relations between the US and China. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s planned visit to Beijing has been postponed. And China has reacted to the shooting down of the balloon with diplomatic fury.

Both sides have long disagreed over the presence of US warships in the South China Sea and Taiwan Strait, which China claims as its own waters and the US considers international waters. Will the air be the next realm to be contested by the two superpowers?

A long military history

Hot air balloons have a somewhat benign public image. But they also have a long military history that extends back to the Napoleonic era in Europe during the late 18th century and early 19th century when they were used for surveillance and bombing missions. The early laws of war even included some specific measures designed to address the military use of balloons during armed conflict.

The modern military significance of balloons now appears to be understated, especially in an era of uncrewed aerial vehicles or drones, which have proven effective during the current Ukraine war.

However, while balloons may no longer be valued for their war-fighting ability, they retain a unique capacity to undertake surveillance because they fly at higher altitudes than aircraft, can remain stationary over sensitive sites, are harder to detect on radar, and can be camouflaged as civilian weather craft.

Who has sovereignty over the air?

The international law is clear with respect to the use of these balloons over other countries’ airspace.

Every country has complete sovereignty and control over its waters extending 12 nautical miles (about 22 kilometres) from its land territory. Every country likewise has “complete and exclusive sovereignty over the airspace above its territory” under international conventions. This means each country controls all access to its airspace, which includes both commercial and government aircraft.

But the upper limit of sovereign airspace is unsettled in international law. In practice, it generally extends to the maximum height at which commercial and military aircraft operate, which is around 45,000 feet (about 13.7km). The supersonic Concorde jet, however, operated at 60,000 feet (over 18km). The Chinese balloon was also reported to be operating at a distance of 60,000 feet.

International law does not extend to the distance at which satellites operate, which is traditionally seen as falling within the realm of space law.

Read more:
Chinese spy balloon over the US: An aerospace expert explains how the balloons work and what they can see

There are international legal frameworks in place that allow for permission to be sought to enter a country’s airspace, such as the 1944 Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation. The International Civil Aviation Organization has set an additional layer of rules on airspace access, including for hot air balloons, but it does not regulate military activities.

The US also has its own “air defence identification zone”, a legacy of the Cold War. It requires all aircraft entering US airspace to identify themselves. Canada has its own complementary zone. During the height of Cold War tensions, the US would routinely scramble fighter jets in response to unauthorised Soviet incursions into US airspace, especially in the Arctic.

Many other countries and regions have similar air defence identification zones, including China, Japan and Taiwan. Taiwan, for instance, routinely scrambles fighter jets in response to unauthorised incursions of its airspace by Chinese aircraft.

Testing the waters – and air

So, given these clear international rules, the US was on very firm legal footing in its response to the Chinese balloon. Overflight could only have been undertaken with US permission, which was clearly not sought.

China initially attempted to suggest the balloon malfunctioned and drifted into US airspace, claiming force majeure. If the balloon was autonomous, it would have been entirely dependent on wind patterns. However, a report in Scientific American said the balloon appeared to have a high level of manoeuvrability, especially when it appeared to linger over sensitive US defence facilities in Montana.

Washington displayed a lot of patience in dealing with the incursion. President Joe Biden authorised military jets to shoot down the balloon, but it took some days before that could be done safely without endangering lives on the ground.

The balloon incident has clearly tested the Biden administration and the US response to China’s growing military assertiveness.

Similar events occur on a regular basis in the South China Sea, where the US Navy conducts freedom of navigation operations through Chinese claimed waters. The US presence is vigorously challenged by the Chinese Navy.

Read more:
Does the US have the right to sail warships through the South China Sea? And can China stop them?

China has also responded aggressively to the presence of US reconnaissance planes over the South China Sea, raising the risks of an accident that could spark a wider conflict.

What is remarkable about the balloon incident is China has asserted its physical presence well within America’s sovereign borders. How both sides respond in the aftermath will determine whether China-US tensions worsen further and if we can expect potential future provocations between the two sides in the air, as well as the seas.

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

– ref. Did China’s balloon violate international law? – https://theconversation.com/did-chinas-balloon-violate-international-law-199271

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Brendan Walker-Munro, Senior Research Fellow, The University of Queensland

The generative AI industry will be worth about A$22 trillion by 2030, according to the CSIRO. These systems – of which ChatGPT is currently the best known – can write essays and code, generate music and artwork, and have entire conversations. But what happens when they’re turned to illegal uses?

Last week, the streaming community was rocked by a headline that links back to the misuse of generative AI. Popular Twitch streamer Atrioc issued an apology video, teary eyed, after being caught viewing pornography with the superimposed faces of other women streamers.

The “deepfake” technology needed to Photoshop a celebrity’s head on a porn actor’s body has been around for a while, but recent advances have made it much harder to detect.

And that’s the tip of the iceberg. In the wrong hands, generative AI could do untold damage. There’s a lot we stand to lose, should laws and regulation fail to keep up.

Read more:
Text-to-audio generation is here. One of the next big AI disruptions could be in the music industry

From controversy to outright crime

Last month, generative AI app Lensa came under fire for allowing its system to create fully nude and hyper-sexualised images from users’ headshots. Controversially, it also whitened the skin of women of colour and made their features more European.

The backlash was swift. But what’s relatively overlooked is the vast potential to use artistic generative AI in scams. At the far end of the spectrum, there are reports of these tools being able to fake fingerprints and facial scans (the method most of us use to lock our phones).

Criminals are quickly finding new ways to use generative AI to improve the frauds they already perpetrate. The lure of generative AI in scams comes from its ability to find patterns in large amounts of data.

Cybersecurity has seen a rise in “bad bots”: malicious automated programs that mimic human behaviour to conduct crime. Generative AI will make these even more sophisticated and difficult to detect.

Ever received a scam text from the “tax office” claiming you had a refund waiting? Or maybe you got a call claiming a warrant was out for your arrest?

In such scams, generative AI could be used to improve the quality of the texts or emails, making them much more believable. For example, in recent years we’ve seen AI systems being used to impersonate important figures in “voice spoofing” attacks.

Then there are romance scams, where criminals pose as romantic interests and ask their targets for money to help them out of financial distress. These scams are already widespread and often lucrative. Training AI on actual messages between intimate partners could help create a scam chatbot that’s indistinguishable from a human.

Generative AI could also allow cybercriminals to more selectively target vulnerable people. For instance, training a system on information stolen from major companies, such as in the Optus or Medibank hacks last year, could help criminals target elderly people, people with disabilities, or people in financial hardship.

Further, these systems can be used to improve computer code, which some cybersecurity experts say will make malware and viruses easier to create and harder to detect for antivirus software.

The technology is here, and we aren’t prepared

Australia’s and New Zealand’s governments have published frameworks relating to AI, but they aren’t binding rules. Both countries’ laws relating to privacy, transparency and freedom from discrimination aren’t up to the task, as far as AI’s impact is concerned. This puts us behind the rest of the world.

The US has had a legislated National Artificial Intelligence Initiative in place since 2021. And since 2019 it has been illegal in California for a bot to interact with users for commerce or electoral purposes without disclosing it’s not human.

The European Union is also well on the way to enacting the world’s first AI law. The AI Act bans certain types of AI programs posing “unacceptable risk” – such as those used by China’s social credit system – and imposes mandatory restrictions on “high risk” systems.

Although asking ChatGPT to break the law results in warnings that “planning or carrying out a serious crime can lead to severe legal consequences”, the fact is there’s no requirement for these systems to have a “moral code” programmed into them.

There may be no limit to what they can be asked to do, and criminals will likely figure out workarounds for any rules intended to prevent their illegal use. Governments need to work closely with the cybersecurity industry to regulate generative AI without stifling innovation, such as by requiring ethical considerations for AI programs.

The Australian government should use the upcoming Privacy Act review to get ahead of potential threats from generative AI to our online identities. Meanwhile, New Zealand’s Privacy, Human Rights and Ethics Framework is a positive step.

We also need to be more cautious as a society about believing what we see online, and remember that humans are traditionally bad at being able to detect fraud.

Can you spot a scam?

As criminals add generative AI tools to their arsenal, spotting scams will only get trickier. The classic tips will still apply. But beyond those, we’ll learn a lot from assessing the ways in which these tools fall short.

Generative AI is bad at critical reasoning and conveying emotion. It can even be tricked into giving wrong answers. Knowing when and why this happens could us help develop effective methods to catch cybercriminals using AI for extortion.

There are also tools being developed to detect AI outputs from tools such as ChatGPT. These could go a long way towards preventing AI-based cybercrime if they prove to be effective.

Read more:
Being bombarded with delivery and post office text scams? Here’s why — and what can be done

Brendan Walker-Munro receives funding from the Australian Government through Trusted Autonomous Systems, a Defence Cooperative Research Centre funded through the Next Generation Technologies Fund.

– ref. Scams, deepfake porn and romance bots: advanced AI is exciting, but incredibly dangerous in criminals’ hands – https://theconversation.com/scams-deepfake-porn-and-romance-bots-advanced-ai-is-exciting-but-incredibly-dangerous-in-criminals-hands-199004

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Doug Drury, Professor/Head of Aviation, CQUniversity Australia

When booking a flight, do you ever think about which seat will protect you the most in an emergency? Probably not.

Most people book seats for comfort, such as leg room, or convenience, such as easy access to toilets. Frequent flyers (this author included) might book their seat as close as possible to the front so they can disembark more quickly.

We rarely book a flight with hopes of getting one of the middle seats in the last row. Well, guess what? These seats are statistically the safest ones on an airplane.

Air travel is safe

Before we get into it, I should reiterate that air travel is the safest mode of transport. In 2019, there were just under 70 million flights globally, with only 287 fatalities.

According to the US National Safety Council’s analysis of census data, the odds of dying in a plane are about 1 in 205,552, compared with 1 in 102 in a car. Even so, we pay little attention to fatal road accidents, but when we hear about an ATR72 crashing in Nepal it’s the lead story on every news page.

Read more:
Qantas flight mayday: can a plane normally fly on just one engine? An aviation expert explains

Our interest in plane crashes might lie in wanting to understand why they happen, or what the odds are of them happening again. And perhaps it’s not a bad thing; our concern ensures these tragic incidents are thoroughly investigated, which helps keep air travel safe.

Frankly speaking, there is no real need to worry about safety when you board a commercial flight. But if you’ve still got that nagging question in your head, driven by sheer curiosity, read on.

In the middle, at the back

It’s worth remembering accidents by their very nature do not conform to standards. In the 1989 United Flight 232 crash in Sioux City, Iowa, 184 of the 269 people onboard survived the accident. Most of the survivors were sitting behind first class, towards the front of the plane.

Nonetheless, a TIME investigation that looked at 35 years of aircraft accident data found the middle rear seats of an aircraft had the lowest fatality rate: 28%, compared with 44% for the middle aisle seats.

This logically makes sense too. Sitting next to an exit row will always provide you with the fastest exit in the case of an emergency, granted there’s no fire on that side. But the wings of a plane store fuel, so this disqualifies the middle exit rows as the safest row option.

At the same time, being closer to the front means you’ll be impacted before those in the back, which leaves us with the last exit row. As for why the middle seats are safer than the window or aisle seats, that is, as you might expect, because of the buffer provided by having people on either side.

Some emergencies are worse than others

The type of emergency will also dictate survivability. Running into a mountain will decrease chances of survival exponentially, as was the case in a tragic 1979 disaster in New Zealand. Air New Zealand Flight TE901 crashed into the slopes of Mt Erebus in Antarctica, killing 257 passengers and crew.

Landing in the ocean nose-first also decreases chances of survival, as witnessed with the 2009 Air France Flight 447, in which 228 passengers and crew perished.

Pilots are trained to minimise potential risk in an emergency event as best as they can. They will try to avoid hitting mountains and look for a level place, such as an open field, to land as normally as possible. The technique for landing in water requires assessing the surface conditions and attempting to land between waves at a normal landing angle.

Aircraft are designed to be very robust in emergency situations. In fact, the main reason the cabin crew remind us to keep our seat belts fastened is not because of crash risk, but because of “clear air turbulence” that can be experienced at any time at high altitudes. It is this weather phenomenon that can cause the most damage to passengers and aircraft.

Manufacturers are designing new planes with more composite materials capable of handing in-flight stress. In these designs, the wings are not rigid and can flex to absorb extreme loading to prevent structural failure.

Does the type of plane make a difference?

Granted, there are certain variables, such as impact from airspeed, that can vary slightly between different airplane types. However, the physics of flight is more or less the same in all planes.

Generally, larger planes will have more structural material and therefore more strength to withstand pressurisation at altitude. This means they may provide some additional protection in an emergency – but this, again, is highly dependent on the severity of the emergency.

That’s not to say you should book your next flight on the largest plane you can find. As I’ve mentioned, air travel remains very safe. So I’d suggest thinking about what movie you’ll watch instead, and hoping they don’t run out of chicken and only have the shrimp left!

Read more:
Jetlag hits differently depending on your travel direction. Here are 6 tips to get over it

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

– ref. What’s the safest seat on a plane? We asked an aviation expert – https://theconversation.com/whats-the-safest-seat-on-a-plane-we-asked-an-aviation-expert-198672

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne

A federal Newspoll, conducted February 1-4 from a sample of 1,512, gave Labor a 55-45 lead, unchanged on the previous Newspoll in early December. Primary votes were 38% Labor (down one), 34% Coalition (down one), 11% Greens (steady), 6% One Nation (steady) and 11% for all Others (up two).

While Labor retained a large lead, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s ratings slumped, with 57% satisfied with his performance (down five since December), while 33% were dissatisfied (up four). Albanese’s net approval dropped nine points to +24.

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton’s net approval was down one point to -10. Albanese continued to lead Dutton by 56-26 as better PM (59-24 in December). The net approval for Albanese is the lowest in this term so far for Newspoll. Newspoll figures are from The Poll Bludger.

In the first Newspoll that has asked about the Indigenous Voice to parliament, voters supported the Voice by a 56-37 margin with 7% undecided. Greens voters were the strongest supporters (81-10), with Labor voters at 74-18 support. However, Coalition voters were opposed by 59-37 and Other voters, which includes One Nation, were opposed by 53-41.

Labor won government at the May 2022 election, and have now been in office for over eight months. With Australia’s inflation rate still high, a softening in Albanese’s ratings is to be expected.

Morgan poll: 57-43 to Labor

In last week’s weekly federal Morgan poll, Labor led by 57-43, a two-point gain for the Coalition since the previous week. Primary votes were 37.5% Labor, 33.5% Coalition, 11.5% Greens and 17.5% for all Others. This poll was conducted January 23-29.

Resolve additional questions on the republic, Australia Day and bulk billing

I covered the federal Resolve poll in late January. In additional questions
, voters favoured Australia becoming a republic by 39-31 (37-36 opposed after the death of the queen in September).

On all the Harry and Meghan revelations, 62% said they had heard about it, but it had no influence on their view of a republic, 14% said they were more likely to support a republic and 7% less likely. By 31-12, voters thought King Charles III is performing well as Australia’s head of state.

By 54-18, voters supported companies allowing their employees to work on Australia Day and swap this with another day. By 47-19, they supported councils offering citizenship ceremonies on days other than Australia Day.

On GP bulk billing, 47% said their GP bulk bills, 18% said their GP used to bulk bill, but doesn’t anymore. 22% said their GP charges a gap fee and 10% said they don’t have a regular GP. Asked to choose the top priority for additional health funding, 46% chose raising the medicare rebate, 29% increased hospital funding and 16% setting up out-of-hours medical clinics.

Liberals win Victorian Narracan supplementary election

A supplementary election occurred in the Victorian state Liberal-held Narracan on January 28; the election was postponed from the November 26 state election owing to a candidate’s death.

The Liberals held Narracan by a 62.9-37.1 margin over independent Tony Wolfe, a 2.9% swing to the Liberals from the Liberal vs Labor margin at the 2018 state election. Labor did not contest the supplementary election.

Primary votes were 45.0% Liberals (down 10.6%), 11.1% Greens (up 5.1%), 11.0% Wolfe (new), 7.1% Labour DLP (new), 6.1% Freedom Party (new) and 6.0% One Nation (new). In 2018, Labor had won 31.9% of the primary vote in Narracan. I expect Wolfe to finish second ahead of the Greens after distribution of preferences.

Lower house seats won at the state election are now final, with Labor winning 56 of the 88 seats (up one since 2018), the Coalition 28 (up one) and the Greens four (up one). Three independents elected in 2018 either retired or were defeated.

Victorian election poll performance

With the November 26 Victorian election complete with Narracan, Labor won 36.6% of the overall lower house primary vote, the Coalition 34.5%, the Greens 11.5% and all Others 17.4%. Labor won the two party vote by 54.9-45.1, with the ABC assuming Wolfe in Narracan is Labor for this purpose.

Read more:
Final Victorian election results: how would upper house look using the Senate system?

The table below shows how the three final polls – Resolve, Morgan and Newspoll – performed against the election results. Bold in the table indicates a poll estimate within 1% of the actual result.

Overall the polling was accurate, with Labor’s actual two party share very close to what was estimated by both Newspoll and Morgan. Of these three polls, Newspoll performed best with primary votes estimates very near actual for both the Coalition and the Greens.

Old NSW Morgan poll: 55-45 to Labor

The New South Wales state election will be held in under two months, on March 25. A Morgan poll, conducted in December but not released until January 31, gave Labor a 55-45 lead over the Coalition, a three-point gain for Labor since November.

Primary votes were 33.5% Coalition (down 3.5), 33.5% Labor (down 1.5), 12% Greens (up 0.5), 4.5% One Nation (down 0.5), 1% Shooters (down 0.5) and 15.5% for all Others (up 5.5). This poll had a sample of 1,446.

WA changes in National and Liberal leaders

After Labor’s massive March 2021 Western Australian election landslide, Labor held 53 of the 59 lower house seats, the Nationals four and the Liberals two. That made the Nationals the official opposition.

The Poll Bludger reported on January 31 that National leader Mia Davies had resigned, and was replaced as opposition leader by Shane Love. For the Liberals, leader David Honey was challenged by Libby Mettam, the only other Liberal in the lower house. This was settled in Mettam’s favour by the Liberals’ seven upper house MPs. Honey conceded defeat, and Mettam was elected unopposed.

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

– ref. Albanese’s Newspoll ratings drop but Labor maintains big lead – https://theconversation.com/albaneses-newspoll-ratings-drop-but-labor-maintains-big-lead-198584

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Murray Goot, Emeritus Professor of Politics and International Relations, Macquarie University

Support for embedding an Indigenous Voice to parliament in the Constitution has fallen. The polls provide good evidence once you work out how to find it.

However, the voters who have shifted are not Labor voters or those who vote for the Greens – they are Coalition voters.

These voters have not shifted to the “undecided” column or joined the “don’t knows”, as some pollsters suggest; they have shifted to the “no” column.

This may not be fatal to the referendum’s prospects, but with the campaign barely begun and support slipping in the final weeks of other referendum campaigns, it is serious.

Comparing different polls that asked the same question

One way of establishing whether support has shifted is to compare polls taken by the same pollster using the same question, some time apart.

From May (59%) through August (57%) to October (55%), SEC Newgate reported a decline of four percentage points in favour of inscribing a Voice in the Constitution.

Between September (65%) and October (60%), Compass reported a decline of five percentage points in polling that was made available to me.

And from August (65%) to December (63%), a much longer period, Essential Media, whose polls are published in the Guardian, reported a smaller decline.

While the shifts were all in the same direction, their disparate sizes are difficult to reconcile. The task of estimating the overall shift, from the earliest date (May) to the latest (December), is more difficult still.

Read more:
Most Australians support First Nations Voice to parliament: survey

Comparing two polls from the same pollster using different questions

Another approach is to compare polls taken by the same pollster, some time apart, even when the question used the first time differs from the question used the second time.

Recently, David Crowe, chief political correspondent for the Sydney Morning Herald, reported that support for an Indigenous Voice to parliament had fallen from 53% to 47%, though when forced to choose between “yes” and “no”, support had fallen less steeply, from 64% to 60%.

Crowe’s report was based on a comparison between the latest Resolve poll (December-January) and an earlier poll Resolve had run (August-September).

The first time around, the Resolve question rehearsed the prime minister’s proposed wording of the constitutional amendment; the second time around, it did not.

The first time, it avoided the word “enshrine”, a word some may have found off-putting. And the first time, it asked a standard “yes”, “no”, “don’t know” question, while the second time, it asked whether respondents would definitely vote yes, probably vote yes, were undecided or did not have enough information, would probably vote no or would definitely vote no.

In short, if support had slipped, this was not a set of questions that could show it.

The best way to see how far support has fallen

In the absence of a panel, where the shift in views of individual respondents are tracked, the best way of seeing how far opinion has changed is to compare the seven national polls conducted between late May and September (by Dynata, Essential, Resolve, Scanlon, and SEC Newgate) and the four conducted between October and January (by Freshwater, Morgan, Resolve, and SEC Newgate).

All of these polls meet acceptable standards for question wording and are similar in their range of response options.

This way, we can look at a larger number of polls, avoid the problem of overlapping timeframes when making comparisons, and allow differences in question wording and in response formats to wash out.

Across the two periods, the proportion of respondents saying “yes” declined from 58 to 51%, while the proportion saying “no” increased from 18 to 27%. These are averages across the two sets of polls; the medians are little different.

This suggests a decline of about seven percentage points in support for inscribing a Voice in the Constitution and an increase of around nine points in opposition.

Which voters have moved – and where have they moved

We can also compare the averages of the polls that break down results by party in order to see how support for the Voice has shifted among voters who support the Coalition, Labor, the Greens or other parties.

Between late May and September, support among Coalition voters averaged 45% in the six polls that broke down the results by party. Among Labor voters, support averaged 64%; among the Greens, 80%; and among others, 53%.

Between October and January in the three polls that broke the results down by party, support among Coalition voters averaged just 36%; among Labor voters it averaged 67%; among the Greens, 80%; and among others, 52%.

In short, while support among Coalition voters dropped by nine percentage points, on average, among other voters it remained steady or increased. If respondents in the two sets of polls shifted from “yes” to “no”, then Coalition voters must have shifted from “yes” to “no” – not to “don’t know”.

Moving to “don’t know” might have suggested they were open to coming back; moving to “no” suggests they are not, especially for Nationals happy to follow the party line. (Unfortunately, the polls do not distinguish Liberal voters, National voters and those in Queensland who vote for the LNP.)

Read more:
Could the Nationals’ refusal to support a Voice to Parliament derail the referendum?

Parties as influencers

One of the questions keeping some in the “yes” campaign up at night is how much support would decline if the Liberals (or the Greens) came out against the Voice, or became increasingly divided.

Others have slept well in the belief that the standing of the major parties is so attenuated it no longer matters what the Liberals decide to say.

Just how far parties as opinion leaders have declined is one thing the referendum may help reveal. With the prime minister loud in his support, the opposition leader expressing his doubts, and the Nationals saying no, perhaps it has started to do so already.

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

– ref. How much has support for the Voice fallen? It depends on how you ask – https://theconversation.com/how-much-has-support-for-the-voice-fallen-it-depends-on-how-you-ask-199002

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Doug Drury, Professor/Head of Aviation, CQUniversity Australia

When booking a flight, do you ever think about which seat will protect you the most in an emergency? Probably not.

Most people book seats for comfort, such as leg room, or convenience, such as easy access to toilets. Frequent flyers (this author included) might book their seat as close as possible to the front so they can disembark more quickly.

We rarely book a flight with hopes of getting one of the middle seats in the last row. Well, guess what? These seats are statistically the safest ones on an airplane.

Air travel is safe

Before we get into it, I should reiterate that air travel is the safest mode of transport. In 2019, there were just under 70 million flights globally, with only 287 fatalities.

According to the US National Safety Council’s analysis of census data, the odds of dying in a plane are about 1 in 205,552, compared with 1 in 102 in a car. Even so, we pay little attention to fatal road accidents, but when we hear about an ATR72 crashing in Nepal it’s the lead story on every news page.

Read more:
Qantas flight mayday: can a plane normally fly on just one engine? An aviation expert explains

Our interest in plane crashes might lie in wanting to understand why they happen, or what the odds are of them happening again. And perhaps it’s not a bad thing; our concern ensures these tragic incidents are thoroughly investigated, which helps keep air travel safe.

Frankly speaking, there is no real need to worry about safety when you board a commercial flight. But if you’ve still got that nagging question in your head, driven by sheer curiosity, read on.

In the middle, at the back

It’s worth remembering accidents by their very nature do not conform to standards. In the 1989 United Flight 232 crash in Sioux City, Iowa, 184 of the 269 people onboard survived the accident. Most of the survivors were sitting behind first class, towards the front of the plane.

Nonetheless, a TIME investigation that looked at 35 years of aircraft accident data found the middle rear seats of an aircraft had the lowest fatality rate: 28%, compared with 44% for the middle aisle seats.

This logically makes sense too. Sitting next to an exit row will always provide you with the fastest exit in the case of an emergency, granted there’s no fire on that side. But the wings of a plane store fuel, so this disqualifies the middle exit rows as the safest row option.

At the same time, being closer to the front means you’ll be impacted before those in the back, which leaves us with the last exit row. As for why the middle seats are safer than the window or aisle seats, that is, as you might expect, because of the buffer provided by having people on either side.

Some emergencies are worse than others

The type of emergency will also dictate survivability. Running into a mountain will decrease chances of survival exponentially, as was the case in a tragic 1979 disaster in New Zealand. Air New Zealand Flight TE901 crashed into the slopes of Mt Erebus in Antarctica, killing 257 passengers and crew.

Landing in the ocean nose-first also decreases chances of survival, as witnessed with the 2009 Air France Flight 447, in which 228 passengers and crew perished.

Pilots are trained to minimise potential risk in an emergency event as best as they can. They will try to avoid hitting mountains and look for a level place, such as an open field, to land as normally as possible. The technique for landing in water requires assessing the surface conditions and attempting to land between waves at a normal landing angle.

Aircraft are designed to be very robust in emergency situations. In fact, the main reason the cabin crew remind us to keep our seat belts fastened is not because of crash risk, but because of “clear air turbulence” that can be experienced at any time at high altitudes. It is this weather phenomenon that can cause the most damage to passengers and aircraft.

Manufacturers are designing new planes with more composite materials capable of handing in-flight stress. In these designs, the wings are not rigid and can flex to absorb extreme loading to prevent structural failure.

Does the type of plane make a difference?

Granted, there are certain variables, such as impact from airspeed, that can vary slightly between different airplane types. However, the physics of flight is more or less the same in all planes.

Generally, larger planes will have more structural material and therefore more strength to withstand pressurisation at altitude. This means they may provide some additional protection in an emergency – but this, again, is highly dependent on the severity of the emergency.

That’s not to say you should book your next flight on the largest plane you can find. As I’ve mentioned, air travel remains very safe. So I’d suggest thinking about what movie you’ll watch instead, and hoping they don’t run out of chicken and only have the shrimp left!

Read more:
Jetlag hits differently depending on your travel direction. Here are 6 tips to help you get over it

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

– ref. Which seat on a plane is the safest? We asked an aviation expert – https://theconversation.com/which-seat-on-a-plane-is-the-safest-we-asked-an-aviation-expert-198672