Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jane Norton, Senior Lecturer in Law, University of Auckland

With the effective end of New Zealand’s managed isolation and quarantine (MIQ) system this week, the outcome of the court battle over the government’s border restrictions may have become moot. But the principles at stake are important nonetheless.

Brought by the lobby group Grounded Kiwis, the case was about the legality of the MIQ system, especially its effect on citizens’ right to return home and whether the border controls were justified in the public good.

There’s no doubt the system disrupted the mobility rights of New Zealand’s global diaspora, causing considerable pain and anguish for some. And the case was seen by many as a day of reckoning for MIQ.

In the end, however, the judicial review proceedings ended up with a much narrower focus. Grounded Kiwis effectively only contested the operation of MIQ during the last few months of last year, with their legal complaint largely boiling down to the system having not been appropriately reformed or phased out quickly enough.

Government lawyers responded by setting MIQ in its emergency context and the government’s “stamp it out, keep it out” approach to the pandemic. While changes were made to the MIQ system over its lifetime, reform was necessarily cautious in the light of the level of risk the government and community were prepared to bear.

Legally, the case was focused on a citizen’s right to return in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. Limits on that right are only permissible if “reasonable” and “demonstrably justifiable in a free and democratic society”. The courts have developed a special way of assessing this – one that carefully weighs public benefits and private burdens and looks closely at alternative ways to achieve the government’s aim.

MIQ design in the spotlight

So, did MIQ unreasonably and unjustifiably limit the right to return more than was reasonably necessary to achieve the public health goal of significantly reducing the outbreak and spread of COVID-19?

Here the court will have to consider a whole raft of objections to MIQ, such as its very existence, its blanket application to all who wished to enter New Zealand, its restricted capacity and its allocation method.

À lire aussi :
Two years on from the first COVID case, New Zealand’s successful pandemic response still faces major challenges

While individual cases have tended to make headlines, the administration of exceptions was not squarely part of this legal challenge. The focus was on the overall design of the system.

Grounded Kiwis spoke about the right to return as a “foundational right”, from which all other rights flowed. This right should have been afforded greater priority, they said, and New Zealanders should not be denied entry to their country of citizenship – even in a pandemic.

Forcing them to wait for a spot in MIQ breaches this right. They accused the government of being myopically focused on public health.

Public health paramount

But public health was precisely what government lawyers emphasised in court. They pointed to the state’s obligations in domestic and international law to protect all New Zealanders’ rights to life and health, and the importance of minimising the impact on the healthcare system. Caution was needed, especially when vaccinations were still being rolled out.

People’s rights were at the centre of all decision making, government lawyers argued. Ministers did not see mobility rights and public health in competition with each other but hard choices had to be made in the circumstances. People have to be alive and well to enjoy their freedom of movement. Sacrifices were made by all New Zealanders, here or abroad, whether through lockdowns or border restrictions.

Those public health priorities also extended to New Zealand’s diaspora, it was argued, as they enjoy the benefit of a healthy country when they return.

À lire aussi :
New Zealand’s border quarantine has intercepted thousands of COVID cases, but is it time to retire the flawed system?

Grounded Kiwis played a delicate game by not explicitly attacking the need for MIQ, but repeatedly arguing there was a tipping point: no one should wait more than three months for entry, regardless of MIQ’s limited capacity or the state of the pandemic.

But there are many within the Grounded Kiwis network who have publicly doubted the wisdom of the government’s elimination strategy. In court, their lawyers spoke of wanting to “put a stake in the ground” so we wouldn’t ever see these border controls again.

In reply, government lawyers stressed the crucial role the elimination strategy played throughout the pandemic and its epidemiological foundation. It’s difficult to see a judge second guessing a public health game plan that has served New Zealand so well.

Was MIQ fit for purpose?

Grounded Kiwis also took issue with the design and operation of the quarantine system, especially the way spots were allocated, initially through a first-in-first-served system and later a virtual “lobby”.

They said alternatives should have been used, including a bespoke risk assessment system for each traveller, more extensive testing and triage, self-isolation and a more sophisticated allocation system. All better, they said, than subjecting returnees to the stress of the random lottery or the earlier free-for-all for open spots.

The government’s lawyers responded by explaining how the systems had evolved over time and why the alternatives Grounded Kiwis wanted either weren’t feasible or generated unacceptable risk in the face of an unpredictable virus.

Self-isolation was ripe for exposure events and would have created its own resourcing challenges, they argued. No alternative priority system, especially one trying to grade every applicant’s reason for travel, would be perfect. A new set of grievances would no doubt emerge.

À lire aussi :
NZ’s confirmed COVID case numbers are rising fast, but total infections are likely much higher – here’s why

Importantly, these alternatives didn’t square with the governing risk tolerances and precautionary approach. Director-General of Health Ashley Bloomfield’s evidence recorded that he sought to avoid irreversible decisions with potentially severe negative impacts on health – so much so, he sent out his public advice on key design elements for close peer review.

Ultimately, it’s difficult to know what the judge will make of it all. The philosophical attack on MIQ seems unlikely to succeed. But whether the design of systems allocating spots was sufficiently rigorous may still worry the judge.

Given the re-opening border (at least for vaccinated travellers), the best Grounded Kiwis will be able to achieve is a sense of vindication for past burdens – if the judge finds the design or operation of the system in its final throes imposed unjustified limits on the right of return. A decision on that is still some way off.

Les auteurs ne travaillent pas, ne conseillent pas, ne possèdent pas de parts, ne reçoivent pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’ont déclaré aucune autre affiliation que leur organisme de recherche.

– ref. How will history – and the law – judge New Zealand’s mothballed MIQ system? – https://theconversation.com/how-will-history-and-the-law-judge-new-zealands-mothballed-miq-system-177436

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrea Carson, Associate Professor, Department of Politics, Media and Philosophy, La Trobe University

With a federal election expected in May, at a time of great upheaval at home and around the world, the need for trusted media to accurately inform voters’ choices and debunk myths will be critical.

Yet studies show about two-thirds of Australians are worried about misinformation, especially about COVID-19, and do not know who or what to trust.

This is further complicated when politicians are the culprits, making false claims in the news media and online.

So what role should journalists play in calling out these falsehoods? Or should this role be left to third parties, such as independent fact-checkers, to test verifiable claims?

The fight against ‘fake news’

Fact-checking is one global response to countering fake news, which has become a multi-billion-dollar industry. More than 340 fact-checking outlets now operate worldwide.

In Australia, independent fact-checkers include newswires AAP and AFP, and RMIT ABC Fact Check (a collaboration between RMIT University and the public broadcaster). Yet little is known about what effect independent fact-checking has on public trust in news where false claims can be found.

In a new study published in a major international journal, we investigate if third-party fact-checking affects public trust in news. To do this we used the case study of the “sports rorts” scandal.

Read more:
The ‘sports rorts’ affair shows the need for a proper federal ICAC – with teeth

As a quick refresher, the sports rorts scandal unfolded just before the 2019 federal election. Sporting clubs in Coalition and marginal seats disproportionately benefited from a taxpayer-funded community sports grants program.

The Australian National Audit Office later investigated the funding process. It found the then sports minister and National Party deputy, Bridget McKenzie, had not allocated funds based on independent advice given to her. Several senior ministers, including Peter Dutton, defended McKenzie’s actions before she was forced to resign from that role because of the alleged pork-barrelling.

We use this real-life example in an experimental design to see what impact a real AAP fact-check about the scandal had on Australians’ trust in news. We mocked up two news stories – one presented as being from ABC online and another from Newscorp’s news.com.au. The stories contained identical wording and headlines, but used different fonts and banners.

Both stories contained a real quote from the then home affairs minister, Peter Dutton, about McKenzie’s decision-making process. On January 23 2020, Dutton stated:

Bridget McKenzie made recommendations, as I understand it, on advice from the sporting body that these programs that have been funded were recommended.

Dutton restated this position in other media that week, including on Nine’s Today program, suggesting his words were not a slip of the tongue.
The AAP fact-checked the statement and labelled it “false”.

Months after the scandal subsided, public recall of specific details was likely overtaken by pandemic news stories. So, we invited 1,600 adult Australians to do an online survey and randomly assigned them to read either our constructed ABC or News Corp story, and then answer questions about the trustworthiness of that story (and the media outlet more generally). We randomly assigned half the respondents to also read the AAP fact-check.

The findings tell both a positive and negative story about how Australians view political news. On the up side, trust in the news story (without seeing the fact check) was high for both our ABC (86%) and news.com.au stories (79%). Political partisanship has some impact, with Labor supporters the most trusting of the news story overall (87%).

Consistent with other Australian surveys, we found the ABC had higher levels of public trust overall than News Corp. However, some strong Coalition and right-wing supporters had greater trust in the news.com.au story, as other research has also found.

Concerningly, we found that when participants read the AAP fact check after reading the news story, trust in the original story fell sharply (by 13% overall), even after respondents’ political or news source preferences were taken into account. Counter-intuitively, the act of fact-checking had a clear negative influence on readers’ trust in the original news story for both the abc.com.au and new.com.au stories as the chart below shows.

This suggests news audiences may not separate a politician’s false claims within a news story from the news reporting itself. Think about that for a second:

• the politician told a falsehood
• a fact-checker corrects it
• but, as a consequence, the news story itself suffers the loss of public trust.

This finding is particularly important given Australian journalists’ reliance on a “he said/she said” news reporting style (this excludes opinion pieces), in which readers are presented with competing statements, one or both of which may be false, rather than the reporter actively adjudicating the false claim.

In this case, letting fact-checkers determine the truth may be a deeply unwise strategy for journalism. While fact-checkers unquestionably do many positive things such as identify misinformation, in this instance it lowered trust in political journalism.

With the public demanding the truth, it seems journalists have a very important role to play by critiquing politicians’ false claims in news stories at the time of reporting.

While some outlets like Crikey already practise active adjudication in political stories, we acknowledge it might be problematic for an organisation like the ABC, which has impartiality as a duty in the ABC Act 1983.

However, the ABC’s 2019 revised code of practice specifies that “impartiality” does not mean every perspective receives equal attention. Other media have the same policy. For example, The Conversation’s approach to reporting climate change has decided in favour of the scientific evidence and does not give air time to climate denialism.

We see lessons in our findings for independent fact-checkers as well. Fact-checkers might help increase trust in news by more clearly stating they are fact-checking a politician’s specific claim, rather than the media coverage that contains it. Some fact-checkers make this distinction already on their websites, but rarely on every fact-check explanation.

Spelling this out may help audiences avoid conflating a fact-check of a specific political falsehood with the trustworthiness of the news story and media outlet.

With a federal election just months away, this study is a timely reminder of the important role that political journalists can play as sense-makers rather than just conveyers of political information.

Andrea Carson receives funding from the Australian Research Council and Facebook. This project was funded with research grants from La Trobe University (academic start-up award).

Aaron Martin receives funding from the Australian Research Council and this project was funded by University of Melbourne Policy Lab.

Justin Phillips’ individual and collaborative research receives funding from the Facebook, the Royal Society Te Apārangi, and the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment.

Andrew Gibbons 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. Fact-checking can actually harm trust in media: new research – https://theconversation.com/fact-checking-can-actually-harm-trust-in-media-new-research-176032

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Karen McLean, Paediatrician, Royal Children’s Hospital; Research officer, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute

More than 10,000 Victorian children and young people live with a foster or kinship (relative) carer. They enter such care because of court orders aiming to protect them from abuse or neglect.

These children have more physical, developmental and mental health needs than others, which is why they are meant to have a number of health checks when they enter care.

But when we checked the records of more than 6,000 children who were in foster or kinship care for the first time, we found just 41 of them had attended all of the recommended health appointments.

Read more:
For children in foster care, the coronavirus pandemic could be extremely destabilising

High needs

The health needs of children in out-of-home care are high across all areas of health. Around half will have behavioural, mental health and developmental problems. Most have some physical health concern, such as asthma, constipation or hearing difficulties.

These high rates are not surprising, given their experiences of abuse, neglect or trauma and increased likelihood of living in adverse socioeconomic circumstances. This is why there are National Standards for out-of-home care which specifically state that health needs need to be assessed and addressed in a timely manner.

There is also a national framework, adopted by Victoria, that spells out the details: an initial health check by 30 days and a thorough check within three months, led by a paediatrician and including hearing, vision and dental checks.

Nine years ago, specialised health care clinics with paediatricians, psychologists and speech pathologists were established in some areas of Melbourne for vulnerable children to provide a comprehensive assessment and develop health management plans. Such clinics are now in Gippsland too, but they have not been rolled out to the rest of the state.

In the handbook for foster carers, Victorians are told to take a child to a GP, dentist, optometrist and for a hearing test within a month. The comprehensive health check is not mentioned.

We were concerned many children were missing out on these important health visits that could identify health issues and make a plan to address them. So we applied for federal and state de-identified administrative health data for Victorian children in care. This showed us health visits through Medicare (say, for GPs and optometrists) and at Victorian community, mental, dental and hospital outpatient health services.

Read more:
Does the government’s new national plan to combat child sexual abuse go far enough?

Too little, too late

We looked at health visits for all children who entered care and stayed at least three months – long enough to see a doctor. We analysed visits within the first year of care to all the recommended health professionals: GPs, paediatricians, dentists, optometrists and audiologists.

We found only one in every 130 children attended all the services within 12 months (far fewer attended all services within three months). It was good to see nine out of ten children saw a GP – but only 37% saw one within the recommended 30 days.

Using Medicare data meant we couldn’t see why a child had gone to the GP – it’s likely some visits were not for a check-up, but were for a specific issue or illness. About one-third of children made it to a paediatrician within a year, but less than 20% saw an optometrist, audiologist or community dentist. Very few attended these services within three months.

Because we looked at data over more than five years, we could see that in areas where a dedicated specialised health clinic was started up to provide health assessments, more children attended paediatricians, audiologists and optometrists. Even before the strains the COVID pandemic has placed on our health system, foster and kinship carers said there were not enough health services and very long waiting lists at those that did exist.

To make sure access to health care does not depend upon a child’s postcode, we need statewide paediatric health services that can provide health assessments and ongoing care.

Those children in foster care had higher odds of attending all health services than those in kinship care. We think this is because kinship carers do not receive as much training, support or financial compensation as foster carers. While it is good Victoria has world-leading rates of kinship care – children in kinship care tend to have better outcomes for behavioural and mental health than children in foster care – it is important all children in care get access to health assessments and the services they need.

Read more:
Reunifying First Nations families: the only way to reduce the overrepresentation of children in out-of-home care

Listen to those inside the system

To improve these rates, and to get in early to meet children’s health needs, we need to address what carers have told us present barriers to health care. They report limited paediatric and mental health services and difficulty navigating the systems.

Bureaucratic delays in providing Medicare numbers to carers and getting consent for health care need to be reduced. We could, as in the United Kingdom, make health assessments a legal requirement of care.

More data is also important. Our research only looked at Victorian children – each state and territory has its own approach to health care for children in care. But there are no publicly available data anywhere in Australia, and therefore no public accountability for some of the children who need it the most.

Because it takes years to get permission, analyse data and publish, we do not yet know the impact of COVID upon this group of children. With reports of worsened mental health and longer wait times for services, it is unlikely things have improved.

If we have a system that removes children from families when we believe they are being harmed or their needs neglected, then we need to make sure we don’t overlook them any further.

Karen McLean received funding from the state and federal government and a Learning System Grant (from the Centre for Excellence in Child and Family Welfare) for this research.

Harriet Hiscock receives funding from NHMRC

Sharon Goldfeld receives funding from ARC, NHMRC

– ref. We checked the records of 6,000 kids entering care. Only a fraction received recommended health checks – https://theconversation.com/we-checked-the-records-of-6-000-kids-entering-care-only-a-fraction-received-recommended-health-checks-177634

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anita Wreford, Professor, Lincoln University, New Zealand

This week’s major report on climate impacts, adaptation and vulnerability highlights the challenges a shifting climate presents for food- and fibre-producing regions, including Aotearoa New Zealand and Australia.

A chapter of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report evaluates key evidence from Australasia. It shows we are already observing tangible changes in our climate, even at the current 1.1℃ of warming above pre-industrial temperatures. With economies in both countries based on the primary sector, this is a cause for concern.

Climate impacts of particular relevance to the primary sector include increased frequency and intensity of droughts and changes to the seasonality of pasture growth and winter chilling in horticulture. Growing evidence shows these impacts would not be happening in a world without climate change.

These changes will intensify in the future as the planet warms. How much will depend on how successful global and domestic efforts are to reduce greenhouse gases.

The north and east of New Zealand is expected to become drier, and the west and south wetter, with considerable seasonal variation. Extreme events are expected to become more frequent. Droughts will be more frequent and last longer, rainfall will be more intense.

The number of days with temperatures above 25℃ is likely to increase considerably, while we can expect fewer frost days. Hot days cause heat stress in livestock and affect the quality of wine grapes, while fewer frost days can affect crops such as kiwifruit, which need winter chilling for both yield and quality.

All of these changes will have implications for our primary sector. It has developed around a relatively stable climate, with has allowed regional specialisation such as Sauvignon Blanc production in Marlborough, kiwifruit in the Bay of Plenty and dairy in the Waikato.

Read more:
Mass starvation, extinctions, disasters: the new IPCC report’s grim predictions, and why adaptation efforts are falling behind

Current efforts to prepare for impacts will reach limits

Opportunities may present as well, although we need to be careful and examine the full picture. While modelling studies suggest higher levels of carbon dioxide will boost pasture and tree growth, they do not incorporate changes in extreme events, such as drought or wind damage to trees, which counter those benefits.

Farmers and growers are already adapting to the impacts they experience now. As experts in their systems, they have the knowledge and experience to make changes to their farm management, timing of sowing and harvesting or perhaps experimenting with different crops.

Read more:
Plants are flowering a month earlier – here’s what it could mean for pollinating insects

But as global temperatures continue to rise and the impacts in Aotearoa intensify, these types of adaptations will become less effective. More transformative change may be necessary to maintain the viability of our primary sector.

This could include diversification of production, perhaps incorporating different crops or trees into an existing system, or more widespread land-use change. If planned carefully and for the long term, this could present an opportunity to address other challenges the primary sector faces, including the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, improve water quality and enhance biodiversity.

People will experience climate change differently

Farmers and growers are all different and have different circumstances that influence how they experience climate change and how well they can adapt. Many have high levels of debt that make further investment or borrowing challenging. Others may be constrained by decisions they have made in the past that lock them into the system they are currently in.

Almost all of them face increasing regulatory requirements that may also limit their ability to implement adaptations to climate change, particularly over the longer term. This might be due to limited financial resources, or lack of knowledge and skills to make changes on different fronts.

Read more:
Transformational change is coming to how people live on Earth, UN climate adaptation report warns: Which path will humanity choose?

However, it is essential any changes and adaptations undertaken now consider the long term. Otherwise we run the risk of “maladaptation” or adjustments that may be effective only on a small scale or short term, with negative or unintended consequences in other areas or into the future.

For example, irrigation can be maladaptive if it results in an associated increase in fertiliser use which in turn adds greenhouse gas emissions and reduces water quality. It can also lead to the loss of places of cultural, social and spiritual significance. And investment in irrigation can lock farmers into systems they are then unable to change.

Nature and land have the potential to support adaptation

The report also emphasises the critical role ecosystems and nature-based adaptation can play.

Land has potential to support adaptation beyond the primary productive sector. For example, using the natural environment as a buffer to avoid flooding from heavy rainfall would have a wider range of benefits than more “hard” engineered solutions. This could be in the form of wetlands or restoring river flood plains instead of constructing stop banks or sea walls which only transfer the problem elsewhere and lead to a potentially misguided sense of security.

This kind of adaptation that generates public good benefits has to be inclusive to ensure everyone’s voices are heard, especially tangata whenua. But it comes with the same urgency, as its effectiveness at higher levels of warming is uncertain.

The report emphasises that effective adaptation requires consistent policies, aligned across different policy areas, sectors and timeframes. Integration and coordination across levels of government and sectors, and the inclusion of all voices and knowledge systems are also critical.

Developing ways to share knowledge and tools, ideally across sectors, will be essential, along with monitoring and evaluating adaptations so that we can learn and develop as the climate changes.

Anita Wreford receives funding from the Deep South National Science Challenge, MPI, MBIE and Lincoln University.
She is a Lead Author on the Australasia Chapter of the IPCC Working Group II 2022 report.

– ref. New Zealand farmers and growers are already adapting to changing climate conditions – just not enough – https://theconversation.com/new-zealand-farmers-and-growers-are-already-adapting-to-changing-climate-conditions-just-not-enough-178161

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rachel Carey, Senior Lecturer in Food Systems, The University of Melbourne

Australia is facing yet another “unprecedented” weather event as extreme flooding across Queensland and New South Wales submerges entire towns.

In the immediate aftermath, there’s a new challenge for many Australians in these flood-ravaged areas. On top of damage to houses, livelihoods and water supply, it’s hard to get food. Stores are running short of fresh food. Major supermarkets have been forced to introduce buying limits on some foods.

Empty supermarket shelves and temporary food shortages are becoming more common in Australia, due to disruptions in food supply related to the COVID-19 pandemic and extreme weather events.

Australia can expect to see extreme weather and disasters such as floods, heatwaves, bushfires and droughts become more common and worse, according to the latest report from the global authority, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. That means food supplies will become disrupted more often and food will cost more.

At present, our governments largely rely on the food industry to ensure our supply chains are resilient to these threats. Governments also rely on charities to feed people who are going hungry after disasters.

As climate threats intensify, these responses are not enough. We need government to take the lead.

These shocks affect the entire food system

Climate and pandemic shocks pose real challenges across the food system, from production to transport to consumption. Just in the past few days, floods have washed away or ruined vegetable crops in low lying areas of the Lockyer Valley near Brisbane, a hugely productive horticultural area.

Read more:
To protect fresh food supplies, here are the key steps to secure city foodbowls

Fresh food has been damaged in warehouses, while the Brisbane Markets had to close due to flood damage.

The Pacific Highway between Sydney and Brisbane is blocked in places, disrupting distribution of food to some supermarkets, while emergency food supplies are being provided to flood-affected residents. Food waste is also likely to increase due to crop losses, delays in food freight and power outages.

Earlier this year, West Australia had food shortages dubbed “the worst in memory” after heavy flooding washed out 300 kilometres of the only railway linking it to the eastern states.

Food supply shocks have the greatest impact on the most vulnerable

Shocks like floods and the pandemic affect a large number of people through temporary food shortages and rising food prices. But the greatest impact is on people already at risk of food insecurity, meaning they may lack regular access to enough safe and nutritious food to lead an active and healthy life.

Rates of food insecurity in Australia are highest among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, asylum seekers, people who are unemployed and low-income households.

During the first 12 months of the pandemic, Australian demand doubled for food relief. More people were pushed into food insecurity, including casual workers who lost jobs, temporary migrant workers and international students.

As of 2021, fully one in six (17%) of Australian adults were severely food insecure and 1.2 million children were estimated to be living in food insecure households.

Even before the pandemic, rates of food insecurity were at worrying levels. Demand for food relief in Australia has risen rapidly over the last decade. This points to more systemic causes, such as low levels of income support.

We must make our food systems resilient

Governments urgently need plans to increase the resilience of food systems to shocks and stresses. At present, governments typically have plans to manage emergency food supplies during a disaster.

That’s no longer enough. What we need is a new focus on building the long-term resilience of our food systems to a range of future shocks related to climate change, pandemic and even geopolitical shifts emerging from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

What would this look like? Our new infographic identifies key features of a resilient food system, based on our research on the resilience of Melbourne’s food system.

One feature is diversity in where and how we source our food – global and local, large and small scale, commercial and community enterprises, supermarkets and other food markets.

Another is a decentralised food supply chain, where food processing, distribution and retail is spread across many locations and organisations. The pandemic has shown us the risks of highly centralised food processing and distribution.

We also need to strengthen local and regional food supply chains. Short food supply chains connecting people directly to sources of locally produced food can increase the resilience of food systems when longer food supply chains are disrupted. They can also build local economies.

Our governments need to lead

There’s a common belief Australia is a food secure country simply because we produce and export a lot of food.

But food security is about more than the amount of food we produce. It’s also about ensuring we all have access to nutritious food and ensuring our food supplies are resilient.

Read more:
What is food insecurity?

We can no longer rely on the food industry and charities to tackle our rising rates of food insecurity and step in after disasters.

Australian governments need food resilience plans where they lay out their strategies to ensure all Australians will have access to enough nutritious food in a world of increasing shocks to food supplies.

Access to adequate food is a fundamental human right. Our governments have a responsibility to help us to realise this right.

Rachel Carey leads the research project Foodprint Melbourne: Building the resilience of Melbourne’s food system, which is funded by the Lord Mayor’s Charitable Foundation. Project partners include the City of Melbourne, the Victorian Council of Social Service, the Open Food Network, Foodbank and the peak bodies representing local government areas in Melbourne’s city fringe food bowl. Rachel was also a Research Fellow on the project ‘Regulating Food Labels: The case of free range food products in Australia’, funded by the Australian Research Council.

Leila Alexandra is a research assistant on the research project Foodprint Melbourne: Building the resilience of Melbourne’s food system, which is funded by the Lord Mayor’s Charitable Foundation.

Maureen Murphy is a Research Fellow at the University of Melbourne on the Foodprint Melbourne research project, which is funded by the Lord Mayor’s Charitable Foundation

– ref. We can’t keep relying on charities and the food industry to supply food after disasters – the government must lead – https://theconversation.com/we-cant-keep-relying-on-charities-and-the-food-industry-to-supply-food-after-disasters-the-government-must-lead-178215

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Chie Adachi, Associate Professor and Director, Digital Learning, Deakin University

Universities are welcoming international students back to campuses now Australia’s borders are open. So, with these students back in person, is this the end of digital learning at universities? It shouldn’t be.

Continuing multimodal study will be critical for our universities to attract and retain international students whose numbers in Australia halved during the pandemic.

Quality of education is now tied to quality of hybrid in-person and online learning. And quality of learning is one of the three top factors international students consider when choosing a study destination.

Rolling back changes isn’t an option

What was normal practice in pre-COVID education might no longer adequately prepare students for the future.

Our lives and the world of work continue to digitalise. Education must develop the digital literacy and human-centred skills our graduates will need in this world.

Read more:
Digital learning is real-world learning. That’s why blended on-campus and online study is best

The pivot to online learning exposed international students to many new study options. These include:

• flexible online access to classes and learning materials from anywhere
• multi-modality in creating diverse content and in student assignments
• multiple platforms and communication channels for diversified feedback and dialogue
• captions for recorded videos through tech platforms such as Zoom.

However, international students have faced many challenges in their online learning. These include:

• disconnectedness and anxiety
• cross-cultural issues leading to misunderstandings or even conflicts
• time-zone differences
• lack of body language and other cues that aid understanding
• varying levels of digital literacy
• varying access to internet and online platforms due to different circumstances, locations and national policies.

4 ways to keep improving digital education

Continuing to enhance digital education could help Australian universities to secure their future. Looking at the emerging trends and issues for digital education globally, four areas require action to better meet international students’ needs.

1. Offer flexibility and hybrid learning

International students will benefit from further flexibility enabled by hybrid learning. In particular, they will welcome the choice of attending online or campus-based classes. This will help them juggle their studies with jobs and other competing priorities.

Hybrid learning, done well, also offers better access to learning materials and more opportunities for interaction. These interactions might be teacher to student, peer to peer, or peer to community. They can happen in person on campus, or online across time and space.

Read more:
International students are coming back and it’s not just universities sighing with relief

The demands on universities to design flexible, authentic, active and meaningful learning, both on campus and online, are more pressing than ever. International students won’t travel overseas simply to attend didactic lectures anymore.

2. Promote belonging and online communities

International students always long for human connections and social relationships in their learning away from home. Connections built through informal and formal learning in culturally immersive environments have been vital to their academic experiences and achievements.

The emergency remote learning over the past two years limited this opportunity. Digital learning environments usually consist of learning management systems with multiple communication technologies. What they lack is the informal “in-between” interactions that students value on campus.

Cultivating a sense of belonging and community online needs to be an indispensable aspect of educational design. Universities have to invest in this process. Students’ own independently created and temporarily used Facebook and WhatsApp chat groups are no substitute for university experiences.

However, universities must ensure digital safety and data privacy for their online communities.

Read more:
COVID halved international student numbers in Australia. The risk now is we lose future skilled workers and citizens

3. Look after student well-being

Virtual experiences are often framed as transcending various physical and material obstacles. These experiences build on the narrative of being able to “study anytime and anywhere”.

However, the pandemic has made us pay closer attention to our digital well-being, the physicality of human bodies and embodied practices in learning and teaching. With online learning, despite the comfort of students sitting at their desk in their own home, it is taxing to sit in front of a computer all day every day.

In the pivot to online learning, some teachers simply moved their classes online. As those class hours and interactions with computer screens and devices accumulated across days and weeks, many students struggled to focus on their studies online.

Universities need to design more carefully for the receiving end of human bodies interacting with online programs. Online course design needs to allow for students’ practical and holistic human needs, beyond academic needs. A focus on digital health and student well-being is essential for them to learn productively and healthily.

For example, back-to-back online classes should not be timetabled for students. They will struggle to focus if required to be online for hours on end.

Read more:
Australia can rebound to be international students’ destination of choice when borders reopen

4. Internationalise learning for all students

It is crucial for curriculum content and online teaching and learning experiences to be internationalised.

The future world of work is ever more global and digital. To prepare graduates for this highly connected world, universities must develop hybrid curriculum and learning experiences that include international and intercultural dimensions.

By internationalising the hybrid curriculum and digital education, we engage students with both local and global issues. This will enrich learning for all while developing empathy and graduate employability.

The investment will be worth it

International students bring rich educational, social and economic capital to Australia. The revenue they provide also heavily subsidises other university activities such as research.

Even though international students are returning physically, we should not downplay the role of digital education. Instead, we need to pay more attention to their needs for digital learning.

We have the opportunity to work with these students to improve digital education practices holistically and to internationalise hybrid learning for all students. We need to create learning spaces that seamlessly dissolve the boundaries of informal and formal, digital and physical.

Quality digital education will enhance Australia’s reputation for international education.

Ly Tran receives funding from the Australian Research Council and DFAT for her research on international students, geopolitics and student mobilities, the New Colombo Plan, staff professional development in international education and graduate employability in Vietnam.

Chie Adachi 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. International students are back on campus, but does that spell the end of digital learning? Here’s why it shouldn’t – https://theconversation.com/international-students-are-back-on-campus-but-does-that-spell-the-end-of-digital-learning-heres-why-it-shouldnt-177545

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Paula Jarzabkowski, Professor in Strategic Management, The University of Queensland

As South-East Queensland and New South Wales wade through the devastation of storms and flooding that now threatens the greater Sydney region, residents and businesses will be turning to insurance as their only hope of recovery.

More than 60,000 claims have been lodged in seven days.

Unfortunately, many people will find that they are either not insured or underinsured against this sort of catastrophe either because premiums have become unaffordable or because they have become unavailable because of the increasing frequency of extreme weather events.

Without insurance payouts they will find it hard to recover, causing emotional and economic hardship for them, their communities and the Australian economy.

The insurance gap keeps growing

The potential for disaster and the lack of insurance to pay for recovery were already known. Australia is among the most exposed countries in the world to extreme weather events and also one of the least insured advanced economies.

Floods in March 2021 resulted in A$2.9 billion worth of damage. The current bill will probably be higher and, without individual insurance, taxpayers are likely to have to pick up the bill – even though they shouldn’t have to.

Australia is in a vicious cycle: each disaster increases underinsurance, forcing taxpayers to help out, and the more it happens the more underinsurance grows.

To stop this cycle, the government needs to do two things: reduce the risk of damage to properties, and subsidise insurance for those who remain at risk.

How to end the vicious cycle

The Australian government needs to create a financially-sustainable disaster insurance model.

Known as a Protection Gap Entity and in place in nations including Spain, France and Switzerland, it creates an insurance or reinsurance pool that reduces premiums, provides wide coverage and enables urgent support to be paid out fast.

Our research into protection gap entities overseas finds them effective when coverage reaches 85%-100% of households. Such coverage enables redistribution, in which everyone buys insurance at a flat rate against all types of disasters.

Read more:
After the floods comes underinsurance: we need a better plan

The private insurers pass on the risk to the state-owned protection gap entity, which uses the pooled premiums to ensure everyone is covered for their specific disaster.

Because every type of disaster doesn’t usually happen at once, that risk is likely to be manageable.

That’s one way a government-run protection gap entity could stop the vicious cycle in Australia. The other is by using data to reduce risks. Protection gap entities are well-positioned to do this because they receive every claim, so know what is damaged where and how.

Our research in France and Switzerland sets out how this data is used to reduce risk. These protection gap entities are:

• directly connected to the government system of planning and building regulations, so their data can be used to build future resilience

• have the power to ensure insurance payments for every damaged property are used to rebuild in a disaster-resilient way.

This process is often called Build Back Better, and only works when it uses data for a joined-up approach to financial and physical resilience.

The cyclone reinsurance pool is half-hearted

So, what is Australia doing? The Australian Treasury is in the process of legislating an oddly specifically named Northern Australia Cyclone Reinsurance Pool, due to commence July 1.

As it happens, the pool wouldn’t cover the current flood losses both because they are not caused by a cyclone and also because they are not situated in what the pool defines as northern Australia.

What’s proposed has neither the widespread cover needed for redistribution nor a mandate for disaster risk reduction. It would address past floods in one region, rather than prevent future losses everywhere.

Read more:
Stalled weather: how stuck air pressure systems drive floods and heatwaves

International research finds these partial approaches both fail to deliver affordable insurance and fail to reduce the incidence of disasters.

The proposed pool won’t stop the vicious cycle. It could do so, but only if the government is willing to refashion it along the lines of a protection gap entity.

Meanwhile, the recovery from the Queensland and Northern NSW floods will be largely funded by the public purse, which is you and me – taxpayers.

What we won’t be getting is measures to ensure next time the recovery is better.

Paula Jarzabkowski receives funding for research into the evolving nature of terrorism risk from The Australian Reinsurance Pool Corporation. She is also a member of the Expert Advisory Group for Pool Reinsurance Company UK; a Member of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) High Level Advisory Board for the Financial Management of Catastrophic Risks; and has been Co-Chair of the Expert Advisory Group of the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Development Office, Centre for Global Disaster Protection

Corinne Unger receives funding for collaborative research on terrorism reinsurance with the Australian Reinsurance Pool Corporation (ARPC).

Katie Meissner 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. Victims of NSW and Queensland floods have lodged 60,000 claims, but too many are underinsured. Here’s a better way – https://theconversation.com/victims-of-nsw-and-queensland-floods-have-lodged-60-000-claims-but-too-many-are-underinsured-heres-a-better-way-178294

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Richard Holden, Professor of Economics, UNSW Sydney

“It’s difficult to make predictions, especially about the future,” American baseball legend Yogi Berra once quipped. When it comes to predicting where the Australian economy is heading the task is made even trickier in the face of war in Europe and uncertainty about the global energy and other markets.

This week there was some good news. Australia’s economic growth (GDP) bounced back strongly in the last quarter of 2021, up 3.4%, according to Australian Bureau of Statistics figures.

This was a turnaround from the 1.9% decline in GDP in the September quarter.

Australian quarterly gross domestic product

It is often noted, however, that GDP is an imperfect measure – it doesn’t capture things such as unpaid work. It is also “backward-looking”.

The figures tell us what happened at the end of last year, at a time when what we would really like to know is what is going to happen this year, and beyond.

That said, they provide useful clues.

Splurge-based recovery

The 3.4% growth was generated almost entirely by consumer spending (3.2 percentage points) with the rest due to changes in inventories and trade.

Government spending made no contribution. Investment (both private and public) was actually a drag, knocking 0.3 and 0.1 percentage points off growth.

This isn’t all that surprising. After months of lockdowns in much of Australia, people wanted to spend.

In the September quarter household savings soared to 19.8% of income. In the December quarter they fell to 13.6% as people splurged on things they couldn’t spend on while they had been locked down.

Household final consumption expenditure

Spending on “accommodation and food services” jumped 26.1%. Personal and other services (such as haircuts and beauty treatments) grew 15.4%. Air transport expenditure rose a massive 56.5%, though, as economists say, it was was “strong growth off a low base”.

In other words, many people couldn’t get a haircut or go to a restaurant or fly in the third quarter of 2021. In the fourth quarter they could – and did.

This is reinforced by the fact the strongest ouput growth (6.7%) was in New South Wales, where the lockdown arguably bit the most mid-year.

State final demand, December quarter

Of course, Omicron hit hard in mid-December, but too late to have a big impact on the quarterly figures.

We will see more of Omicron’s impact in the numbers for the March quarter, due to be released after the May election.

On the plus side, households still have a large stock of savings compared with pre-pandemic levels.

The $424 billion consumer “war chest” Treasurer Josh Frydenberg has rightly been talking up puts us in a good position to spend, building a sustained recovery.

Household saving ratio

Can Australia’s spending-led-recovery continue in 2022? Perhaps, but there are reasons to be concerned.

The mechanical point is that the GDP figures for the December quarter are only impressive when you fail to remember they were bouncing back from a decline of 1.9% in the September quarter (so-called negative growth).

Read more:
Wednesday’s GDP numbers are impressive, but they are for the December quarter, when we were bouncing back from Delta

A less mechanical concern is that the world is now awash with uncertainty.

The largest European conflict since the second world war threatens to upend everything from peace and security to global supply chains and financial markets.

The Reserve Bank governor referred to “a major new source of uncertainty” after his board meeting on Tuesday.

Domestically, we still don’t know whether inflation is just returning to regular programming or getting away from us.

What’s ahead

Like many economists, I favour the former interpretation. Anyone who tells you they know for sure is delusional.

Aggressive wages claims, if successful, could be the genesis of a wage-price spiral, sending inflation systemically higher, but we don’t know.

The Reserve Bank is going to raise interest rates sooner rather than later.

It could be mid-year or delayed many months, but eventually rates will climb to align with the so-called “neutral rate of interest” – the level that keeps the economy on an even keel, with unemployment low and inflation stable.

Read more:
Why there’s no magic jobless rate to increase Australians’ wages

There is considerable uncertainty about what that rate is.

In the 1990s and early 2000s the Reserve Bank thought it was between 3% and 4%. Now it’s hard to dispute it is lower, but not as low as 0.1%, where rates are now. Either way, it suggests meaningful rate rises are coming.

All of these factors will feed into future rate rises – which will dent spending by Australia’s highly leveraged households.

In short, getting sustainable GDP growth back to the 3% plus it used to be will require more than just a consumer spending binge. It will require the hard work of productivity growth.

The budget looms

In 2021, for the first time, the federal budget set out four years of “forecasts” instead of two years of forecasts and two years of “projections”.

It has an important implication. It means this year’s budget will need to take a more formal and rigorous view about the next four years – in particular about the international environment in which Australia sits.

The budget is due in less than four weeks. The big question is what will be needed to drive the economy in the years ahead. It will require more than a rebound in restaurant meals and haircuts.

Richard Holden is President of the Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia.

– ref. Vital Signs: Australia’s hairdressing-based economic recovery can’t last – https://theconversation.com/vital-signs-australias-hairdressing-based-economic-recovery-cant-last-178327

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sheila Fitzpatrick, Professor of History at the Institute of Humanities and Social Sciences, Australian Catholic University

One interpretation of the name “Ukraine” is borderland. This needs to be taken seriously.

Borderlands are all about diversity and competing understandings of community and nation. They are always mixtures of people with different languages, religions and customs. Some will think of themselves as kin to the people on one side of the border; some look to the other side.

In Ukraine, the West (Europe) is one side of the border, the East (Russia) the other.

Among those in the eastern parts of Ukraine (Donetsk, Luhansk) who tend to look East are descendants of the Russian peasants, like the parents of Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev, who around the turn of the 20th century came to work in the Donbass mines.

In borderlands like Ukraine, there are generally competing origin stories.

Ukrainians tell a story of the origins of the Ukrainian nation going back to 11th century Kyiv, surviving centuries of oppression by Russia and Poland, and, finally, emerging out of the wreckage of the Soviet Union as a sovereign Ukrainian state in 1991.

For the Russians, the various western and southern provinces now called “Ukraine” were populated by Slavic border people (Ukrainians) who were essentially Russian. They considered this land as a part of the Russian Empire for centuries.

The Australian press has been treating the Ukrainian origin story as “truth” and the Russian one as “lies,” but things are never that simple. Like all origin stories, both are a mixture of historical fact and political imagination.

Read more:
Saint Olga of Kyiv is Ukraine’s patron saint of both defiance and vengeance

A modern country

Ukraine’s modern history as an independent state amounted to a few tumultuous years of a shaky Ukrainian People’s Republic between the collapse of the Russian Empire in 1917 and the consolidation of the Soviet Union in 1920.

Ironically, its incorporation into the Soviet Union as one of its original constituent republics was an important milestone on the path to national sovereignty.

This incorporation established territorial boundaries, recognised Ukrainians as the republic’s titular nationality, and, for 70 years, offered the republic’s communist leaders a substantial degree of autonomy (increasing over time) in the internal government of their territory.

Post-Soviet Ukraine has built a national identity around the memory of Holodomor, the famine of the early 1930s which is seen by the current Ukraine state and some historians as a punishment Stalin intentionally visited upon Ukrainians.

There were undoubtedly black chapters in the history of Soviet Ukraine, as of the Soviet Union in general.

From the mid 1950s, the top official in Ukraine was always a Ukrainian, and Ukraine had its men in the party Politburo (the top Soviet policy-making body) and substantial influence in Soviet national affairs.

Nationalist and, ultimately, separatist feeling increased in Ukraine during Gorbachev’s perestroika (1985-91), but less than in the Baltic states or even the Caucasus.

As late as March 1991, 70% of the Ukrainian population voted to remain in the Union.

But by December the great majority of Ukrainians voted for independent sovereignty.

Kith and kin

In recent weeks, the depth and sincerity of the commitment to Western democracy, the repudiation of the Communist past and rejection of the Russian connection has been impressively demonstrated by the Ukrainian government and people.

Russians whose memories go back 30 or 40 years might see the Ukrainian situation differently.

This is not just a matter of one deluded autocrat (President Vladimir Putin) leading Russia into a deranged quest for aggrandisement. This is a story of the attitudes and assumptions of the majority of the Russian population, which up to now has supported Putin and (at least pre-invasion), his Ukrainian policy.

Read more:
Remembering the past, looking to the future: how the war in Ukraine is changing Europe

The appalling and tragic decision to invade Ukraine may have been Putin’s alone. Pre-invasion Russian opinion polls are an unreliable guide to the future. It is not clear if the younger post-Soviet generation – in particular, young men liable for military conscription – see Ukraine and its current Western orientation in the same way as their elders.

Putin’s past wars and acts of aggression on the international scene (Chechnya, Crimea) raised his popularity at home, but they were successful wars. So far, Russia’s Ukrainian adventure is not looking like a success.

In the case of Crimea (which, as all Russians know, was transferred from Russia to Ukraine in 1954 on a whim of Khrushchev), this agression was essentially bloodless.

Chechnya was bloody, but the victims were not Slavs.

It remains to be seen how the Russian Army and Russians back home will feel about the killing of Ukrainians: Slavic kith and kin.

Sheila Fitzpatrick 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. Ukraine as a ‘borderland’: a brief history of Ukraine’s place between Europe and Russia – https://theconversation.com/ukraine-as-a-borderland-a-brief-history-of-ukraines-place-between-europe-and-russia-178168

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

If Scott Morrison had contracted COVID two months ago, it would have been a big story. Instead, when the PM fell victim this week, it was also-ran news.

We are finally starting to “live with COVID”, as Morrison has insisted we should. Except in Western Australia, which opened its border this week, and faces a painful transition.

More significantly of course, the COVID story has been pushed aside by two massive events: Russia’s attack on Ukraine and the devastating floods in NSW and Queensland.

Both show, in their vastly different ways, how quickly and dramatically things can change, and consequently shift public attention, throwing a blanket over most else.

Each has highlighted, again so differently, the great courage of ordinary people. And they have put into perspective the smallness and the pettiness characterising much of our day-to-day politics.

We are only weeks from the formal start of the campaign for the May election. Yet we’re having a break in the national argument between the parties.

Or at least it’s been toned down. It goes beyond being drowned out. The major parties are either finding in their research, or intuiting, that people’s tolerance for their usual carry-on is limited in times like this, although the hiatus will be temporary.

The floods will feed into the on-the-ground issues in coming weeks in some areas. Stressed voters trying to get their lives back together will lay blame as the reconstruction begins.

The state governments will cop criticism but the Feds will be vulnerable too.

Morrison (with the lessons of the bushfire disaster in memory) has been anxious to get ahead of critics. On Thursday he convened a virtual roundtable to discuss supply chain and other issues (he tuned in from Kirribilli House); federal funds have been announced for NSW and money for Queensland will follow.

At the start of the week Newspoll, in which the opposition retained its 55-45% two-party lead, was a relief for Labor and a source of further worry for an embattled government. Most immediately, it suggested the Coalition had failed, at least for the moment, in its over-the-top attempt to wedge the opposition on China.

Both sides know the polls will narrow at some point. But the longer Labor can hold that off, the better for its momentum and the more the Coalition’s morale will be sapped.

One danger Labor will need to keep in mind is being caught on the hop as circumstances change. COVID-related government mistakes were fertile ground for the opposition as recently as January. Yet Labor’s strategists know that harking back to these, while tempting, is reaching into a bucket with a hole in it.

It’s always difficult to let go of issues as they pass their use-by date – for example, Labor in 2001 was out of time when campaigning on rolling back the GST on some items.

For its part, the government needs to get attention onto the economy, but it mightn’t have much opportunity until close to the March 29 budget.

Wednesday’s national accounts indicated a strong economic recovery in the December quarter, in a bounce back from last year’s lockdowns in Melbourne and Sydney. (The March quarter will reflect the Omicron hit but we won’t see that until after the election.) The numbers received limited coverage, squeezed by the dominant stories.

Read more:
Labor maintains 55-45% Newspoll lead despite elevation of ‘national security’ issues

The budget, the launch pad for the election, will be affected by both the floods and the Ukraine war, although the estimates of the extent of the impact will of necessity be rough. Apart from bringing direct costs, the floods will hit production. Reserve Bank governor Philip Lowe this week drew attention to the uncertainty the war poses for the world economy.

Asked this week about the budget’s priorities, Treasurer Josh Frydenberg laid down some markers.

“Despite the very strong economic recovery that we’ve seen and the resilience, the recovery is not yet locked in,” he told his national accounts news conference. COVID was “still with us” and the international events showed the “downside risks”.

The government had been driving unemployment down – “we are on the verge of full employment” – and the budget would continue to invest in areas that helped create jobs. “So, there will be very significant infrastructure investment […] There will be very significant investment in our regions because they are going to be key to our economic growth.”

Frydenberg named the digital economy as “a major focus” for the government, as well as manufacturing. There’d be attention on skills and on “incentivising investment”, including in energy. National security will obviously be to the forefront, and he also mentioned health and education.

Budgets are full of pea-and-thimble tricks, so in some areas the question will be whether extra spending is real or illusory. But clearly budget repair will not be a priority at this point and there’ll be election “pork” to try to attract voters.

Frydenberg continues to dodge the question of whether the low and middle income tax offset, which costs nearly $8 billion, will be renewed. Despite the price tag, it would be a big call in an election budget not to continue it or have some equivalent.

This budget is not just important to the government’s chance of reviving from a low base, but many in the Liberal Party will also have an eye on the personal performance of Frydenberg, as a prospect for leader if the Coalition is defeated.

As he watched things from isolation at Kirribilli House, Morrison would have registered Anthony Albanese arriving in Perth as soon as the border opened on Wednesday night. Morrison is desperate to get to WA, where the Liberals fear for two or three of their seats.

The PM’s illness has been a sharp reminder of something that’s been preoccupying the parties. We might be “living with COVID” but it still has the ability to disrupt life mightily, including election campaigning.

Frustrated as he might be this week, Morrison may reckon he’s better off to have COVID now than in the campaign itself (assuming no return bout).

Albanese has dodged the virus but knows there are no guarantees it won’t strike him between now and election day. Imagine coming down with COVID in the second-last week of the campaign, say when there was supposed to be a face-to-face debate.

The parties are putting in place contingency plans but nothing is easy. With our “presidential” campaigns, there are no understudies for leaders.

In this era when many people have become fans of working from home, for a leader a week’s electioneering from the domestic office, perhaps while feeling crook, is as bad as campaign nightmares get.

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

– ref. Grattan on Friday: Morrison’s COVID bout a reminder the virus could disrupt election campaign – https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-morrisons-covid-bout-a-reminder-the-virus-could-disrupt-election-campaign-178427

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sabrina Pit, Honorary Senior Research Fellow at the University of Sydney, Honorary Adjunct Research Fellow, Western Sydney University

I’m writing this from the flooded far north coast of New South Wales, where all around me people are contending with the awful and unexpected consequences of a catastrophic flood.

I have worked in rural health for a long time and this has been the worst I have experienced it. It is well established that those living in flood-prone areas often already have more financial and health issues than others.

Among those consequences is the need to manage medicines safely, and sometimes urgently find and acquire medicines you need to stay alive and healthy or keep pain at manageable levels.

The far north coast has a high population of older people, many of whom need daily medicines such as insulin to survive.

While I was picking up medicines for a family member this morning, another older person turned up at the pharmacy with a script. She was running out of her medicine today but the pharmacy did not have the required medicines left. She continued her hunt for medicines at the last pharmacy in the area we have access to.

These are just some of the challenges people face when it comes to medicines in a disaster zone.

From ordinary errand to a life or death challenge

A week ago, if you needed to top up your medicine supplies, you could pop down to the local chemist. The script would be filled, and supplies plentiful. It would be an easy trip.

Today during floods, an errand like that means confronting challenges such as:

• many chemists being underwater or badly flooded

• the chemists that are open are contending with a surge of demand as people flock there to buy medicines

• power is down in many places, meaning online systems for managing scripts are impossible to access and fridges used to store medicines such as insulin at home are not working

• phone and internet is down or patchy in many places

• petrol is very hard to get and running out, so many people cannot drive to the chemist

• many people have lost their cars too or have water damaged cars

• some people cannot leave home due to landslides or floodwaters

• roads are being cut off and supply lines disrupted because the highway is blocked off

• getting a new script is not as easy as heading to the doctor’s office; some GPs are also flooded in, their practices inundated or not-operational and many are unable to get to work and/or stuck without power, phone or internet.

These challenges are not unique to our area nor are they unique to floods. People who have survived bushfires and other disasters have faced similar issues.

But with disasters predicted to become more frequent and more intense as the climate changes, it does raise the question what systems we can put in place to deal with these challenges in future without putting people at risk.

What can be done?

Firstly, if you are in an emergency, please contact the SES on 132 500.

When preparing your evacuation plan, ensure you have a list of all your medicines, care plans, scripts, Medicare and other health-care cards details and other important medical information ready.

If an evacuation warning is out for your area, ensure all your information and medicines are packed. Store medicines that need to remain cold in an esky with ice bricks, so you are ready when you need to evacuate. The esky is important; power may not be available for a while when you leave home.

Several apps are available to help in preparing for a disaster and taking your medicines safely, such as the Red Cross’ RediPlan emergency survival plan or the MedicineWise app.

If you know a flood is heading your way, it’s also handy to have extra cash at hand. During this flood disaster, electronic payment systems were not working in many places in the Northern Rivers. Having some cash can further reduce already very stressful circumstances.

If you’re flood-affected, in need of medicines and can get yourself to a pharmacy, it may be OK even if you have lost your scripts in the floods. The pharmacist may be able to call the GP on their mobile.

If you have internet access, use social media to see if others can help with transport or delivery of medicines. Many people feel powerless during disasters and will be keen to help.

And there may be some strictly limited circumstances under which a pharmacist can provide a small emergency supply of certain medicines without a script.

According to Queensland Health:

In an emergency situation where you are not able to reach a community pharmacy, your GP’s prescription can be filled by a Queensland Health public hospital pharmacy. However, please be aware that hospitals may not stock the full range of medicines prescribed by your GP, as the needs of hospital and community patients are different.

You can use My Health Record to get certain key details on your medicines and health details, if you’ve got internet access.

After the floods, it is important to look at replacing medicines that have been in contact with flood water or other contaminated water. This includes pills, liquids, injections, inhalers or creams. Contact your doctor or pharmacist as soon as possible and organise replacement medications.

You can also contact the NPS Medicines Line 1300 MEDICINE (1300
633 424) or the healthdirect helpline (1800 022 222 or Nurse on Call in Victoria) if you are unsure or have questions about your medicines.

More broadly, access to medicines during a natural disaster is complex, and we need to continue strong partnerships and collaboration between organisations to ensure access during disasters.

Having a good spread of chemists around different parts of a town or rural areas helps boost the chances that even if some are hit by disasters, others are able to operate and provide people with medicines (which is what we have seen in the 2022 floods in some areas).

Privately owned and hospital-run helicopters have been used to get medicines to residents in flood-affected areas of Brisbane; ensuring disaster-prone regions have the infrastructure and machines needed for this kind of help is important.

COVID forced us to think creatively about delivering medical supplies to people who need them but are unable to visit a pharmacy. This shows what’s possible when needs must be met.

Thinking carefully about people’s health during and after disaster is crucial to building disaster resilience. Ensuring uninterrupted supplies, extra support for vulnerable people and access to medicines is a core part of that goal.

Sabrina Pit has received funding in the past from NHMRC.

– ref. Getting urgent medicines in a flood zone can be a life or death challenge – https://theconversation.com/getting-urgent-medicines-in-a-flood-zone-can-be-a-life-or-death-challenge-178300

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Steve Turton, Adjunct Professor of Environmental Geography, CQUniversity Australia

Climate change – fuelled by increasing greenhouse gases – is causing more extreme weather events worldwide.

Many of these events, such as the “rain bomb” inundating Australia’s east coast and the recent heatwave in Western Australia, are associated with “stalled” weather systems.

Normally, Australia’s weather systems are driven from west to east by jet streams: narrow bands of fast-flowing air high up in the troposphere, the lowest layer of Earth’s atmosphere.

But when weather systems stall in a particular place, usually because of “blocking” high-pressure systems that stop them moving on, they can produce devastating extended periods of heat, cold or rain. As the climate continues to change, these stalled weather systems are expected to get bigger.

Stalled weather systems

Blocking systems are persistent high-pressure systems combined with one or two low-pressure systems.

High-pressure systems (where air pressure is relatively high) are associated with clear and dry weather, while low-pressure systems are associated with rising air, cloudiness and rain

Blocking tends to be less persistent in the southern hemisphere than the northern as the westerly jet streams are stronger.

Blocking highs are mostly associated with a region of low pressure to the north of the system. Together, the two systems work against each other to effectively “stall” the weather.

Depending on where they occur, blocking systems may cause consistent heatwaves, cold spells, floods and dry spells. They are often associated with record-breaking weather events and human deaths – for example, the deadly heatwaves in France in 2003 and Russia in 2010.

In 2021, persistent blocking systems were responsible for the North America cold wave in February and the record-shattering Western North America heatwave in June and July. The latter event caused some of the highest temperatures ever recorded in the region, including the highest temperature ever measured in Canada at 49.6℃.

Slowing jet streams

Blocking events in the northern hemisphere are often associated with slowing or meandering jet streams. This occurs when the polar vortex – a large region of low pressure and cold air around the pole – breaks down.

While the exact mechanisms driving the slowing of mid-latitude jet streams is debated, the consensus attributes it to “Arctic amplification”.

The Arctic region is currently warming two to three times faster than the rest of the world. This different rate of atmospheric warming between the Arctic and tropics results in a weaker atmospheric pressure gradient and slows down the jet streams.

Stalled weather in Australia

Blocking highs in the Australian region usually occur in the Great Australian Bight and the Tasman Sea. These strong high-pressure systems typically form further south than usual.

These highs remain almost stationary for an extended period, blocking the normal easterly progression of weather systems across southern Australia. They can occur at any time of year, and usually stay in the Australian region for several days to several weeks.

A prolonged blocking high in the south Tasman Sea in January and February 2019 caused record heatwaves for many inland towns in Australia. Adelaide recorded the hottest day for any Australian capital city (46.6℃) on January 24.

The same blocking high prevented the movement of a deep monsoon low in North Queensland, resulting in the equivalent of a year’s rain in a week over the Townsville area in early February 2019.

The rain bomb

In late February 2022, a stalled weather system caused heavy rain and flooding over large parts of Southeast Queensland and Northern NSW. A stubborn blocking high near New Zealand prevented it moving away to the east.

A region of low pressure in the upper atmosphere became cut off from the westerly air current further south, creating a trough of low pressure at surface level. This created the perfect mix of upper and surface atmospheric conditions for what has been called a “rain bomb” or a “river in the sky”.

Read more:
Like rivers in the sky: the weather system bringing floods to Queensland will become more likely under climate change

The rain bomb caused extensive major flooding.

Brisbane, the country’s third-largest city, smashed its three-day record with 677mm of rain. Over four days, the city recorded 741mm – almost three-quarters of its annual average rainfall!

The city endured flooding similar to the disastrous 2011 floods. More than 15,000 homes are estimated to have been inundated in Brisbane by the current event.

Read more:
‘One of the most extreme disasters in colonial Australian history’: climate scientists on the floods and our future risk

The Brisbane River peaked at 3.85 metres, below the 4.46 metres experienced in 2011. However, the two flood events are very different, and some suburbs experienced worse flooding than in 2011.

Gympie, north of Brisbane, and Lismore in northern NSW experienced catastrophic flooding of their central business districts. Gympie has endured its worst flood in 120 years and Lismore its highest ever recorded flood level, smashing the previous record by about 2 metres.

Future events

Recent research has shown extremely high rainfall, and flooding events, will become more likely as the atmosphere and oceans warm under climate change.

What does this mean for the future? Can we expect more rain bomb events? Will we continue to witness more rainfall and flood level records in Australia and globally?

The answer to all these questions is yes, and rising greenhouse gases and warming of the atmosphere and oceans are to blame.

The rise in average global temperatures has driven more extreme rainfall events since the 1950s. Australian land areas have warmed about 1.4℃ since 1910.

Read more:
Global evidence links rise in extreme precipitation to human-driven climate change

A warmer atmosphere can hold more water. For every 1℃ of extra warming, about 7% more water can be saved as water vapour. Given the right atmospheric triggers, vast amounts of stored water can be released as heavy rainfall over unsuspecting human communities.

The jury is out regarding the effects of global warming on high-pressure blocking systems.

Currently, climate models tend to underestimate both the frequency and duration of blocking events. Scientists continue to grapple with this problem in their models, and it forms the basis of ongoing research.

However, one study found climate change will increase the size of stalled high-pressure weather systems in the northern hemisphere by as much as 17% this century.

In the case of an extensive high-pressure system, this will cause impacts such as heat and cold waves over larger geographical areas, affecting more people.

Steve Turton 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. Stalled weather: how stuck air pressure systems drive floods and heatwaves – https://theconversation.com/stalled-weather-how-stuck-air-pressure-systems-drive-floods-and-heatwaves-178157

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alasdair Macintyre, Associate lecturer visual arts, artist, PhD candidate, Australian Catholic University

“Nice outfit” said an approving Jack Nicholson to the caped crusader in Tim Burton’s 1989 movie version of Batman, resplendent in menacing black rubber with bulging pecs, a six pack and very pointy ears.

This is the first of Batman’s many batsuits that visitors see upon entering the Gold Coast equivalent to Bruce Wayne’s bat cave, Movie World’s showcase exhibition Batman Legacy. The Dark Knight mannequin stands resolutely, fists coiled by his side, posed ready to leap into one of the nearby batmobiles.

The exhibition is billed by the theme park as the “largest official Batman exhibition in the Southern Hemisphere”, encompassing multiple bat suits, vehicles, movie props and costumes from the cinematic Batman franchise from 1989 to 2017.

Having been first introduced to readers through comic books in 1939, there would be very few of us around who wouldn’t remember a time when this superhero was a massive part of popular culture – and as the years have gone by, the caped crusader has adapted to suit the era he is in. This is exemplified through the changing nature of his costumes – from grim-dark leather, to bat-nipples to bespoke-emo.

Simple fabric and pantomine aesthetic

Batman made his debut on March 29 in issue 27 of Detective Comics and his immediate popularity saw his first cinematic depiction in a low-budget serial in 1943, followed by a longer series in 1949. In these early depictions Batman’s suit was a simple fabric costume with a pantomime aesthetic filled by burly actors, ill-fitting for the most part.

This remained the case through to Adam West’s caped crusader in the 1960s, when the character was portrayed on screen in full colour for the first time. This depiction of Batman in light grey and blue was very true to the batsuit as seen in the parallel comic series of the era, including the chest-mounted bat-symbol enclosed in a yellow ellipse, which was heavily armoured and sought to act as a target for gunfire (rather than the superhero’s head).

For several generations of fans, West became the established look of the caped crusader.

The dark knight

When Tim Burton’s Batman emerged blacker-than-black in 1989, the aesthetic reflected the darker direction of The Dark Knight Returns comic series earlier that decade.

The casting of Michael Keaton as the titular Batman raised some controversy at the time, as the comedic actor’s slight build didn’t reflect the established muscular look of Bruce Wayne/Batman.

This was resolved with Keaton’s bravura performance and his bat suit (and all subsequent suits) which had external stylised muscles incorporated into it – transforming Keaton into a much more formidable figure. The actor had to endure adding 40 rubbery kilograms to his overall bodyweight, the cape alone weighing in at 18 kg.

External nipples

Although his initial film did well at the box office, Tim Burton’s grim Batman Returns (1993) did not reach the same heights, leading to Joel Schumacher taking charge as director.

Batman Forever (1995) had a more colourful and lighter touch, reflected in Jim Carrey’s sparkly Riddler onesy style jumpsuit, and Tommy Lee-Jones Two-Face fuschia dominated outfit.

Batman Forever also saw the introduction of Robin, with both he and Batman (now played by Val Kilmer) sporting highly stylised suits that further accentuated musculature, with the added addition of external nipples.

The infamous bat-nipples even led to accusations that the openly gay Schumacher was furnishing the superheroes with homoerotic motifs. The director rejected this, stating he was trying to bring the feeling of classical antiquity to the costumes. Co-creator of Batman, Bob Kane was also unimpressed, as Jim Carey recalled hearing him say “I never put nipples on a Batsuit. Whoever heard of nipples on the Batsuit?”.

The final film of the series was Batman and Robin (1997), which was panned by contemporary critics (particularly for multiple glistening chest and butt close-ups in the film) as was the performance of new Batman actor George Clooney, who was later to say that he “killed the franchise”.

By now Batman and Robin superhero’s suits had evolved to resemble life-sized over-stylised glossy plastic action figures, and much of the criticism levelled at the film dealt with the aggressive marketing of the toys associated with it.

Read more:
The Joker’s origin story comes at a perfect moment: clowns define our times

Muscles and reboot

The 2005 rebooted series directed by Christopher Nolan saw method-driven actor Christian Bale physically transform himself into a bulked up Bruce Wayne, reflecting the original comic look of the muscled millionaire – but also mirroring the swathe of men’s health magazines and websites that promoted male body-building in the new century.

In parallel franchises of the 2000’s, Hugh Jackman, Daniel Craig and Robert Downey Jr. all similarly buffed up to portray their respective characters Wolverine, James Bond and Ironman.

The heavily fabricated Batsuit reached something of an apotheosis in Batman vs. Superman (2016) and Justice League (2017) where Ben Affleck’s Batman’s popping veins and bulging sinews strain against the fabric. Described as “monstrous”, the suit is heavy, menacing, and unforgiving – with Batman’s maxed-out physical perfection closely resembling his appearance in the 2010’s Arkham series of video games.

Batman today

While not featured in the Batman Legacy exhibition, Robert Pattinson’s new iteration of the caped crusader in The Batman (2022) sees a less bulky muscle tone.

The suit is simplified to angular motifs, the mask and cowl sporting a certain hand-stitched bespoke look, while both the Riddler’s army surplus garb and the Penguin’s gangster chic are much understated, marking a full departure from the Burton/Schumacher films.

Alasdair Macintyre 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. From dark knight to bat-nipples: the evolution of the Batman costume – https://theconversation.com/from-dark-knight-to-bat-nipples-the-evolution-of-the-batman-costume-177827

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Cameron Webb, Clinical Associate Professor and Principal Hospital Scientist, University of Sydney

The extreme weather and flooding in recent days is likely to boost mosquito numbers, even as we say goodbye to summer.

Like all insects, mosquitoes thrive in warm conditions. Water is also critical for the mosquito’s life cycle, as they lay eggs in and around water. More water generally means more mosquitoes.

Disease caused by mosquito-borne viruses can be potentially severe. These include:

• Ross River virus, which causes fever, chills, headache, muscle and joint pain and fatigue. It’s not fatal but it can be debilitating, and is the most commonly reported mosquito-borne disease in Australia

• Barmah Forest virus is also common and causes fever, rash and sore joints

• flaviviruses, including West Nile (Kunjin), Murray Valley encephalitis and Japanese encephalitis virus are extremely rare but can cause severe brain infection and death, in a small proportion of cases.

Health authorities will be closely monitoring flood-affected regions for these diseases.

While mosquito populations peak in summer, even without floods, these diseases generally peak in March and April. That’s because it takes time for the viruses to spread by mosquitoes among the local wildlife, such as water birds and native mammals, before spilling over into humans.

It’s too early to say what impact the floods will have on disease case numbers but it’s best to be prepared.

Read more:
La Niña will give us a wet summer. That’s great weather for mozzies

What happened after previous floods?

Major floods have triggered historically significant outbreaks of mosquito-borne disease in Australia.

Most notable was the outbreak of Murray Valley encephalitis virus in the 1970s. While authorities have been mindful of disease risk associated with flooding ever since, we’ve been spared a significant return of this virus.

Not so for Ross River virus.

In 2014-15, above average rainfall is thought to have provided habitat for freshwater mosquito populations that contributed to the major outbreak of Ross River virus in northern NSW and southeastern Queensland.

Flooding across Victoria over the 2016-2017 summer produced exceptional increases in mosquitoes. This resulted in the state’s largest outbreak of Ross River virus, with almost five times as many cases as the long-term average.

Following the exceptional rainfall that broke the East coast bushfire-swept summer of 2019-2020, NSW experienced its biggest outbreak of Ross River virus on record.

But more mosquitoes don’t always mean more disease.

Sometimes after floods, there is just too much water. It washes away any mosquito already present in the wetlands and displaces the animal hosts of viruses.

It may take some time for mosquitoes to move back in and build up their populations in the stagnant water left behind by the floods.

Read more:
Drinking water can be a dangerous cocktail for people in flood areas

What are health authorities on the look-out for?

Extreme weather events, such as the record-breaking floods we’re currently seeing, may cause more frequent and intense outbreaks of Ross River virus.

But it’s the potential to see the resurgence of more serious local mosquito-borne diseases – such as those caused by Murray Valley encephalitis virus – which has authorities most concerned because it causes more severe disease.

Read more:
Is climate change to blame for outbreaks of mosquito-borne disease?

The recent detection of Japanese encephalitis virus for the first time in southeastern Australia has shocked many, even those who have studied mosquito-borne diseases for decades. The discovery has health authorities on alert given the seriousness of the disease this virus causes.

While La Niña has played a role in new disease emergence, that may also quickly change. If a return to El Niño-dominated weather patterns brings back drought, that would see those wildlife and mosquito populations disappear.

‘Mozzie proof’ your property and family as floodwaters recede

Massive clean-ups will be required in coming weeks. That means long hours outside and much work done to make homes safe and secure again.

There isn’t much you can do to stop mozzies flying into your backyard from nearby flooded bushland and wetland areas.

Insecticide spraying may provide some relief but it is a short-term fix. As many commonly used products are not specific to mosquitoes, beneficial insects may also be killed if not used with caution.

Repairing, replacing, or installing insect screens on windows and doors can provide a physical barrier to mosquitoes seeking to fly inside your home.

Mosquito nets can also be a quickly deployed protection measure.

In your backyard, clean up as much debris as is safe to do so. Water-holding containers will quickly become a home to mosquitoes.

Gutters, drains and rainwater tanks can also be home to mosquitoes, so clean out and screen where possible.

Mosquito repellent may be your best friend over coming weeks. There is a range of formulations available from your supermarket, pharmacy or camping store. Choose a product that contains diethyltolumide, picaridin, or oil of lemon eucalyptus as these products will provide the best protection.

To get the most out of your repellent, ensure you have an even coat on all exposed areas of skin.

There are some alternatives to topical insect repellents, such as mosquito coils and other devices, but they can be limited in the protection provided.

Insecticide-treated clothing may also assist in beating the bites.

Read more:
Insect repellents work – but there are other ways to beat mosquitoes without getting sticky

Cameron Webb and the Department of Medical Entomology, NSW Health Pathology, have been engaged by a wide range of insect repellent and insecticide manufacturers to provide testing of products and provide expert advice on mosquito biology. Cameron has also received funding from local, state and federal agencies to undertake research into mosquito-borne disease surveillance and management.

– ref. How to mozzie-proof your property after a flood and cut your risk of mosquito-borne disease – https://theconversation.com/how-to-mozzie-proof-your-property-after-a-flood-and-cut-your-risk-of-mosquito-borne-disease-178299

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Margaret Cook, Lecturer in History, University of the Sunshine Coast

As the floodwaters rose in Southeast Queensland last week, my phone buzzed with texts from friends. We compared this event with the last catastrophic flood of 2011 and tried to calculate whether our homes would be affected this time. I live in Ipswich, not far from the now-flooded Bremer River.

I’m also an expert in the history of natural disasters, including flooding in Brisbane. I watched with interest as social media struggled to keep up with continuous updates on flood levels and photos of rapidly rising water. News reports also made constant references to the 2011 Brisbane floods.

This time, the floodwaters stopped at 3.85 metres at the Brisbane gauge in the central business district – less than the 4.46m peak in 2011. Many homes flooded this year that didn’t flood in 2011 – notably in the northern suburbs of Ashgrove, Windsor and The Gap. Meanwhile, homes in the western suburb of Bellbowrie flooded in 2011 but escaped this time. But why?

As hydrologists will tell you, no two floods are the same. The water may follow familiar paths, but natural and human factors alter flood behaviour each time.

How the rain falls

Rainfall intensity is a key factor in determining the extent of “runoff” – water that flows over the ground rather than soaking in. Heavy rain falling in one hour has a much greater runoff ratio than if the same amount falls over a week.

For example, in January 1974, 872mm of rain fell in Brisbane – including 314mm on one day, January 26. A flood reached 5.45m at the Brisbane gauge.

Last month’s rain was similarly unrelenting, when 611.6mm fell between February 25 and 27. For perspective, Brisbane’s annual rainfall is 1,149mm. That intensity and volume of rain in one weekend meant flooding was inevitable but very hard to predict.

Where the rain falls also matters. In 2011, heavy rain fell upstream of Wivenhoe Dam. But in 2022 vast quantities fell downstream of the dam, including on the Bremer River and Lockyer Creek, where there are few flood-mitigation structures to manage the extra water.

The adequacy of stormwater infrastructure, such as gutters, drains and pipes that carry water away, also influences the extent of flooding.

Across Southeast Queensland, many local stormwater systems could not cope with the heavy rain, causing overland flow that flooded houses. The problem was particularly acute in some suburbs that received about a metre of rain over three days.

Read more:
‘One of the most extreme disasters in colonial Australian history’: climate scientists on the floods and our future risk

What’s happening in the river catchment?

People have compared this year’s Brisbane floods with 2011, but they are in fact more similar to the 1974 floods.

The Brisbane River catchment is a complex network. It comprises three rivers – the Stanley, Brisbane and Bremer – and many creeks, the largest of which is Lockyer Creek. Heavy rain can cause any, or all, of these rivers and creeks to flood.

In 2011, rivers were the biggest cause of the floods. But this year, while Ipswich and Brisbane experienced river flooding, suburban creeks caused the most extreme flooding, just as they did in 1974. This was because rain fell heavily throughout the entire catchment, filling even the smallest watercourses.

For example, Ithaca Creek last month flooded the suburb of Ashgrove for the first time since 1974. Kedron Brook flooded Windsor and The Grange, which were left dry in 2011.

And rain filled the Enoggera Reservoir to more than double its capacity, overfilling the Fish and Ithaca creeks and flooding the suburb of The Gap.

Read more:
After the floods comes the disaster of underinsurance: we need a better plan

Humans affect floods, too

Humans can significantly influence the extent of floods. Every time a tree is felled, wetland drained or land developed, the local flood risk is potentially heightened.

Housing estates are built densely – small subdivisions occupied by large houses. And homes are constructed on slabs, rather than elevated to allow water to pass underneath.

Soil and vegetation can absorb water and slow the rate of flooding. But impermeable surfaces such as roads, footpaths and carparks increase surface runoff.

Bridges, ferry terminals and pontoons intrude on waterways, made worse by debris that becomes entangled. Buildings, railway embankments and roads can block waterways, effectively creating dams.

Read more:
IPCC report: Coastal cities are sentinels for climate change. It’s where our focus should be as we prepare for inevitable impacts

Learning from history

History can help us measure the likelihood of flooding and prompt us to prepare, but it’s not that simple. Past experience can also confuse and reduce the perception of risk.

Increasing public awareness is important in mitigating flood risks, as is individual responsibility. But planning authorities must also make hard decisions.

Developers have been allowed to increase the urban footprint and density throughout southeast Queensland. This has created more hard, impermeable surfaces and replaced absorbent green spaces, increasing the likelihood of flooding.

This comes as climate change is predicted to increase the frequency and intensity of floods, and make flood predictions more difficult.

We can’t directly control the rain, but we can change how we respond to future flood hazards.

Margaret Cook is the author of A River with a City Problem: A History of Brisbane Floods.

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

– ref. Why water inundates a home during one flood but spares it the next – https://theconversation.com/why-water-inundates-a-home-during-one-flood-but-spares-it-the-next-178163

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Margaret Cook, Lecturer in History, University of the Sunshine Coast

As the floodwaters rose in Southeast Queensland last week, my phone buzzed with texts from friends. We compared this event with the last catastrophic flood of 2011 and tried to calculate whether our homes would be affected this time. I live in Ipswich, not far from the now-flooded Bremer River.

I’m also an expert in the history of natural disasters, including flooding in Brisbane. I watched with interest as social media struggled to keep up with continuous updates on flood levels and photos of rapidly rising water. News reports also made constant references to the 2011 Brisbane floods.

This time, the floodwaters stopped at 3.85 metres at the Brisbane gauge in the central business district – less than the 4.46m peak in 2011. Many homes flooded this year that didn’t flood in 2011 – notably in the northern suburbs of Ashgrove, Windsor and The Gap. Meanwhile, homes in the western suburb of Bellbowrie flooded in 2011 but escaped this time. But why?

As hydrologists will tell you, no two floods are the same. The water may follow familiar paths, but natural and human factors alter flood behaviour each time.

How the rain falls

Rainfall intensity is a key factor in determining the extent of “runoff” – water that flows over the ground rather than soaking in. Heavy rain falling in one hour has a much greater runoff ratio than if the same amount falls over a week.

For example, in January 1974, 872mm of rain fell in Brisbane – including 314mm on one day, January 26. A flood reached 5.45m at the Brisbane gauge.

Last month’s rain was similarly unrelenting, when 611.6mm fell between February 25 and 27. For perspective, Brisbane’s annual rainfall is 1,149mm. That intensity and volume of rain in one weekend meant flooding was inevitable but very hard to predict.

Where the rain falls also matters. In 2011, heavy rain fell upstream of Wivenhoe Dam. But in 2022 vast quantities fell downstream of the dam, including on the Bremer River and Lockyer Creek, where there are few flood-mitigation structures to manage the extra water.

The adequacy of stormwater infrastructure, such as gutters, drains and pipes that carry water away, also influences the extent of flooding.

Across Southeast Queensland, many local stormwater systems could not cope with the heavy rain, causing overland flow that flooded houses. The problem was particularly acute in some suburbs that received about a metre of rain over three days.

Read more:
‘One of the most extreme disasters in colonial Australian history’: climate scientists on the floods and our future risk

What’s happening in the river catchment?

People have compared this year’s Brisbane floods with 2011, but they are in fact more similar to the 1974 floods.

The Brisbane River catchment is a complex network. It comprises three rivers – the Stanley, Brisbane and Bremer – and many creeks, the largest of which is Lockyer Creek. Heavy rain can cause any, or all, of these rivers and creeks to flood.

In 2011, rivers were the biggest cause of the floods. But this year, while Ipswich and Brisbane experienced river flooding, suburban creeks caused the most extreme flooding, just as they did in 1974. This was because rain fell heavily throughout the entire catchment, filling even the smallest watercourses.

For example, Ithaca Creek last month flooded the suburb of Ashgrove for the first time since 1974. Kedron Brook flooded Windsor and The Grange, which were left dry in 2011.

And rain filled the Enoggera Reservoir to more than double its capacity, overfilling the Fish and Ithaca creeks and flooding the suburb of The Gap.

Read more:
After the floods comes the disaster of underinsurance: we need a better plan

Humans affect floods, too

Humans can significantly influence the extent of floods. Every time a tree is felled, wetland drained or land developed, the local flood risk is potentially heightened.

Housing estates are built densely – small subdivisions occupied by large houses. And homes are constructed on slabs, rather than elevated to allow water to pass underneath.

Soil and vegetation can absorb water and slow the rate of flooding. But impermeable surfaces such as roads, footpaths and carparks increase surface runoff.

Bridges, ferry terminals and pontoons intrude on waterways, made worse by debris that becomes entangled. Buildings, railway embankments and roads can block waterways, effectively creating dams.

Read more:
IPCC report: Coastal cities are sentinels for climate change. It’s where our focus should be as we prepare for inevitable impacts

Learning from history

History can help us measure the likelihood of flooding and prompt us to prepare, but it’s not that simple. Past experience can also confuse and reduce the perception of risk.

Increasing public awareness is important in mitigating flood risks, as is individual responsibility. But planning authorities must also make hard decisions.

Developers have been allowed to increase the urban footprint and density throughout southeast Queensland. This has created more hard, impermeable surfaces and replaced absorbent green spaces, increasing the likelihood of flooding.

This comes as climate change is predicted to increase the frequency and intensity of floods, and make flood predictions more difficult.

We can’t directly control the rain, but we can change how we respond to future flood hazards.

Margaret Cook is the author of A River with a City Problem: A History of Brisbane Floods.

Margaret Cook 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. Why water submerges a home during one flood but spares it the next – https://theconversation.com/why-water-submerges-a-home-during-one-flood-but-spares-it-the-next-178163

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Layton, Visiting Fellow Griffith Asia Institute, Griffith University

There’s a problem with Australia’s brand new fighter jet – it’s just not that reliable. As a result, it flies about 25% less than it should. Less flying means fewer well-trained pilots, but it also hints at other problems lurking in the background.

Everybody who buys a house or apartment off the plan knows there may be some surprises along the way. Australia’s fighter jets are the same.

Why Australia bought these jets

Australia committed to its new F-35 fighters off the plan in 2002. At the time, the F-35 was still a twinkle in the eyes of Lockheed Martin’s marketers. The US and several European countries had commissioned the aerospace company to design, build and manufacture the F-35, with the first step being a prototype.

Australia’s plan was to buy four squadrons – about 72 jets in total – at a cost of around A$16 billion. The F-35 was intended to replace the air force’s ageing Hornet fighters and F-111 bombers. And back in 2002, when Middle East wars were raging, a short-range stealth fighter seemed more than adequate.

But by 2010, with China firmly on the rise, it became apparent this was a poor strategy. In retrospect, a key error was looking at the F-35 simply as a replacement aircraft without first assessing the changing strategic environment. But by then, too much money had been sunk into the F-35 program to change course.

Then, the F-35 development ran late, and the first tranches of Australia’s fleet weren’t ready to be deployed on operations until December 2020.

Escalating problems

Building the aircraft proved harder than anticipated and this inexorably fed into higher costs.

Much of the money that should have been spent on building the maintenance support system went into trying to fix the aircraft’s continuing hardware and software problems. Accordingly, there are now fewer depots to fix broken parts and fewer spare parts than there should be.

Little of this is in Australia’s control. America’s global support solution (GSS) is used to keeping Australia’s F-35 fleet flying. The GSS manages spare parts, maintenance, supply chain support, training systems and engineering. But the program is new, creating problems both now and into the next decade.

Read more:
What do we need of a military fighter aircraft?

There was a second compounding problem arising from the drawn-out development process: the F-35 jets were constructed at different times over the past ten years in seven different configurations. Think about the maintenance staff having to repair individual aircraft in a large fleet with no single standard configuration. Every repair is an adventure – and a learning experience.

The configuration complexity, insufficient spare parts and slow spare part repair times mean there are fewer serviceable aircraft on the flight line now than was expected even a couple of years ago.

In 2019, the Department of Defence estimated the F-35 fleet would fly 11,800 hours in the fiscal year 2021-22. The real figure, however, is 3,000 hours below that.

In simple terms, Australia is short the flying hours needed to keep a squadron’s worth of pilots combat ready. This is very worrying, as Australia only has three operational F-35 squadrons in total.

Continuous upgrades at tremendous cost

A perfect solution to this is probably not possible. For example, the two F-35 aircraft Australia bought in 2013 for more than A$280 million are now arguably too old to be upgraded to the current configuration. In terms of flying combat missions, these two aircraft are obsolete.

The US Air Force frets its similarly old F-35s are now just crushingly expensive training aircraft.

Most of Australia’s fleet is planned to be upgraded to be broadly similar to the US fleet, although this will cost even more money. It may seem strange to have to pay extra to upgrade a brand new aircraft on delivery, but that’s not the end of the problems. There is another complication.

Australia’s latest F-35s (as well as the upgraded older ones) use the Block 3F software, a digital operating system designed by Lockheed Martin. It is proving to be just as costly to keep updated as the jets themselves.

Lt. Gen. S. Clinton Hinote, the US Air Force’s deputy chief of staff, has serious concerns about the outdated software, saying last year,

the block that is coming off the line right now is not a block that I feel good about going up against China and Russia.

He noted recent war games focused on the prospect of defending Taiwan from Chinese air attack showed

Every [F-35] that rolls off the line today is a fighter that we wouldn’t even bother putting into these scenarios.

This means Australia’s F-35s appear not to be as good as the potential opposition. It seems Australia is paying to lose the air combat battle.

The only solution: another upgrade

So, what is the solution to these seemingly intractable and eye-wateringly expensive problems?

Lockheed Martin is advocating a major operating system software upgrade: the Block 4. It might not be surprising to hear this is now running years late, with delivery expected in 2027 or later. It is also significantly over budget.

In a small piece of good news, the last nine F-35 aircraft Australia will get off the production line next year, and may be partly Block 4 compatible. Hinote thinks these F-35s might be capable of fighting against first-rate adversaries.

Read more:
With China-US tensions on the rise, does Australia need a new defence strategy?

The bad news is the full Block 4 upgrade now requires a major engine upgrade or even a new engine. So, this means Australia’s current F-35 fleet might not be able to use all the Block 4 software until after 2030 – and at a substantial cost.

Buying another hugely expensive upgrade for a brand new fighter is actually the cheap way out. The US Air Force’s focus is already shifting to the Block 4 upgraded aircraft. Countries like ours with older F-35s will be left to fend for ourselves if we don’t embrace the new technology, as well.

But the costs do keeping going up, and the problems with these F-35 jets haven’t seemed to stop. It’s the price of buying off the plan, which anyone who’s bought a house or apartment would surely know.

Peter Layton 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. Australia spent billions on jet fighters off the plan. Now, we’re having trouble even flying them – https://theconversation.com/australia-spent-billions-on-jet-fighters-off-the-plan-now-were-having-trouble-even-flying-them-177156

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Steven Hamilton, Visiting Fellow, Tax and Transfer Policy Institute, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University

It was only on Sunday that I wrote about the radical escalation in the economic and financial side of the war between Russia and Ukraine.

That was before the financial markets opened on Monday, and before Russia had a chance to respond.

But even by then – early Sunday morning Moscow time – enormous lines had begun to form at Russian automatic teller machines with many running dry, and reports had begun to emerge of Russians swarming luxury retailers to swap their rubles for anything that might retain its value.

These were the beginnings of what is sure to be the most significant financial crisis in Russia since the 1998 Russian financial crisis which brought it to its knees.

So damaged was the Russian economy following that event that the Russian government would eventually ask the International Monetary Fund for food aid.

1998 on steroids

The 1998 crisis triggered massive capital flight, a sharp devaluation of the ruble, default on public debt, hyperinflation, and a huge increase in interest rates.

It was devastating, and left Russia’s global financial reputation in tatters.

The parallels in the last few days have been striking. When foreign markets opened on Monday, the ruble immediately fell more than 30% to record lows after foreigners began desperately selling out of Russia.

Read more:
‘Just short of nuclear’: these latest financial sanctions will cripple the Russian economy

Perhaps the most devastating measure is the freezing of at least half of the Bank of Russia’s foreign exchange reserves held by the central banks of cooperating nations. This is the war chest Russia built up with great discipline over many years precisely to guard against sanctions.

Central banks are typically treated as off-limits for sanctions – sacrosanct, if you will. Russia presumably thought so.

Freezing reserves no longer off-limits

But just as Russia seems to have underestimated the will of the Ukrainians to fight militarily, it also seems to have underestimated the will of the West to fight financially.

Without the ability to use those foreign reserves to support the ruble, Russia was forced to revert to a range of desperate measures.

The Moscow stock exchange was kept closed on Monday and is yet to reopen. After all, you can’t have a market crash if the market never opens.

Russia more than doubled its key central bank interest rate, lifting it from 9.5% to 20%.

This might seem curious amid an economic crisis.

But when your currency is in freefall because people are dumping it, you need to provide a very big financial incentive for people to hold onto it, including by paying higher interest rates on the remaining rubles in savings accounts.

Economy tanking, yet higher rates

The higher rates immediately flowed through to higher mortgage rates for ordinary Russians – the last thing an economy on the brink needs – as well as to loans funding business investment.

This is the diabolical conundrum Russia faces as it’s hit with a financial crisis with at least one hand tied behind its back by the West.

Russia also banned Russians from buying Russian assets from foreigners, to stop foreigners bailing out of Russia. It required every Russian firm to convert 80% of its foreign earnings into rubles – essentially confiscating foreign dollars to use in lieu of its own frozen foreign reserves.

Read more:
How disrupted Russian gas supplies will hit global and Australian prices

And, most recently and most worryingly, it has halted interest payments on three trillion rubles (US$27 billion) in Russian government debt held by foreigners.

Another way to put that is the Russian government is now in default.

That makes one thing certain: there is no going back for Russia now. The damage will be permanent.

Ultimately, each of Russia’s moves is intended to rebuild foreign currency holdings inside Russia. Even with the sanctions, Russia receives billions each day in foreign earnings on the exports still permitted including oil, gas and wheat.

Russia’s goal is to hoard that cash and rebuild its war chest, giving it more room to manoeuvre. Given that US$300 billion of reserves are frozen, this will take time.

How long before collapse?

While the West has made efforts to exempt energy from the sanctions, the interconnectedness of global financial markets and jittery participants fearful of inadvertently falling foul of sanctions have already seen energy deals disrupted.

Contracts for future Russian oil supply are failing to sell, even at sharp discounts.

This raises the key question Western leaders are asking right now: how long can the Russian economy – and thereby its people, and its leadership – survive?

It’s a confounding irony that just as the Russian army encircles Ukrainian cities in a bid to besiege them, Western governments have encircled the Russian economy in a bid to besiege it.

More draconian measures likely

Despite everything Russia has thrown fighting the sanctions so far, the ruble remains 26% below its level last week and 32% below its level a month ago.

It seems likely that to properly stabilise its financial system it will need more draconian measures – such as bans on bank withdrawals and rationing. They will do even more damage to the economy than 20% interest rates and sanctions.

Is this degree of economic damage enough to get Russia to change course in Ukraine? Can the Ukrainians hold on long enough that the economic costs to Russia become unsustainable?

Read more:
US-EU sanctions will pummel the Russian economy – two experts explain why they are likely to stick and sting

If necessary, will the West be willing to double down, and really put some skin in the game by limiting their purchases of Russian oil and gas?

That could well be the nail in Russia’s coffin – but also highly damaging to the European and global economy. Only time will tell.

Steven Hamilton 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. Russian sanctions are biting harder than it could have imagined, and it’ll get worse – https://theconversation.com/russian-sanctions-are-biting-harder-than-it-could-have-imagined-and-itll-get-worse-178322

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hassan Vally, Associate Professor, Epidemiology, Deakin University

Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s COVID diagnosis has barely registered a blip in the media.

Although admittedly there is a lot in the news – with war in Ukraine and major floods on Australia’s eastern seaboard – the lack of newsworthiness of Morrison’s diagnosis says so much about where we are in the pandemic right now.

It highlights a significant shift in both the reality and the perception of what being infected with COVID means in Australia, for the vast majority of us.

Let’s do a time-travel thought experiment.

If we go back in time

To highlight just how far we have come, let’s imagine how this diagnosis would had landed if Morrison had contracted COVID towards the start of the pandemic, in March 2020, rather than March 2022.

Regardless of your political stripes, a March 2020 diagnosis would have provoked genuine concern for his health. We knew so little about COVID with certainty back then, and what we did know was truly frightening.

The most obvious change since 2020 is the availability of safe and effective vaccines. These have completely transformed the risk the virus poses for individuals and the community.

Read more:
How well do COVID vaccines work in the real world?

Vaccination, by priming the immune system, takes away one of the virus’ greatest weapons – the ability to catch the immune system by surprise.

Vaccination allows us to be pre-exposed to viral antigens (its spike protein), allowing the immune system to respond quicker and more effectively when exposed to the virus itself. This reduces the likelihood of symptomatic illness, and perhaps more importantly, severe disease.

More recently, we have also started to see more effective COVID treatments. These are also making a huge difference in preventing COVID deteriorating and causing severe illness.

Read more:
Pfizer’s pill is the latest COVID treatment to show promise. Here are some more

Let’s contrast the circumstances facing Morrison today with the challenges UK’s Prime Minister Boris Johnson and former US President Donald Trump faced when they caught COVID earlier in the pandemic.

This really rams home how much difference advances over the past year or so have made.

Johnson spent time in ICU

In March and April 2020, Johnson’s trajectory followed what we have now seen many times over. What started off as relatively mild symptoms took a drastic turn a week later and he was admitted to intensive care. He spent three days in a critical condition before being moved to a general ward, then released to recover at home.

Remember, at the time, there were no vaccines and very limited treatments.

Despite these barriers, Johnson made a full recovery. But we need to remember that even now, not all patients admitted to ICU survive or come out of the experience unscathed. Johnson was incredibly lucky.

Read more:
We’re two frontline COVID doctors. Here’s what we see as case numbers rise

Trump used experimental therapies

Trump, who had previously played down the threat of COVID, contracted it in October 2020.

Although the full story is still a mystery, he also became very ill, perhaps more so than was officially acknowledged. Being overweight and 74 at the time were legitimate reasons to fear the worst.

Once again, context is important. Trump’s diagnosis was also before vaccines were available.

However, as United States president, he had access to experimental treatments not available to other Americans.

Specifically, Trump was only one of only a handful of people at the time to be given Regeneron, an experimental antibody cocktail, which many believe played an instrumental role in his recovery.

Like Johnson, Trump, after a troubling time, appeared to make a full recovery.

One can only speculate what his fate would have been if he were just an average 74 year-old overweight American and not the president of the United States. Like Johnson, Trump was lucky.

What does this tell us about Morrison’s chances?

If we look at the circumstances Morrison faces, there really is no comparison. Vaccines, along with the other advances we have made, means he is most likely to have mild symptoms while he isolates, will continue working, and make a full recovery.

Of course, this is not to underplay the very real risk any of us have of developing more severe illness, such as if we have a weakened immune system or an underlying health condition.

Read more:
What does it mean to be immunocompromised? And why does this increase your risk of coronavirus?

But the likelihood of serious illness if fully vaccinated, even if we are at greater risk of severe COVID, is much lower thanks to vaccines.

If someone at high risk of severe COVID was infected, we also now have medicines to reduce the risk of developing severe illness.

Read more:
Australia approves two new medicines in the fight against COVID. How can you get them and are they effective against Omicron?

As we wish Morrison a speedy recovery, the lack of noteworthiness of his diagnosis is something we should celebrate as the most remarkable aspect of this situation.

COVID is not to be underestimated and recent history says there will be challenges to come. This includes ensuring vaccines are distributed globally to everyone who needs them.

But the huge advances we have made in the past two years mean the threat COVID causes in March 2022 is very different to the threat it posed in March 2020.

Read more:
Australia is failing marginalised people, and it shows in COVID death rates

Hassan Vally 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. Scott Morrison has COVID. It’s a big deal but not how you think – https://theconversation.com/scott-morrison-has-covid-its-a-big-deal-but-not-how-you-think-178298

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Marianne Hanson, Associate Professor of International Relations, The University of Queensland

Russian forces in Ukraine may have used thermobaric weapons and cluster bombs, according to reports from the Ukraine government and human rights groups.

If true, this represents an escalation in brutality that should alarm us all.

While cluster munitions are banned by international convention, thermobaric munitions – also known as fuel-air explosive devices, or “vacuum bombs” – are not explicitly prohibited for use against military targets.

These devastating devices, which create an oxygen-eating fireball followed by a deadly shockwave, are far more powerful than most other conventional weapons.

What are thermobaric weapons?

Thermobaric weapons are generally deployed as rockets or bombs, and they work by releasing fuel and explosive charges. Different fuels can be used, including toxic powdered metals and organic matter containing oxidant.

The explosive charge disperses a large cloud of fuel which then ignites in contact with the oxygen in the surrounding air. This creates a high-temperature fireball and a massive shockwave that literally sucks the air out of any living being in the vicinity.

Thermobaric bombs are devastating and effective in urban areas or open conditions, and can penetrate bunkers and other underground locations, starving the occupants of oxygen. There is very little that can protect humans and other life forms from their blast and incendiary effects.

A 1990 CIA report, cited by Human Rights Watch, noted the effects of a thermobaric explosion in a confined space:

Those near the ignition point are obliterated. Those at the fringe are likely to suffer many internal, thus invisible injuries, including burst eardrums and crushed inner ear organs, severe concussions, ruptured lungs and internal organs, and possibly blindness.

A history of horror

Crude versions of thermobaric weapons were developed by Germany during World War Two. Western states, as well as the Soviet Union and latterly Russia, have used them since the 1960s.

The Soviet Union is believed to have used a thermobaric weapon against China during the Sino-Soviet conflict of 1969, and in Afghanistan as part of its takeover of that country in 1979. Moscow also used them in Chechnya, and has reportedly provided them to separatist rebels in eastern Ukraine.

The United States has used these weapons in Vietnam and in the mountains of Afghanistan.

Why some weapons are banned, even in war

Although thermobaric weapons are not yet unequivocally banned, there are several points that argue against their development and use.

International humanitarian law stipulates what is and is not permissible during warfare. There has long been an understanding that even wars have their limits: while some weapons are considered legal, others are not, precisely because they violate key principles of humanitarian law.

A new report from Human Rights Watch makes it clear the Russian invasion of Ukraine is illegal. It draws on the Geneva Conventions to define the illegitimacy of Moscow’s actions, including its use or potential use of particular weapons.

Read more:
International law says Putin’s war against Ukraine is illegal. Does that matter?

The use of weapons in indiscriminate attacks – those that cannot distinguish between combatants and civilians – is forbidden by the Geneva Conventions.

A thermobaric weapon might be targeted specifically at military installations and personnel, but its effects cannot be contained to one area. In all likelihood, many civilians would be killed if such bombs were used in any city.

Using explosive weapons in populated areas would result in indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks. Aerial bombs, even if aimed at military objectives, pose a grave threat to civilians because of their wide blast radius.

Unnecessary suffering

Efforts to ban these weapons have not yet produced a clear prohibition. The 1980 Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (commonly called the “Inhumane Weapons Convention”) addresses incendiary weapons, but states have managed to avoid an explicit ban on thermobaric bombs.

In addition to the impacts on civilians, thermobaric bombs would cause superfluous injury and unnecessary suffering. Under international humanitarian law, they should not be used.

There is a point at which – even if a war is deemed legitimate or “just” – violence must not involve weapons that are excessively cruel or inhumane.

If a weapon is likely to prolong the agony of soldiers (or civilians) or result in superfluous and unacceptable injuries, theoretically its use is not permitted. Thermobaric weapons clearly seem to meet this definition.

Cluster bombs and nuclear weapons

It is not only thermobaric weapons that cause us concern in the current war.

Ukraine’s government and human rights groups say Russia has also used cluster munitions. These are bombs or rockets that release a cluster of smaller “bomblets” over a wide area.

Cluster munitions were banned under an international convention in 2008. Russia has not signed (nor has the US, China or India), but until now it has largely respected the convention’s provisions.

Perhaps of greatest concern, however, is Moscow’s nuclear weapons arsenal. President Vladimir Putin has hinted strongly that he would potentially be willing to use them, putting Russian nuclear forces on high alert and warning that countries which interfere in the invasion will face “consequences you have never seen”.

Read more:
As Putin puts nuclear forces on high alert, here are 5 genuine nuclear dangers for us all

Russia has around 6,000 nuclear weapons and an escalation of conflict could result in their use – either deliberately or inadvertently during the fog of war.

Putin is not the only one to have made threats like this. The US holds around 5,500 nuclear weapons of its own, and its nuclear policy promises nuclear devastation to opponents.

Even the British and French resort to nuclear pressure, and former US president Donald Trump, when threatening North Korea, used similar language. But Putin’s statement goes beyond even these threats.

Read more:
The nuclear weapons ban treaty is groundbreaking, even if the nuclear powers haven’t signed

It is these very real dangers that led 122 states at the United Nations to vote in favour of developing the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in 2017.

The war in Ukraine is the latest reminder that we must act to eliminate thermobaric, cluster, and nuclear weapons, under strict international control. The stakes are simply too high to allow these dangers to remain.

Marianne Hanson has previously received funding from the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the University of Queensland to conduct research on weapons and international law. In a voluntary capacity, she is currently Co-Chair of ICAN Australia (the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons).

– ref. What are thermobaric weapons? And why should they be banned? – https://theconversation.com/what-are-thermobaric-weapons-and-why-should-they-be-banned-178289

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rachel Wilson, Associate Professor in Education, University of Sydney

You may think “not another article on school funding”. But this important story has to be told and the book, Waiting For Gonski: how Australia failed its schools, should be read by every parent, economist and Australian committed to “the fair go”.

The title is apt and who would have thought a book on school funding would be a riveting read? Authors Tom Greenwell and Chris Bonnor have all the angles covered.

What went wrong?

The much-lauded Gonski reforms, recommended ten years ago, have not been effectively enacted. The book provides a clear account of how it all went wrong in “the Gonski we got” and “postmortem” analysis chapters.

Rather than levelling the playing field, it is clear the system has become more unfair. More funding has gone to less needy schools. Government funding to non-government schools grew at five times the rate of funding for government schools over the past decade.

The review introduced the concept of the Schooling Resource Standard (SRS). The review panel said this was the funding “needed as the starting point for […] transparent, fair, financially sustainable and educationally effective” resourcing. The SRS uses a base funding amount each student, plus “loadings” for particular school and student needs.

The majority of government schools are yet to be fully funded to the SRS. At the same time, many non-government schools are overfunded, well beyond the standard (and fees sit on top of this government funding).

Shortfalls and excesses in SRS funding by state and territory, 2018-2023

A 2019 federal government review of needs-based funding makes it clear government schools’ needs are not being met and the system lacks transparency. New South Wales, Queensland, Victoria and Tasmania committed to reach 75% of SRS funding for government schools beyond 2023. NSW and Tasmania will reach 75% in 2027, Victoria in 2028 and Queensland in 2032.

A quote from the then Grattan Institute school program director, Peter Goss, is instructive:

“The federal government has locked in a model where every private school will get fully funded by 2023, whereas very few government schools will ever get fully funded. By 2030 we’re going to be having this same argument and it’s all predictable from now.”

Unlevel playing field has a long history

While many schools are still waiting to receive the Gonski needs-based funding, Greenwell and Bonnor make it clear there was also a sense of waiting in the lead-up to the review and 2011 report.

Pre-Gonski history provides important insights, including coverage of mistakes in the original establishment of Australia’s inclusive public education system. The system wasn’t really inclusive and created the first unlevel playing field, with well-resourced free education for most, alongside struggling Catholic schools. This changed after the 1960s, when the private sector successfully lobbied for funding. But, as the authors point out, “one unlevel playing field replaced another”.

The 1973 Karmel report followed, but was criticised because, as Simon Marginson wrote in 1984:

“[The report] did not develop an understanding of the dynamics of the dual system of schooling that operates in Australia […] [and] failed to go to the roots of inequalities in schooling”.

Gonski also failed on this score

Bonnor and Greenwell point out this criticism also applies to the Gonski review. Rather than tackle the complexities of the public-private system, Gonski left untouched the issues of school fees and very different school sector obligations, operations and accountabilities. Inequities in school operations, including enrolment policies, were not addressed.

While recommending adequate funding for schools where students had greater needs, the review did not question or seek to resolve why these students concentrated within disadvantaged schools, most of them government schools. The segregation of schools has since increased. Both the OECD and UNICEF have identified this as a key weakness in Australian schooling.

Greenwell and Bonnor point to the significance of the review’s focus on the impact of peers on student achievement, in a structure where fees sort and segregate students into different schools on the basis of socio-educational advantage. Bonnor says:

“The review panel couldn’t, or chose not to, join the dots between this phenomenon and Australia’s increasingly mediocre levels of student achievement.”

Gonski review panel member Ken Boston now agrees and attributes much of our educational woes to weaknesses in the report and failures of implementation. Noting the model was to be needs-based and sector-blind, he says: “Quite the opposite has occurred”.

Waiting for Gonski is a riveting, but depressing, account of how that happened. Drawing on interviews with key figures, the authors describe the manoeuvrings to get the funding legislation passed, the distorting of Gonski’s recommendations, the intensity of the activities of the lobby groups, and the eventual sabotage of the remnants of Gonski that managed to get over the line.

Students – and Australia – continue to miss out

The story is complete with a coming-of-age personal drama highlighting the impacts of funding on two young students as they move through their schooling.

It is important to remember that many thousands of children have completed all their schooling in the post-Gonski era, without the funding deemed necessary for the system to be “educationally effective”. The pathways of those lives have missed out on the educational enrichment funding to the Schooling Resource Standard would have brought.

Alongside Waiting for Gonski, a Why Money Does Matter conference marked the 10th anniversary with further sobering analysis, available here.

Gonski made “needs-based” equity funding part of our vocabulary but not part of our system. It is clear that action to fully implement true needs-based funding is urgently needed.

Waiting for Gonski ends with a call to action. For our education system to thrive nothing short of substantial structural change will do.

Greenwell and Bonnor also argue public funding brings public obligations, and a public contract is needed, requiring non-government schools to operate with policies comparable to those of government schools. Such an approach would “level the playing field”, which would undoubtedly strengthen Australian education and our economy. Do we have to wait much longer?

“Let us do something, while we have the chance! … Let us make the most of it, before it is too late!” ― Samuel Beckett, Waiting For Godot.

I previously published a report “Structural failure: Why Australia keeps falling short of its educational goals” co-authored by Chris Bonnor, one of the authors of ‘Waiting for Gonski’

I am also on the Board of the Centre for Public Education Research that hosted the conference mentioned in this article.

– ref. Still ‘Waiting for Gonski’ – a great book about the sorry tale of school funding – https://theconversation.com/still-waiting-for-gonski-a-great-book-about-the-sorry-tale-of-school-funding-178016

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Philippa Higgins, PhD candidate, UNSW Sydney

The Northern Territory has some of the most pristine rivers in the world. But amid the big push to develop northern Australia, industries are lining up to take water from these wild waterways.

The agriculture industry – and in particular, large-scale cotton growers – are seeking up to 5.2 billion litres of water a year from the Daly River near Katherine. But our research published today suggests water allocations based on recent gauge data might be too generous.

We found since the 1960s, flows in the Daly have been higher than at any point in the past 600 years. If flows return to lower levels in future, extracting large volumes of water may cause big problems for the river.

Over-allocating water resources can degrade rivers and harm aquatic life that needs wet season flows to thrive. Before granting water rights to big business, authorities must better understand the ancient history of Australia’s river flows.

Going back in time

Every year when the monsoon arrives in Northern Australia, rivers spread over the floodplains and sustain a kaleidoscopic variety of plant and animal life.

To sustainably develop the north while keeping river ecosystems healthy, we must get a full picture of high and low flows over time. But in many rivers, including the Daly, we don’t have enough data to do this.

Streamflow gauges have only been in place for the last 60 years in the Northern Territory. However the climate – and subsequent river flows – can vary across decades and generations.

Luckily, tree rings can tell us how the climate behaved for hundreds of years before streamflow gauges were installed.

The rings indicate how old a tree is and what the weather was like during each year of its life. For example, a ring wider than others indicates greater-than-average growth, and might reflect a year of high rainfall or warm temperatures.

Read more:
Floodplains aren’t separate to a river — they’re an extension of it. It’s time to change how we connect with them

Nature’s weather stations

Tree rings are examined by drilling a narrow hole in a tree to extract a core – a process that does not harm the tree. All up, we used cores from 63 different sites in our study.

We obtained existing cores from Northern Territory trees, then sought to interpret how the tree rings related to past climate changes. Usually, the correlation between tree rings and streamflow can be used to build a model of past streamflow. But the gauge data for the Daly is too short to develop a reliable model.

So we used a new method using much older rainfall data. It meant we could develop a much better and longer reconstruction of the river’s flow.

But we faced another challenge. The oldest Northern Territory tree core we had to work with was 250 years old, but we wanted to look further back.

So we also used cores from older trees in Southeast Asia. These trees also experience monsoon rainfalls and so record similar climate variations.

Rivers of change

Our reconstruction showed over that, with the exception of dry years in 2019 and 2020, flows over the last 57 years were higher than at any point in the past 600 years.

This is because more rainfall is falling during the monsoon season than ever before. Records from ship logs suggest the increase is part of a much longer trend which began in the 1800s.

Theories abound about why monsoon rainfall has increased, and include changes in sea surface temperatures and changes to the timing of the monsoon onset. More research is needed into this phenomenon.

However, the increase suggests flows in the Daly River may return to low levels in future. So allocating water to industry based only on data from the past few decades may mean too much water will be extracted and the river’s health will suffer.

Even during these unusually wet decades, we found the annual monsoon – and therefore streamflow – varies a lot from year to year.

In La Niña years, the Daly’s flow is higher than in other years – but during El Niño there is no difference. So, while low flows lead to higher water demand and risk to rivers, we don’t really understand why they occur.

Read more:
The hydropower industry is talking the talk. But fine words won’t save our last wild rivers

An uncertain future

Global climate models differ on whether northern Australia will experience higher or lower rainfall in future. So we don’t know if the Daly and other Northern Territory rivers will remain high in decades to come.

Climate models do suggest monsoon rain will become more variable. This means managing river resources in the territory will be even more complex in coming years and needs careful planning.

The proposed water allocation from the Daly River comes on the back of record dry years and much lower wet season flows than normal. And it follows other industry proposals to extract huge amounts of water from territory rivers.

Monsoon rivers are the lifeblood of the Top End. They’re unique, precious and need to be protected. We can’t hold back development, but we can make good decisions to ensure ecosystems are managed sustainably.

Let’s listen to the message of the trees – and make sure these rivers are still healthy in another 600 years.

Read more:
Victoria just gave 2 billion litres of water back to Indigenous people. Here’s what that means for the rest of Australia

Fiona Johnson receives funding from the Australian Research Council, NSW and Victorian State Government.

Jonathan Palmer receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC).

Martin Sogaard Andersen receives funding from ARC, NSW State and Federal Government.

Philippa Higgins 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. As industry lines up to take water from a wild Top End river, trees tell the story of a much drier past – https://theconversation.com/as-industry-lines-up-to-take-water-from-a-wild-top-end-river-trees-tell-the-story-of-a-much-drier-past-177221

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sean Phelan, Associate Professor of Communication, Massey University

One striking feature of the “freedom convoy” protests in Ottawa, Wellington and elsewhere has been the intense antagonism towards “mainstream media” (MSM).

These antagonisms are expressed not only in now familiar descriptions of MSM journalists as sinister agents of a wider power elite, coupled with pity or scorn for the befuddled “sheeple” who believe everything they hear in the media.

They can also take an uglier, more menacing form. Witness the clip circulating on Twitter of protesters spitting on CTV journalists in Vancouver. Or earlier reports of New Zealand journalists being “punched and belted with umbrellas” or harassed in person and online.

These kinds of encounters are becoming more common. Increased violence against journalists, particularly women journalists, has been a feature of the global rise of far-right politics.

This anti-media rhetoric has a clear “us” versus “them” dynamic. People start to define their own identities in opposition to the “MSM”. The media are framed as enemies (one of a gallery of interchangeable enemies) in ways that destroy the distinctions between journalism and propaganda, journalism and ideology, journalism and politics.

This language is then normalised in far-right media channels, sometimes with considerable success that might leave one wondering about the precise location of the mainstream: a livestream broadcast from one Facebook channel linked to the Wellington protests apparently had more views than the videos broadcast on the New Zealand Herald’s website.

Distrust of corporate media

The abuse and harassment of journalists trying to do their jobs are worrying. Journalists are right to suggest these attacks are an attack on democracy and the best democratic ideals of journalism.

At the same time, the cultural politics driving the antagonism to mainstream media and journalism are not as straightforward as is sometimes assumed.

In an official public sphere preoccupied with online disinformation and misinformation, one could be forgiven for thinking the problems could be fixed if people stopped feeding the social media algorithms and affirmed their trust in corporate news media instead.

It’s also not enough for journalists to insist (in good faith) they do nothing more than present balanced and objective news coverage – as if the vast academic literature documenting the problems with these professional rationalisations didn’t exist.

Defining ‘mainstream media’

The increasingly reactionary connotations of contemporary references to the “MSM” need historical context.

Like the “media” itself, the term “mainstream media” is a relatively recent invention. My research suggests academic scholars only started routinely referring to something called “mainstream media” from the 1980s onwards.

Read more:
The extremism visible at the parliament protest has been growing in NZ for years – is enough being done?

The term is nearly always taken for granted, as if it’s perfectly obvious what the mainstream media is. But only 20 or 30 years ago, the term was associated primarily with left-wing critiques of capitalist media, and proposals for alternative media models.

We still hear those arguments today, and there are good reasons for critiquing mainstream media. The destructive impact of the market on contemporary journalism is more profound than it was in the 1980s and 1990s.

And there is an ironic dimension to the anti-media rhetoric of the convoy protesters, given that they benefit from the commercial appeal of “wall-to-wall mainstream media coverage”.

Read more:
The NZ anti-vax movement’s exploitation of Holocaust imagery is part of a long and sorry history

Into the rabbit hole

However, the meaning of media critique can become confused in a political context where the people who seem most critical of media and journalism are aligned to the far right.

This, in turn, can alter perceptions of the alternative. The online “rabbit hole” becomes a potential site of empowerment and agency – an archive of resources for mocking the conventions of “left-wing”, “woke” media.

Read more:
In ‘freedom convoy’ and other vaccine protests, slogans cross the political aisle

But just because the ideological connotations of “MSM” have shifted, it does not mean the differences between authoritarian and democratic media criticism dissolve.

On the contrary, making such distinctions is more important now than ever. Being able to thoughtfully analyse how various media construct or define the world we live in is vital for our democracy.

Our democracies would be in even more trouble than they already are if anyone voicing suspicion of mainstream media was dismissed as a conspiracy theorist. It would be a world where the far right has successfully monopolised the terms of media criticism.

Ideological confusion

Nonetheless, the politically confused nature of media criticism today is a symptom
of a general ideological confusion that has accelerated during the pandemic and found another expression in the “freedom” convoys.

Talking points that might have once sounded inherently progressive start to float in unpredictable and chaotic ways. (A case in point: listening to one livestream broadcast from inside the Wellington convoy, I heard what sounded like an attempt to link the rhetoric of the sovereign citizen movement to notions of Māori sovereignty and self-determination.)

Read more:
Canada’s legal disinformation pandemic is exposed by the ‘freedom convoy’

Anyone committed to a culture of vibrant democracy needs to be alert to this ideological confusion. We need to minimise the chances of our own political and media critiques compounding the problem and be vigilant for reactionary rhetoric that loves to blur left-right boundaries.

Our defence of journalists against “aspirational fascists” should be unambiguous. But our democratic imaginations will be seriously impoverished if the public conversation is reduced to a Manichean alternative of wild, paranoid denunciations of the “MSM” versus unquestioning support of our present media systems.

Sean Phelan receives funding from the EU’s Horizon Europe scheme through a Marie Skłodowska-Curie Fellowship at the University of Antwerp.

– ref. Why legitimate criticism of the ‘mainstream’ media is in danger of being hijacked by anti-vax and ‘freedom’ movements – https://theconversation.com/why-legitimate-criticism-of-the-mainstream-media-is-in-danger-of-being-hijacked-by-anti-vax-and-freedom-movements-178166

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Marianne Hanson, Associate Professor of International Relations, The University of Queensland

Russian forces in Ukraine may have used thermobaric weapons and cluster bombs, according to reports from the Ukraine government and human rights groups.

If true, this represents an escalation in brutality that should alarm us all.

While cluster munitions are banned by international convention, thermobaric munitions – also known as fuel-air explosive devices, or “vacuum bombs” – are not explicitly prohibited for use against military targets.

These devastating devices, which create an oxygen-eating fireball followed by a deadly shockwave, are far more powerful than most other conventional weapons.

What are thermobaric weapons?

Thermobaric weapons are generally deployed as rockets or bombs, and they work by releasing fuel and explosive charges. Different fuels can be used, including toxic powdered metals and organic matter containing oxidant.

The explosive charge disperses a large cloud of fuel which then ignites in contact with the oxygen in the surrounding air. This creates a high-temperature fireball and a massive shockwave that literally sucks the air out of any living being in the vicinity.

Thermobaric bombs are devastating and effective in urban areas or open conditions, and can penetrate bunkers and other underground locations, starving the occupants of oxygen. There is very little that can protect humans and other life forms from their blast and incendiary effects.

A 1990 CIA report, cited by Human Rights Watch, noted the effects of a thermobaric explosion in a confined space:

Those near the ignition point are obliterated. Those at the fringe are likely to suffer many internal, thus invisible injuries, including burst eardrums and crushed inner ear organs, severe concussions, ruptured lungs and internal organs, and possibly blindness.

A history of horror

Crude versions of thermobaric weapons were developed by Germany during World War Two. Western states, as well as the Soviet Union and latterly Russia, have used them since the 1960s.

The Soviet Union is believed to have used a thermobaric weapon against China during the Sino-Soviet conflict of 1969, and in Afghanistan as part of its takeover of that country in 1979. Moscow also used them in Chechnya, and has reportedly provided them to separatist rebels in eastern Ukraine.

The United States has used these weapons in Vietnam and in the mountains of Afghanistan.

Why some weapons are banned, even in war

Although thermobaric weapons are not yet unequivocally banned, there are several points that argue against their development and use.

International humanitarian law stipulates what is and is not permissible during warfare. There has long been an understanding that even wars have their limits: while some weapons are considered legal, others are not, precisely because they violate key principles of humanitarian law.

A new report from Human Rights Watch makes it clear the Russian invasion of Ukraine is illegal. It draws on the Geneva Conventions to define the illegitimacy of Moscow’s actions, including its use or potential use of particular weapons.

Read more:
International law says Putin’s war against Ukraine is illegal. Does that matter?

The use of weapons in indiscriminate attacks – those that cannot distinguish between combatants and civilians – is forbidden by the Geneva Conventions.

A thermobaric weapon might be targeted specifically at military installations and personnel, but its effects cannot be contained to one area. In all likelihood, many civilians would be killed if such bombs were used in any city.

Using explosive weapons in populated areas would result in indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks. Aerial bombs, even if aimed at military objectives, pose a grave threat to civilians because of their wide blast radius.

Unnecessary suffering

Efforts to ban these weapons have not yet produced a clear prohibition. The 1980 Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (commonly called the “Inhumane Weapons Convention”) addresses incendiary weapons, but states have managed to avoid an explicit ban on thermobaric bombs.

In addition to the impacts on civilians, thermobaric bombs would cause superfluous injury and unnecessary suffering. Under international humanitarian law, they should not be used.

There is a point at which – even if a war is deemed legitimate or “just” – violence must not involve weapons that are excessively cruel or inhumane.

If a weapon is likely to prolong the agony of soldiers (or civilians) or result in superfluous and unacceptable injuries, theoretically its use is not permitted. Thermobaric weapons clearly seem to meet this definition.

Cluster bombs and nuclear weapons

It is not only thermobaric weapons that cause us concern in the current war.

Ukraine’s government and human rights groups say Russia has also used cluster munitions. These are bombs or rockets that release a cluster of smaller “bomblets” over a wide area.

Cluster munitions were banned under an international convention in 2008. Russia has not signed (nor has the US, China or India), but until now it has largely respected the convention’s provisions.

Perhaps of greatest concern, however, is Moscow’s nuclear weapons arsenal. President Vladimir Putin has hinted strongly that he would potentially be willing to use them, putting Russian nuclear forces on high alert and warning that countries which interfere in the invasion will face “consequences you have never seen”.

Read more:
As Putin puts nuclear forces on high alert, here are 5 genuine nuclear dangers for us all

Russia has around 6,000 nuclear weapons and an escalation of conflict could result in their use – either deliberately or inadvertently during the fog of war.

Putin is not the only one to have made threats like this. The US holds around 5,500 nuclear weapons of its own, and its nuclear policy promises nuclear devastation to opponents.

Even the British and French resort to nuclear pressure, and former US president Donald Trump, when threatening North Korea, used similar language. But Putin’s statement goes beyond even these threats.

Read more:
The nuclear weapons ban treaty is groundbreaking, even if the nuclear powers haven’t signed

It is these very real dangers that led 122 states at the United Nations to vote in favour of developing the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in 2017.

The war in Ukraine is the latest reminder that we must act to eliminate thermobaric, cluster, and nuclear weapons, under strict international control. The stakes are simply too high to allow these dangers to remain.

Marianne Hanson has previously received funding from the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the University of Queensland to conduct research on weapons and international law. In a voluntary capacity, she is currently Co-Chair of ICAN Australia (the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons).

– ref. What are thermobaric bombs? And why should they be banned? – https://theconversation.com/what-are-thermobaric-bombs-and-why-should-they-be-banned-178289

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stephan Rachel, Associate Professor and ARC Future Fellow, The University of Melbourne

You probably know what a crystal is. We’ve all seen one, held one in our hands, and even tasted one on our tongue (for instance sodium chloride crystals, also known as “salt”).

But what on earth is a “time crystal”, if not a sci-fi gadget in the latest Marvel movie? Why do we need a quantum computer to make one? And what is a quantum computer anyway?

Bits and qubits

Let’s start there. Computers are all around us. Some are compact, portable and primarily used to stream Netflix, while others fill entire rooms and simulate complex phenomena like the weather or the evolution of our Universe.

Regardless of the details, on a fundamental level computers all have the same purpose: processing information. The information is stored and processed in “bits”.

Any physical system with two identifiably distinct states (call them “0” and “1”) can serve as a bit. Connect lots of bits together in the right way and you can do arithmetic, logic, or what we generally call “computation”.

Now, it turns out that the physical world on a very fundamental level is governed by the strange rules of quantum physics. You can also make a quantum version of a bit, called a quantum bit or “qubit”.

Qubits can also be described in terms of two states, “0” and “1”, except they can be both “0” and “1” at the same time. This allows for a much richer form of information processing, and hence more powerful computers.

What can we do with quantum computers?

Much of the current research in this area is focused either on building a working quantum computer – a challenging engineering task indeed – or on designing algorithms to do things we can’t manage with our current, classical computers.

Our research, however, is focused on an application first envisioned by the famous US physicist Richard Feynman more than 30 years ago: to use quantum computers to conduct research in fundamental physics.

Read more:
Explainer: quantum computation and communication technology

As theorists, we typically use a combination of pen-and-paper mathematics and computer simulations to study physical systems. Unfortunately, conventional computers are very ill-equipped for simulating quantum physics.

This is where quantum computers come in. They are already quantum in nature and can, in principle, behave like any quantum system we wish to investigate.

Using IBM’s quantum computer we were able to achieve precisely that, turning it into an experimental simulator to create a novel state of matter, just as envisioned by Feynman. This machine is located in America but can be accessed remotely by researchers around the globe.

Being able to access quantum computers from anywhere in the world represents a major shift in this kind of quantum research.

Time crystals

The special type of quantum system we created is called a “time crystal”.

I hope you will not be too disappointed when I say you will probably not get to hold one of these in your hands any time soon. But maybe we can at least understand what a time crystal is!

The crucial idea here is that matter exists in different “phases”, like the three familiar phases of water: ice, water and steam. A material can have very different properties depending on which phase we find it in.

Now a conventional crystal – we might actually call it a “space crystal” – is one such phase of matter. Crystals are characterised by a very regular arrangement of particles in space.

In a time crystal, particles are not only arranged regularly in space, but also in time. The particles move from one position to another and back again, without slowing down or losing energy.

Now this is truly different from what we usually deal with.

Beyond equilibrium

The types of phases we normally encounter all have on thing in common: they are in “thermal equilibrium”. If you leave a hot cup of coffee sitting on your desk it will transfer heat to its surroundings until it reaches the same temperature as your room, and then it stops and no changes happen from then on.

If you carefully add a layer of cream to your – now unfortunately cold – coffee and begin stirring, you will see changes happen in time. Coffee and cream will mix in beautiful swirls until the whole thing turns into a uniform light brown liquid, and nothing really changes after that.

These are examples of “equilibrium”. The common theme is that things in equilibrium do not change over time.

Our time crystal violates this condition. It actually keeps changing indefinitely, for all eternity, without ever reaching equilibrium.

A loophole in the laws of thermodynamics?

A time crystal therefore constitutes an out-of-equilibrium phase – in fact, it is one of the first examples of such a strange state of matter. It is essentially like an ever-ticking clock that neither loses energy, nor requires a supply of energy to keep going.

This seems dangerously close to a perpetual motion machine, which would violate the laws of thermodynamics.

But the first law of thermodynamics – which says energy is not created or destroyed – is not in any danger here, as we can’t extract energy from a time crystal while also keeping it running.

Read more:
Unpacking a mystery of physics: Why processes in nature operate only in one direction

The second law states that things left to themselves can only become more disordered over time. This concept is probably all too familiar to anyone with kids or housemates.

But there is a loophole. The second law forbids things from becoming more ordered with time, but it doesn’t say they can’t maintain their current level of disorderedness forever.

In everyday life, we don’t see this loophole in action. It is the equivalent of stirring away at your coffee and cream and finding that the swirling tendrils of cream never fully mix with the coffee.

This is what time crystals do. We don’t see it in everyday life because it really is a quantum phenomenon.

Beyond time crystals

Quantum computers are still in their infancy. But as they improve they will allow physicists like us to improve our fundamental understanding of nature.

This in turn may translate into technological innovation, just as the physics of the last century enabled the digital revolution that shapes our lives today.

Quantum computers provide a platform for physicists to engineer and investigate novel states of matter that cannot be found in nature. Time crystals just mark the beginning of this exciting endeavour.

Stephan Rachel receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC). He is affiliated with the IBM Quantum Hub established at the University of Melbourne.

Philipp Frey 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. ‘An ever-ticking clock’: we made a ‘time crystal’ inside a quantum computer – https://theconversation.com/an-ever-ticking-clock-we-made-a-time-crystal-inside-a-quantum-computer-178164

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Matt Fitzpatrick, Professor in International History, Flinders University

Both sides in this war have plundered history. Vladimir Putin claims to be replaying the second world war by “denazifying” Ukraine, while his forces desecrate the Holocaust site of Babyn Yar.

Putin’s opponents have their own analogies. Putin is variously Hitler, Stalin or Tsar Peter the Great.

On social media, memes mine the medieval period to remind the West that when Kyiv was a flourishing metropolis in the 11th century, Moscow was still a wilderness.

Historians are uninterested in these debates. They know both sides can produce maps and histories to “verify” their claims. These need not shape present realities. As the Kenyan representative to the UN said about the African situation, where colonial era borders continue to chafe:

Rather than form nations that looked ever backwards into history with a dangerous nostalgia, we chose to look forward to a greatness none of our many nations and peoples had ever known.

Instead, historians are looking at the rapidly shifting present. They realise history is being made, not replayed in Ukraine. In the process, it is changing the face of Europe.

Germany changes course

In the space of one week, some of the old certainties about Europe have been thrown out the window. Most spectacularly, Germany, whose Nazi past has seen it avoid becoming a significant military power, has now committed itself to dramatically increasing its military spending. An initial injection of €100billion (A$153billion) will be followed by a guaranteed sum of at least 2% of GDP to be spent in each budget.

In contravention of its standing policy prohibiting the sale of armaments to war zones, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has announced his country will join the rest of Europe in providing weapons to the Ukrainians. German troops are now heading for Lithuania and Slovakia, while air and sea deployments have been made to Romania, the Baltic and the Mediterranean.

On top of this, Germany’s Merkel-era approach to energy security, which had until days ago rested on the promise of plentiful Russian gas, has been scuttled.

Read more:
What can the West do to help Ukraine? It can start by countering Putin’s information strategy

The rush to NATO

Elsewhere, NATO has also rushed eastward, and the Baltic states of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia have become a hastily agreed-upon forward post for NATO troops.

Having been firmly against joining NATO for decades, public opinion in Finland has suddenly shifted, with a citizen petition forcing a parliamentary debate on the issue. Alongside the Finns, non-NATO Sweden has been granted special access to NATO intelligence to help co-ordinate European responses to the war.

Now scotched rumours had even abounded that Poland, Slovakia and Bulgaria were to donate their fighter places to Ukrainian fighter pilots, stretching the line between military aid and active participation.

Even Switzerland, whose neutrality has lasted since the Napoleonic Wars, has suddenly joined the EU’s economic sanctions targeting Russian banks and assets.

Read more:
Germany’s €100-billion army fund: a remarkable change in post-war policy in response to the Ukraine crisis

Europe’s southeast moves too

Other European states are also altering their political course. Bosnia is mulling over a bid to formally join NATO, while Kosovo is making a pitch to secure a permanent US base on its territory.

Both of these moves would have been viewed as unthinkable provocations to Russia a week ago, and would still represent risky options for NATO. But, with NATO declaring Europe stands at the dawn of a “new normal”, such earlier taboos are giving way to a desire for “more support to countries like Georgia, Moldova, and Bosnia and Herzegovina”.

Meanwhile, French troops have been sent into Romania as part of Europe’s “strategic solidarity” with Ukraine’s neighbours.

Events have swept aside the earlier careful discussions about the consequences of NATO enlargement in Eastern Europe.

In the southeast, Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who has tried to walk a middle road between Russia and NATO, has also succumbed to the pressure of his NATO allies and activated the 1939 Montreux Convention. This effectively closes the Turkish Straits to warships, significantly hampering Russia’s ability to move more ships from the Mediterranean into the Black Sea and on to Crimea and Odessa in southern Ukraine.

Not everything is different

While it appeared Poland and Hungary, along with Bulgaria, Romania and Moldova, had reversed their notoriously anti-refugee policy by opening their eastern borders, it has since emerged these openings are still along racial lines. This means the borders are easily traversed by European Ukrainians, but are still very real barriers to the Arab, Asian and African refugees forced to flee their work and studies in Ukraine.

Some alliances with Moscow have remained firm. The story of Belarus President Alexander Lukashenko is well-known. His fate has been publicly tied to Russia since massive protests broke out after a fraudulent election destabilised his grip on power. He has used the conflict to increase his grip on power through a dubious referendum.

Less well understood outside the Balkans, however, is the position of Serbia’s President Aleksandar Vucic, who has declared his qualified support for Putin, so as to keep Russian support for Serbian objectives in Kosovo and Bosnia. “Serbia respects the norms of international law,” he has declared, “but Serbia also understands its own interests.”

Forgotten histories

Contrary to some reporting, this is not the first major war in Europe since the second world war. The Balkans spent much of the 1990s engulfed in a war that saw the disintegration of Yugoslavia, horrific ethnic cleansing, Serbian genocide, the NATO bombing of Belgrade and the ongoing garrisoning of Kosovo. Indeed, Putin has never forgotten NATO’s actions in the Balkans.

So too, the military conflict between Russian and Ukraine, ongoing since 2014, was preceded by the Russian-Georgian War of 2008.

Elsewhere, Iraqis have pointed out that Russia’s attack on Ukraine echoes the 2003 US invasion of Iraq, an invasion that also brought into question the robustness of international law.

However, historians are aware these past wars in Europe and beyond did not trigger the kind of rapid and united European action being seen now. Nor did they lead to the threat of nuclear conflict that has re-emerged as Europe walks the tightrope between military aid and becoming an active belligerent that could trigger the kind of nuclear consequences threatened by Putin. This nuclear dilemma was not one faced in the times of Hitler, Stalin or the tsars.

Matt Fitzpatrick currently receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. Remembering the past, looking to the future: how the war in Ukraine is changing Europe – https://theconversation.com/remembering-the-past-looking-to-the-future-how-the-war-in-ukraine-is-changing-europe-178151

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Holly Seale, Associate professor, UNSW Sydney

Claims you can “devaccinate” yourself have been circulating on social media, another example of extreme and dangerous misinformation about COVID vaccines.

Methods said to remove COVID vaccines from the body include using snake venom extractors or a type of traditional therapy known as “wet cupping”.

If you encounter claims like this online, you need to ask yourself four questions, to figure out whether these claims really are too good to be true.

Read more:
People want to use bleach and antiseptic for COVID and are calling us for advice

Cupping

Misinformation circulating on Instagram and other social media includes a video of someone using cupping therapy, suggesting this removes or sucks out the COVID vaccine.

The video shows someone cutting the skin, before applying a cup over the cuts to create suction – a type of therapy known as “wet cupping”.

Cupping has been used for thousands of years, mostly in traditional Chinese medicine. Practitioners believe this eases pain or promotes healing by drawing fluid towards the treated area and improve the flow of energy. However, there are few high-quality studies to support its effectiveness.

Why this doesn’t remove vaccine

Cupping usually affects only the superficial layers of the skin. COVID vaccines are generally deeper, injected into muscle.

After injection, vaccines train the body’s immune system to fight SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID. They do this by either presenting a weakened or inactivated part of the virus (the spike protein antigen) to the immune system, or by delivering the instructions for the body to make these antigens.

It’s important to note, this period of “training” is very short, and once the body has learnt how to respond, the vaccines are cleared from your body in mere days or weeks.

That’s because after the vaccine has primed the immune system, the body breaks down these components naturally, just as it does with other genetic fragments, proteins and fats.

Read more:
No, COVID vaccines don’t stay in your body for years

Snake venom kits

Others have tried to devaccinate using venom extraction kits. These kits include a plunger-type device you place over a snakebite, which is supposed to suck out venom.

Again, venom extractors will not remove the antigen in COVID vaccines, for the same reasons we’ve already described.

They also cannot remove enough venom to prevent serious systemic (widespread) effects of a snakebite. One study found the kit only removed 0.04% of the total load of venom, and ended up just removing body fluid.
Critically, they can destroy tissue around the site of the snakebite.

We all play a part

Information about devaccination continues to circulate on some platforms, such as BitChute and Telegram.

If you come across someone selling a wonder cure or drug online – whether that’s related to COVID or some other illness – here are some tips for thinking about what you see:

1. Is it hard to believe?

When you see something posted that looks sensational, it is even more important to be sceptical.

In a popular TikTok video, an osteopathic physician, who no longer practices, suggests people “detox” by take a bath in baking soda, epsom salt and borax to get rid of “radiation, poisons and nanotechnologies”.

She says people need to detox because COVID vaccines have “RNA-Modifying Transhumanism-Nano-Technology”, and “the people pushing these injections want to change what it is to be human”.

She also claims to have identified a jellyfish-like tiny invertebrate called “Hydra Vulgaris” that can:

multiply and form independent neural networks inside those who have received COVID-19 vaccines and could ultimately influence their thoughts and actions.

Even though sometimes we want to believe that someone has found the cure or answer to a question we are seeking, go with your gut reaction. If it sounds ridiculous, it probably is. If you are unsure whether the information is legitimate, talk to a family member, friend or your GP.

2. Have you checked the facts?

If a resource is provided in another language, how can you be sure what it says?

Using the cupping video as an example, Stephen Dickey, a professor of Slavic languages and literature at the University of Kansas, identified the dialogue in the video as Russian. But he said “there was no mention of the vaccine” and “there is no mention at all of exactly what is being extracted”.

When reviewing the resource, do you know who the author is and does that author specialise in the field the article is concerned with? Check LinkedIn or do a quick Google search to see if the author can speak about the subject with authority and accuracy.

3. Is there a hidden agenda?

Have you considered whether the person or organisation attempting to sell you a new drug or treatment has a hidden agenda? This can be increasing their reach on social media or making money.

For example, American “archbishop” Mark Grenon and his sons are reported to have sold more than US$1 million of their bleach-type “Miracle Mineral Solution”. They said it was a cure for COVID, cancer, Alzheimer’s, diabetes, autism, malaria, hepatitis, Parkinson’s, herpes, HIV/AIDS and other serious medical conditions.

4. What’s the source?

When an article cites sources, it’s good to check them out. The post about the snakebite kit included references to three published papers. These were dated 1979-1992, decades before COVID.

It’s also important to look at the topic of the cited paper. In the case of the 1979 paper, this looked at measures for a particular type of snakebite, which included examining the effects of applying firm crepe bandages on monkeys. There was no mention of the use of snake venom removal kits or COVID.

So, when you come across any videos or social media posts about fantastical new drugs or treatments that promise otherwise impossible cures or outcomes, it is important to always think:

If what you’re reading seems too good to be true, or too weird, or too reactionary, it probably is.

Holly Seale is an investigator on research studies funded by NHMRC and has previously received funding for investigator driven research from NSW Ministry of Health, as well as from Sanofi Pasteur and Seqirus. She is the Deputy Chair of the Collaboration on Social Science and Immunisation.

Margie Danchin receives funding from the Commonwealth and State government, NHMRC, DFAT and WHO. She is chair, Collaboration on Social Science and Immunisation (COSSI).

– ref. No, you cannot ‘devaccinate’ yourself with snake venom kits, bleach or cupping – https://theconversation.com/no-you-cannot-devaccinate-yourself-with-snake-venom-kits-bleach-or-cupping-177439

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Laura de Zwaan, Lecturer, Department of Accounting, Finance and Economics, Griffith University

How we can improve the teaching of financial literacy in high school? And why is it important?

People need a basic understanding of financial concepts to make good financial decisions. Our newly released research found most students generally do not know a lot about personal finance. This includes being able to apply basic numeracy to real-life financial situations, such as making purchasing decisions that are value-for-money and understanding interest on loans and investments.

Our report also makes six recommendations to improve financial literacy education in schools.

Our findings were consistent with previous evidence that 16% of Australian 15-year-olds lack even the basic level of financial literacy they need to participate in society. There is evidence that financial literacy in this age group is declining.

Read more:
Aussie kids’ financial knowledge is on the decline. The proposed national curriculum has downgraded it even further

This trend is concerning. The senior years of high school are a time when students take on more personal responsibility and financial independence. The financial habits they form then may last through adulthood. Low financial literacy is persistently linked to poorer financial outcomes.

The Australian Curriculum acknowledges students need financial literacy to operate in our financial world. However, this curriculum only covers up to year 10. In years 11 and 12, the years that are particularly important in shaping students’ financial capability, financial literacy is taught only in lower-level maths subjects.

What did the study find?

Our research explored the financial literacy of students in years 10, 11 and 12 at two urban and two rural schools. We found what students do know about financial literacy has been learned from home, maths or business studies. Students who were undertaking business studies were far more informed than other students.

Home life has been found to have a huge impact on a child’s financial literacy. There are often calls for parents to teach their children about personal finance. However, that assumes parents are able and willing to do that.

Read more:
How to teach your kids to think more critically about money

The students we spoke to were incredibly diverse. Household structures varied greatly, with many students not living with their parent/s. There was also evidence of parents not being able to provide financial guidance.

Nearly half the surveyed students preferred not to think about their financial situation.

We talked to a lot of the students about maths and found this was not the most effective curriculum area for learning about personal finance. When taught as part of the maths curriculum it tends to result in students fixating on formulas and calculations, without understanding the underlying concepts. As one student said:

“I only really remember the formula because that’s all we got taught.”

Many students also dislike maths. This means they are disengaged from learning at the outset. One student told us:

“If I was in class doing that [a simple question about interest], I would just read it, keep reading it, but not actually process it or try it because I’d just give up.”

There was also often a disconnect between the financial scenarios students were learning about and their experiences in their own lives.

Students who could remember financial concepts would often recall an experience or something from history when talking about it. This suggests stories may be more effective in communicating financial concepts. For example, one student said of inflation:

“Over time, because obviously more money is being printed […] people think printing money creates more money and you’re richer, when in reality you’re just making the currency you have worthless, because there’s so much of it, that it’s not difficult to acquire it at all. I learned most of that from history.”

Interestingly, we found evidence of young women in particular needing more context to make financial decisions. When asked financial questions, they wondered about different aspects of the question rather than quickly answering. Test questions commonly used to assess financial knowledge often offer little context.

About one in three students agreed they found managing their personal finances difficult and confusing.

Finally, we noted many students were not learning financial strategies, such as moderating spending, that have lifelong benefits.

Read more:
Would you pass this financial literacy quiz? Many won’t – and it’s affecting expensive aged care decisions

How can we improve?

Given the importance of financial literacy for student well-being, our report makes these recommendations:

1. financial literacy education should be elevated in high schools, ideally as a standalone program, but also by injecting principles of financial literacy into as many curriculum areas as possible – particularly in the well-being and pastoral care area

2. financial literacy education in maths needs to be improved, using a range of approaches – not limited to calculation activities

3. financial literacy education should be expanded to subjects other than maths and business, in line with shifting the focus from financial calculations to financial concepts

4. learning activities should be aligned with the students’ general level of financial experience

5. students need more exposure to effective financial strategies, in particular how to moderate (or control) spending for saving

6. a range of assessment methods should be offered to enable students to show what they have learnt. Assessment tasks should go beyond calculations and could include written pieces, visual or dramatic presentations, or oral explanations. These could be presented by groups or individuals.

Laura de Zwaan has received funding from Ecstra Foundation and the Financial Basics Foundation. She is an affiliate member of the Financial Planning Association and is a member of the Financial Planning Academic Forum. She has also been a member of the Wealth Academy Advisory Board.

Tracey West has undertaken consultancy work for ECSTRA Foundation and Treasury on financial literacy. She has also received grant funding from ECSTRA Foundation and the Financial Basics Foundation.

– ref. Many students don’t know how to manage their money. Here are 6 ways to improve financial literacy education – https://theconversation.com/many-students-dont-know-how-to-manage-their-money-here-are-6-ways-to-improve-financial-literacy-education-177918

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Antonia Settle, Academic (McKenzie Postdoctoral Research Fellow), The University of Melbourne

The floods affecting Australia’s eastern seaboard are a “1 in 1,000-year event”, according to New South Wales Premier Dominic Perrottet. But that’s not what science, or the insurance industry, suggests.

Throughout Australia in areas prone to fires, cyclones and floods, home owners and businesses are facing escalating insurance costs as the frequency and severity of extreme weather events increase with the warming climate.

Premiums have risen sharply over the past decade as insurers count the cost of insurance claims and factor in future risks. The latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, published this week, predicts global warming of 1.5℃ will lead to a fourfold increase in natural disasters.

Rising insurance premiums are creating a crisis of underinsurance in Australia.

In 2017 the federal government tasked the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission to investigate insurance affordability in northern Australia, where destructive storms and floods are most common. The commission delivered its final report in 2020. It found the average cost of home and contents insurance in northern Australia was almost double the rest of Australia – $2,500 compared with $1,400. The rate of non-insurance was almost double – 20% compared with 11%.

Average premiums for combined home and contents insurance, 2018–19

While the areas now experiencing their worst flooding in recorded history aren’t part of the riskiest areas identified by the insurance inquiry, the dynamics are the same.

Those not insured or underinsured will be financially devastated. Insurance premiums will rise. As a result, more people will underinsure or drop their insurance completely, compounding the social disaster that will come with the next natural disaster.

So, what do about it?

Tackling insurance affordability

There are two main ways to reduce insurance premiums.

One is to reduce global warming. Obviously this is not something Australia can achieve on its own, but it can be part of the solution.

The other is to reduce the damage caused by extreme events, by constructing more disaster-resistant buildings, or not rebuilding in high-risk areas.

The federal government, however, has put most of its eggs in a different basket, with a plan to subsidise to insurance premiums in northern Australia.

This won’t do much for those affected by the current floods. It won’t even do much to solve the insurance crisis in northern Australia.

The reinsurance pool, a blunt tool

In the 2021 budget the federal government committed A$10 billion to a cyclone and flood damage reinsurance pool, “to ensure Australians in cyclone-prone areas have access to affordable insurance”. The legislation to establish this pool is now before parliament.

The ostensible rationale is that the government can drive down insurance costs for consumers by stepping in and acting as wholesaler in the reinsurance market, in which insurers insure themselves against the risk of crippling insurance payouts.

The idea is that discounted reinsurance will lead insurers to lower their premiums.

Read more:
A national insurance crisis looms. The Morrison government’s $10 billion ‘pool’ plan won’t fix it

There is no guarantee, however, that insurers will pass on their cheaper costs to customers. This means the benefits of the pool are unclear.

So are its costs. Effectively, the government is shifting risk from insurers to itself, subsidising insurance premiums for those in some parts the country from the public purse.

The ACCC inquiry gave considerable attention to the idea of a reinsurance pool. While acknowledging there could be some benefits, it concluded the risks outweigh the rewards:

We do not consider that a reinsurance pool is necessary to address availability issues in northern Australia.

Targeting and mitigating

Above and beyond the aforementioned problems, there are two telling failures of the reinsurance pool plan.

First, subsidising insurance companies doesn’t target help to those who need it most: low-income households.

There is a growing body of research showing that natural disasters, and the ways governments respond to them, is contributing to greater inequality.

As the South Australian Council of Social Service makes clear in a report published this week, improving insurance access for people on low incomes at risk from natural disaster requires targeted support, such as promoting non-profit “mutual” insurance schemes.

Read more:
Natural disasters increase inequality. Recovery funding may make things worse

Second, only mitigation can bring the overall cost of natural disasters down. Ways to do this include public works (building levees, upgrading stormwater systems, conducting planned burns) and improving buildings (reinforcing garage doors, shuttering windows, managing vegetation around homes, and so on).

The ACCC’s insurance report identifies a range of ways mitigation strategies can be tied into insurance pricing. Yet none of these has been incorporated into the Morrison government’s response to the insurance crisis.

There is little support for the reinsurance pool outside of the federal government. Neither the ACCC, the insurance industry nor community sector advocacy organisations support reinsurance as a meaningful solution.

A reinsurance pool for the whole of Australia?

For the areas of NSW and Queensland now flooded, as well as the rest of the country outside the ambit of the reinsurance pool, the relentless rise in insurance costs will continue, tipping ever more homes out of the insurance safety net.

We must find better solutions to the insurance crisis than what is being offered to northern Australia. A reinsurance pool cannot be a national solution because it isn’t the solution for northern Australia.

There are no cheap and easy solutions, but the terrain is clearly mapped out across an array of inquiries and reports into insurance and climate vulnerability. More than a blanket subsidy for the insurance industry, the time has come for climate vulnerability to be taken seriously by the federal government.

Antonia Settle 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. After the floods comes the disaster of underinsurance: we need a better plan – https://theconversation.com/after-the-floods-comes-the-disaster-of-underinsurance-we-need-a-better-plan-178143

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lynette Russell, ARC Laureate Fellow, Monash University, and Deputy Director of the ARC Centre of Excellence for Australian Biodiversity and Heritage, Monash University

Every year, tens of thousands of New South Wales State Library patrons walk past a stunning mosaic replica of the Tasman Map on the floor of the Mitchell library vestibule. The original Tasman map, recently restored, charts the two voyages of the Dutch explorer Abel Tasman in 1642 and 1644.

The map is perhaps the Mitchell Library’s greatest treasure, though we know little about the time, place, or artist responsible for it.

Yet as we discuss in a new paper, its acquisition by the Mitchell library is a story of subterfuge, intrigue, personal animosities and state-versus-commonwealth rivalries.

The Tasman Map was probably made in the mid- to late-1600s in Batavia (now known as Jakarta), home of the Dutch East India Company, on Japanese paper.

It was most likely compiled by a team of draftsmen from a range of charts from Tasman’s two voyages. One of the artists was almost certainly Isaack Gilsemans, draftsman on the voyage.

Mystery shrouds the map’s whereabouts from the 17th century until 1843, when Amsterdam mapmaker Jacob Swart described and reproduced it.

In 1891 the original 17th century map was listed for sale by Frederick Muller & Co. An interested group headed by historian George Collingridge tried unsuccessfully to persuade the NSW government to purchase it.

Instead, the map was purchased by Prince Roland Bonaparte, great-nephew of Napoleon, and an anthropologist with a great interest in Australia.

Read more:
How early Australian settlers drew maps to erase Indigenous people and push ideas of colonial superiority

The princely promise

In March 1899, Henry Vere Barclay – a failed pastoralist, explorer and raconteur – gave a talk at the Imperial Institute in London where he announced Prince Roland had promised the Tasman map would be bequeathed to the Australian Commonwealth Government.

Within days, headlines declaring Prince Roland’s intended gift of the map to the Commonwealth of Australia had appeared in at least 44 Australian and New Zealand newspapers.

The prince’s intention to bequeath the map was confirmed in 1904 by James Park Thomson, president of the Royal Geographical Society of Queensland.

After viewing the map in Paris, Thomson wrote in his memoir, Round the World, of how the prince believed the map would be “of the greatest interest and use to the Commonwealth.”

Also reported by Thomson was how the prince wanted to hand the map to the Commonwealth government in person – but he was terrified of snakes and disliked rabbits which “seemed to overrun the place”.

Murmurings about the Tasman map fell silent for two decades and only emerged again after the prince’s death in 1924.

Read more:
Putting ‘Australia’ on the map

A clandestine operation

In 1926, anthropologist Daisy Bates read Thomson’s book, noting the reference to Prince Roland’s intended bequest.

Knowing the prince had recently died, she wrote to an acquaintance, William Ifould, asking him to enquire of the prince’s estate and the status of the map.

As chief librarian of the NSW Public Library, Ifould immediately began a clandestine operation to bring the Tasman Map to Australia.

It is clear from his earliest communications, when he warned his agent not to let the map come to the attention of Prime Minister Stanley Bruce, that Ifould was consumed by a singular goal: to acquire the map for NSW before anyone from the Commonwealth government remembered the prince’s promise.

Ifould’s chief personal nemesis was Kenneth Binns, librarian of the Commonwealth National Library, but Ifould also held an abiding antipathy for the Commonwealth itself.

In the earliest days of the scramble for the map, the Commonwealth Library’s collection was yet to have a permanent home, with the national capital of Canberra still in the early planning stages. Binns was based in Melbourne, then the seat of the national parliament, and this played into a rivalry between Sydney and Melbourne.

The Tasman Map was in the possession of Princess Marie Bonaparte, who was aware of her father’s desire to bestow it upon the Australian nation. Her husband Prince George wanted to travel to Australia and present the map himself.

This created concern for Ifould and the Mitchell Library, who were worried they might accidentally present it to the prime minister instead of the Mitchell Library.

Princess Marie clearly considered the map belonged to the Australian Commonwealth.

Ifould and his conspirators – including a succession of British ambassadors and NSW agents-general – ignored this. As one agent-general advised the NSW premier:

it is probable that she does not mean to say the Map will go to the Commonwealth Government, and that the use of the words ‘Government of Australia’ has no particular significance.

In May 1932 came the breakthrough Ifould had been waiting for: Prince George postponed his trip again, and Princess Marie agreed to hand the map to the Paris-based Australian Trade Commissioner.

Ifould’s seven-year clandestine operation, came to fruition when the map, now known as the Bonaparte-Tasman Map, arrived in Australia to great fanfare in September 1933.

A global map; a local rivalry

Absent from any version of the story over the past 90 years is admission of knowledge of Prince Roland’s wish, expressed multiple times, for the map to go to the Commonwealth.

The role of Barclay’s 1899 anecdote, and its publication around the country, was eradicated. This allowed the map falling into the Mitchell’s hands to be characterised as a happy coincidence, and not the result of scheming and subterfuge.

The Tasman Map, as it is commonly viewed today, is a mosaic reproduction by Italian artisans, of a Dutch map, on Japanese paper, depicting Antipodean coastlines, representing east Asian dominance, donated by a French aristocrat, intended for the Australian Commonwealth, but wrested by a state institution obsessed with inter-library rivalry.

This research will be discussed at the NSW State Library’s Mapping the Pacific conference on March 3 2022.

Lynette Russell receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Leonie Stevens is employed as a Research Fellow on the Australian Research Council-funded Global Encounters Laureate project..

– ref. A tale of subterfuge, rivalry, Napoleon and snakes: how the NSW State Library came to own the map of Abel Tasman’s voyages – https://theconversation.com/a-tale-of-subterfuge-rivalry-napoleon-and-snakes-how-the-nsw-state-library-came-to-own-the-map-of-abel-tasmans-voyages-177069

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Hawkins, Senior Lecturer, Canberra School of Politics, Economics and Society and NATSEM, University of Canberra

Australia’s economy bounced back a welcome 3.4% in the December quarter of 2021, more than reversing the 1.9% lockdown-related decline in the September quarter. It was the sixth-biggest increase in the 60 years the figures have been compiled.

Australian quarterly gross domestic product

The economy grew by 4.2% over the year to December, making it 3.4% bigger than it was two years earlier, before COVID.

This is similar to what happened in the United States, but better than what happened in the European Union and South Korea. The economies of the UK and Japan are still smaller than they were before COVID.

While it is impressive in the circumstances, had there been no pandemic, real GDP was set to climb 6% rather than 3.4% over those years. That’s what the Reserve Bank had been forecasting.

The South East versus the rest

It depended very much on where you lived. NSW, Victoria and the ACT were constrained by lockdowns in the September quarter.

Those states bounced back most strongly in the December quarter.

It is notable, and concerning, that in the other states, the best measure of total spending, state final demand, barely grew at all or went backwards.

State final demand, December quarter

Household spending was the main driver of the stronger GDP.

It bounced back in the December quarter as unemployment fell, vaccination rates rose and consumer confidence climbed ahead of Omicron in the belief COVID was coming under control.

Household final consumption expenditure

Spending on services surged. Personal and other services, the category that includes hairdressing, climbed by a record 15%.

There were also some big increases in spending on non-essential goods. Purchases of clothing and footwear jumped by more than 40%.

Components of household final consumption expenditure

Households have been saving an unusually high proportion of their income during the pandemic.

The saving ratio soared to a record high early in the pandemic, fell during the 2020 recovery, soared again during the 2021 lockdowns, and fell in the December quarter.

But it remains, as the Treasurer said in his press conference, around three times what it would have otherwise been without the pandemic.

Household saving ratio

Much of the saving is the result of caution, but much also reflects government support programs that maintained incomes at times when people were limited in their ability to spend on travel, restaurants, cinemas, gyms and other services.

Some of the frustrated services spending was diverted to goods, exacerbating supply bottlenecks and contributing to inflation.

Inventories climbed $1.5 billion after a fall of $2.9 billion in the September quarter as wholesalers restocked, also contributing to GDP growth.

Read more:
Australia cut unemployment faster than predicted – why stop now?

Export volumes fell as the reduction in coal exports (reflecting heavy rain and labour constraints) outweighed the increase in agricultural exports (reflecting a record grain harvest).

Housing construction also detracted from growth as shortages of workers and materials caused delays in building.

Sharing the cake

How were the proceeds of this higher GDP shared among Australians?

Treasurer Josh Frydenberg was keen to point out the wages bill climbed by more than 5% through the year as more workers found jobs, higher bonuses were paid and workers switched to better jobs and got promotions, a form of wage growth not captured in the official wage price index.

The wages share of national income remained near an all-time low. Wage growth is lagging price growth, meaning workers are getting a smaller share of the pie than they have been used to.

Wages share of total factor income

Looking forward

The December quarter was between the bulk of Delta and the bulk of Omicron.

After the outbreak of Omicron in late December, hours worked slid 9% in January as workers became sick, isolated and caring for friends and family who were sick.

Consumer sentiment deteriorated in both January and February as petrol prices rose and attention turned to interest rate rises.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and the subsequent further surge in petrol prices, is likely to depress sentiment further.

Read more:
Inflation hits 3.5%, but it won’t budge the Reserve Bank on interest rates

This means the next GDP release, covering the March quarter, will quite likely go backwards, taking GDP growth down with it.

Fortunately for the government, it isn’t due for release until Wednesday June 1, safely after the election which must be held by Saturday May 21 to avoid a separate half-Senate election.

John Hawkins was formerly an economic analyst and forecaster in the Reserve Bank and Treasury.

– ref. Wednesday’s GDP numbers are impressive, but they are for the December quarter, when we were bouncing back from Delta – https://theconversation.com/wednesdays-gdp-numbers-are-impressive-but-they-are-for-the-december-quarter-when-we-were-bouncing-back-from-delta-177821