Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Joanna Mendelssohn, Principal Fellow (Hon), Victorian College of the Arts, University of Melbourne. Editor in Chief, Design and Art of Australia Online, The University of Melbourne

Review: Hilma af Klint, The Secret Paintings. Art Gallery of New South Wales.

In 1986, those art historians who see art as some form of linear progression “improving” with time received a rude shock. The Los Angeles County Museum of Art’s exhibition The Spiritual in Art — Abstract Paintings 1890 – 1985 introduced a hitherto unknown woman artist.

The issue was not just that this art was so exquisitely beautiful — but that the paintings had been painted in the early 20th century.

Hilma af Klint was once known as a minor academic Swedish artist. Born in 1862, she had been one of the first women to graduate from the Royal Academy of Fine Arts in Stockholm and had exhibited at the Swedish General Art Association.

But these paintings on display in Los Angeles revealed another life, a different art. Her involvement with spiritualism had radicalised her art to such an extent she can only be described as one of the great abstract artists.

Her work was the sensation of the 2013 Venice Biennale, with a full scale retrospective organised by the Moderna Museet shown in Stockholm, Berlin and Malaga the same year. In 2018, New York’s Guggenheim Museum exhibition broke all attendance records. Hilma af Klint: The Secret Paintings brings her art to the southern hemisphere for the first time.

The transformation of af Klint from competent academic to inspirational mystical abstractionist is a result of the same ideas that influenced many of her contemporaries including Kandinsky, Mondrian, Klee and Malevich.

Rather than rewriting the history of art by slotting her in as a hitherto unknown great woman artist, it is probably more useful to consider these ideas and their impact on her art.

Scientific and mystical change

The scientific discoveries of the late 19th and early 20th century encouraged many to question the very nature of the universe.

In the 17th century, Isaac Newton discovered light was made of particles. In the early 19th century, Goethe’s Theory of Colours led many to see colour had spiritual and psychological powers. In the early 20th century, Max Planck demonstrated light particles had energy.

Many began to think that, if the universe was more than it seemed, then perhaps there were other lives living on different astral planes. Perhaps it was possible for some to be mediums, opening themselves to communicate with spirit guides to these worlds.

At the end of the 19th century a new religion, Theosophy, appeared, incorporating both ancient wisdom and modern science.

Today, this may seem esoteric in the extreme, but Theosophy offered an apparently logical and modern system of belief. Its spread was global, and was a major factor behind the liberation of colour in early Australian modernism. In Sydney in 1926, the Theosophical Society was sufficiently mainstream to start a radio station: 2GB.

Read more:
Clarice Beckett exhibition is a sensory appreciation of her magical moments in time

It is not surprising af Klint should become a follower. What is surprising is the power of the art unleashed as a consequence.

In 1896, she joined with four colleagues in a group they called The Five whose investigation of the spirit world included automatic drawing.

In 1906, her spiritual communications led to her spirit guide Amaliel “commissioning” a new series, The Paintings for the Temple. She later described this as “the one great task that I carried out in my lifetime.”

However, af Klint did not see herself as just a simple conduit for the spirits to control:

it was not the case that I was to blindly obey the spirits, but that I was to imagine that they were always standing by my side.

The first Paintings for the Temple were completed five years before Kandinsky proclaimed his revolutionary argument for abstraction in The Spiritual in Art.

In 1907 she painted her great series of works, The Ten Largest.

They are, by any measure, a magnificent study of the seasons of life. Elements of nature, geometry and mysterious writing are traced through juvenile floral blues to orange youth, mauves and yellows of adulthood, then in the seeds of old age where the red paint is all scumbled and thin.

The value in being forgotten

To understand both why her art developed the way it did, and why it was so little known for so long, it is probably worth considering the events of her lifetime and her own position.

Hilma af Klint was from an aristocratic Swedish naval family. During the first world war, Sweden’s position was armed neutrality, but was only too aware of the carnage. Her Swan series, started shortly after the outbreak of war, pitches white swan against black as forms become abstracted, looping in harmony, dissolving into geometry and pure abstraction — until at the very end the two swans are locked together. Each contained elements of the other.

In 1908, Hilma af Klimt showed the Paintings of the Temple to Rudolph Steiner who failed to understand her work, and did not appreciate the way she saw herself as working with spirits.

This, as well as the burden of caring for her frail and blind mother, may be why she abandoned painting for four years. It may also be why she specified her art be kept secret until 20 years after her death.

There is also a more pragmatic reason. For all its studied neutrality, Sweden was very close to Germany as the Nazis assumed power: radical abstract art with mystical overtones could have caused problems.

Hilma af Klint died in 1944. In 1970, after seeing the riches of his aunt’s creative legacy, her nephew Erik offered her art to Sweden’s Moderna Museet. The gift was rejected out of hand when the director heard she was a mystic and a medium.

A year later Linda Nochlin published Why Have There Been No Great Women Artists? — an essay ushering in a new era of scholarly reassessment of art by women.

Read more:
Why weren’t there any great women artists? In gratitude to Linda Nochlin

It was perhaps fortunate this gift was rejected. Almost all her art is now owned by the Hilma af Klint Foundation, created by her family. It will never be scattered by the art market nor be the subject of speculation by dealers. Instead, it is both a constant resource for scholars and for audiences to marvel at the meditative beauty of her forms, the incandescence of her colour and the way she opens eyes to new ways of seeing.

Hilma af Klint: The Secret Paintings is at the Art Gallery of New South Wales until September 19, then City Gallery Wellington from December 4.

Joanna Mendelssohn has received funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. How the stunning abstract art of Hilma af Klint opens our eyes to new ways of seeing – https://theconversation.com/how-the-stunning-abstract-art-of-hilma-af-klint-opens-our-eyes-to-new-ways-of-seeing-162605

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

The petition presented to parliament last week calling for trans women to be excluded from women’s sport is simply the latest round in a difficult and volatile global debate.

Organised by Save Women’s Sport Australasia, the petition challenges Sport New Zealand’s “draft guiding principles for the participation of transgender players in sport” for failing to consult widely enough.

Despite the draft principles covering community-level sport, not international competition, former Olympians and elite athletes supported the petition in an open letter to Minister for Sport and Recreation Grant Robertson.

The controversy comes not long after New Zealand transgender weightlifter Laurel Hubbard’s Pacific Games victory was criticised due to her alleged physical advantage, and not long before the Olympic Games open in late July.

Overall, this polarising issue is likely to keep dividing people. Consensus looks increasingly difficult to achieve. With both sides claiming discrimination, can existing laws and principles provide a way forward?

Sports participation as a human right

The wider relationship between sports and human rights is complex and often contradictory. No explicit right to participate in sport exists in international law. However, a number of core human rights are relevant:

• the Universal Declaration on Human Rights says everyone has the rights to freedom of association, health, rest and leisure, and to participate in cultural life

• the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights says everyone has the right to freedom of association; its sister treaty, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights recognises the rights to health and cultural life

• the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child identifies the rights to rest, leisure and participation in cultural life, which include participation in sport, as does the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

• UNESCO’s International Charter of Physical Education and Sport identifies sport as a fundamental right, as does the International Olympic Committee.

Recognising trangender athletes

As with all human rights, the right to participate in sport is underpinned by the right to be free from discrimination on grounds of sex, gender or other status. That includes gender identity and the right of trans people to be free from discrimination.

This broad principle informs much of the thinking on the issue. The UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Health, for example, has said the participation of girls and women in sport should not result in the arbitrary exclusion of transgender people.

Read more:
How high school sports became the latest battleground over transgender rights

The rapporteur has also asked for a consensus by all international sporting bodies and national governments, in consultation with transgender organisations, with subsequent policies ideally reflecting international human rights norms.

The UN’s Independent Expert on “protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity” has highlighted the negative impact of exclusionary practices in sport, and noted the value of inclusive programs.

The UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women calls for equality between men and women in sports and includes gender identity among the forms of potential discrimination.

The devil is in the detail

Beyond these areas of broad agreement, however, the issue quickly becomes more complex.

In Aotearoa New Zealand, the Human Rights Act 1993 prohibits discrimination on the grounds of “sex” and “sexual orientation”. These prohibitions have been interpreted to encompass the legal right of trans people to be free from discrimination.

Read more:
Hostility to elite trans athletes is having a negative impact on participation in everyday sport

However, the act also says it is not discriminatory to exclude people of one sex from participating in any competitive sporting activity in which the strength, stamina or physique of competitors is relevant.

Unfortunately, this is where the arguments run into the limited help offered by science. There is still strong disagreement about whether transgender athletes have a competitive advantage or not.

The limits of science and the law

Research focusing on testosterone levels to justify the exclusion (or inclusion) of trans athletes has been criticised as an inappropriate oversimplification.

Whether testosterone even provides a competitive advantage is disputed, and commentators point to other factors that may be at play.

One study of the available literature concluded that a consensus could not be reached due a lack of data. That finding was itself challenged, but both sides agreed more research was required.

Read more:
Do naturally high testosterone levels equal stronger female athletic performance? Not necessarily

In the meantime, we need to recognise the limits of science and the law when it comes to setting demonstrably balanced guidelines for trans athletes’ participation in sport.

Progress will only come through listening to both sides in the short term, but broad support for the required research is also needed in the longer term.

Ultimately it is in everyone’s interests that this hugely complex issue is resolved properly. Given it goes to the heart of human identity, the potential benefits are not confined to the sporting world.

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

– ref. The debate over transgender athletes’ rights is testing the current limits of science and the law – https://theconversation.com/the-debate-over-transgender-athletes-rights-is-testing-the-current-limits-of-science-and-the-law-162593

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

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson put Scott Morrison on the spot when he told their joint news conference he thought the Australian PM had “declared for net zero by 2050”.

When Johnson made the statement a journalist interjected to point out Morrison’s policy was to get to net zero “preferably” by 2050.

Johnson pressed on to say this was “a great step forward when you consider[…] the situation Australia is in. It’s a massive coal producer. It’s having to change the way things are orientated, and everybody understands that.

“You can do it fast. In 2012 this country had 40% of its power from coal. It’s now less than 2%, going down the whole time. […] I’m impressed by the ambition of Australia. Obviously we’re going to be looking for more the whole time, as we go into COP26 in November.”

The net zero moment came as the two stood together to announce they had reached an in-principle agreement for a free trade deal between Britain and Australia – the first such deal the United Kingdom has done post Brexit.

Johnson had been asked whether he wanted Australia to go beyond its present 2030 emissions reduction target.

Morrison has been under strong pressure from both Johnson and United States President Joe Biden to embrace the 2050 target. But he has so far not done so, despite edging towards it. His position is to get to net zero “as soon as possible, preferably by 2050.”

Formally embracing the target would threaten a fight within the Nationals that could destabilise the party’s leader Michael McCormack.

Nationals Senate leader Bridget McKenzie warned this week:

“There is no agreement with the second party of this Coalition government on any target date for zero emissions. In fact it would fly in the face of the Nationals public policy commitment.”

The planned free trade agreement, which still has details to be finalised, would reduce barriers on the mobility of workers between the two countries as well on trade in goods and services.

The deal would promote more exchange of young people, allowing them to stay and work in each country for three years instead of two. This arrangement would apply to people up to age 35 rather than 30, as at present.

The federal government says Australian producers and farmers would “receive a significant boost by getting greater access to the UK market” while Australian consumers would “benefit from cheaper products, with all tariffs eliminated within five years, and tariffs on cars, whisky, and the UK’s other main exports eliminated immediately” the agreement started.

Australia would within five years place less onerous conditions on British backpackers, who presently have to spend a set time working in agriculture, or other sectors of labour shortage in regional Australia, to get an extension of their visa.

A separate agriculture visa would be established for UK and Australian visa holders, to get more two way traffic (for example, of shearers) in the agricultural sector.

Over 10 to 15 years the UK would liberalise Australian imports of beef and sheep meat, with shorter periods for sugar and dairy products.

The agricultural sectors in both Britain and Australia expressed concerns when the agreement was being negotiated. In Australia farmers have been worried about the possibility of losing labour if the conditions on backpackers were scrapped.

Johnson said the deal would be good for British car manufacturers and the export of British financial and other services, and he hoped for the agricultural sectors on both sides.

On agriculture “we’ve had to negotiate very hard. […] This is a sensitive sector for both sides, and we’ve got a deal that runs over 15 years and contains the strongest possible provisions for animal welfare.”

The removal of the farm work requirement would make it easier for British people and young people to go and work in Australia, he said.

Morrison said the deal would open the pathway to Britain’s entry into the The Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP).

Morrison and Johnson discussed the final points of the agreement in principle over a dinner meeting at 10 Downing Street. Their talks also included climate change.

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. Boris Johnson overstates Morrison’s climate ambition, as Australia-UK trade agreement reached – https://theconversation.com/boris-johnson-overstates-morrisons-climate-ambition-as-australia-uk-trade-agreement-reached-162790

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

As well as Michelle Grattan’s usual interviews with experts and politicians about the news of the day, Politics with Michelle Grattan now includes “Word from The Hill”, where all things political will be discussed with members of The Conversations’s politics team.

In this episode, politics + society editor Amanda Dunn and Michelle dive into Tuesday’s announcement that the Bioela Tamil family will now live in Perth while their court proceedings are underway, after being incarcerated on Christmas Island since 2019. They also discuss Scott Morrison’s meeting with US President Joe Biden, and Michael McCormack’s sitting in the PM’s parliamentary chair this week.

Additional audio

A List of Ways to Die, Lee Rosevere, from Free Music Archive.

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

– ref. Word from The Hill: the Biloela Tamil family, G7 and the upcoming parliamentary fortnight – https://theconversation.com/word-from-the-hill-the-biloela-tamil-family-g7-and-the-upcoming-parliamentary-fortnight-162769

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

At its peak, more than 3.8 million Australians were on JobKeeper — three in every ten Australian workers.

Adding in those workers already employed by government, it meant four in every ten received a paycheck that originated from government, more than in Russia.

Yet when JobKeeper ended at the end of March, it looked like a mere blip in employment. The unemployment rate actually fell, for the sixth consecutive month.

The Bureau of Statistics said the cutoff had no “discernible impact”.

Treasurer Josh Frydenberg went further. The economy had “strengthened, even after the end of JobKeeper”.

Since the end of JobKeeper 132,000 people had come off income support.

The treasurer is right. After March the number of Australians on JobSeeker and related support payments fell 9%.

Changed rules pushed people off benefits

But it’s possible for people to come off benefits at the same time as people are losing jobs, especially if something else is driving them off, as it was at the end of March.

At the end of March the coronavirus supplement that topped up unemployment benefits stopped. The payment dropped from $715.70 to $620.80 per fortnight.

And job seekers were once again required to search for a minimum of 15 jobs a month, climbing to 20 from July.

Read more:
New finding: jobseekers subject to obligations take longer to find work

While burdensome for employers (if all of Australia’s job seekers actually apply for those jobs, employers will be lumbered with 17 million applications per month, climbing to 23 million) it’s also unhelpful for job seekers.

There’s evidence to suggest job seekers get real jobs sooner if they don’t have to go through charades.

The “dob in a job seeker” hotline will have further dissuaded them from applying for benefits.

These changes make the drop in the number of claimants understandable, much more so than the suggestion they got jobs, which in net terms they did not. Employment fell after the end of March, by 30,600 according to Bureau of Statistics figures which will be updated on Thursday.

As many as 97,000 fewer workers?

How is a drop in employment consistent with a drop in the unemployment rate?

The unemployment rate fell to 5.5% in April not because employment grew, but because 33,600 people who had previously identified themselves as unemployed dropped out of contention, changing their status to “not in the labour force”.

Had they continued to not work but continued to describe themselves as “unemployed”, the unemployment rate would have been 5.7%.

And it would have been higher still if those shifted to zero or reduced hours with the end of JobKeeper had been called unemployed. Employment fell 0.2%, but hours worked fell 0.7%.

Read more:
Josh Frydenberg has the opportunity to transform Australia, permanently lowering unemployment

My rough maths suggests this means the number of Australians actually working might have fallen by 94,100.

An analysis prepared by Melbourne University employment specialist Jeff Borland for the Fair Work Commission puts the number of jobs lost between 45,000 and 97,000.

He gets 45,000 by comparing the number of people who left employment between March and April this year with the number who left between March and April in previous years.

He gets 97,000 by comparing the average (rapid) growth over the previous four months as we emerged from recession with the growth between March and April.

One in 11 JobKeeper jobs

A touch over one million Australians remained on JobKeeper to the end, suggesting that as many as ten in every 11 of them kept their jobs when JobKeeper ended. One in every 11 might have lost their jobs.

The Australians most knocked around were the youngest. Since the end of JobKeeper, women under the age of 30 have on balance lost jobs while women over that age have continued to gain jobs.

Men under the age of 40 have lost jobs while men over that age have gained them.

The treasury’s deepest concern about jobs since the start of COVID (it mentions it right at the top of that section of the budget) has been scarring.

The unlucky young people who happen not to secure jobs during downturns can fail to secure them for years, being passed over by newer, fresher young people who are barely affected.

Even where these people get jobs, if they enter the market when the youth unemployment is five percentage points higher than normal, they can expect to earn roughly 8% less in their first year, and 3.5% less after five years. It takes about a decade for the effect to fully disappear, and it’s worse for women than men.

Vacancies, plus mismatch

Australia’s record-high vacancy rate (2% of all jobs were vacant at the end of March) makes it look as if scarring needn’t be much of a concern. But jobs are vacant for reasons.

It might be that the mix of jobs we will need is changing, or that employers can for the moment no longer rely on migration to give them the mix of skills they want. Or it might simply be that the general bounceback in jobs has been so fast that the right employers and the right workers are still working out how to find each other.

Read more:
The four GDP graphs that show us roaring out of recession pre-lockdown

Many businesses will die as a result of the end of JobKeeper. Businesses are forever dying. Some have been kept alive for longer than they would have been, and some have exited JobKeeper into a changed environment.

We’ve managed to end JobKeeper without a catastrophe, but that doesn’t mean there hasn’t been damage, and it doesn’t mean young lives won’t be scarred.

After a textbook exit from a recession — the sharpest V-shaped recovery ever — it would be awful if we left a slice of young Australia behind.

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

– ref. The end of JobKeeper wasn’t a blip. It might have cost nearly 100,000 jobs – https://theconversation.com/the-end-of-jobkeeper-wasnt-a-blip-it-might-have-cost-nearly-100-000-jobs-162744

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

Federal immigration minister Alex Hawke has exercised his power to allow the Murugappan family from Biloela to live in the Perth community.

The Tamil asylum seeker family was previously held in an “alternative place of detention” (APOD) on Christmas Island. Residence determination, also known as “community detention”, was introduced in 2005 an alternative to held detention. As of April 2021, there were 536 people in community detention, including 181 children.

Read more:
Biloela family moved to Perth in holding decision by Immigration Minister Hawke

Community detention allows people to transition out of detention into the community with appropriate supports. The family will have to live at a specified address and are legally still “detained”. They will not be under any physical supervision and will have the ability to live in the Perth community and engage with local support networks, and the children will be able to go to a local school. However, the requirement to live at a particular place means they are not free to leave Perth and return to Biloela in Queensland, unless the minister allows them to.

Immediate health and mental health a priority

Families in community detention are provided with support services from local community based organisations contracted by the Department of Home Affairs under the Status Resolution Support Service . The Murugappans will be given accommodation, health and welfare services as well as casework support. A small income is provided to allow them to pay for food, clothing and utilities, but the parents will not be allowed to work.

Much has happened in recent days. Physical and mental health must be a priority. There is a strong body of evidence to suggest people’s health deteriorates significantly in immigration detention, with a clear association between time in detention and rates of mental illness. Anxiety, depression and traumatic stress experiences are commonly reported. Length of time in detention is associated with severity of distress. There is evidence that mental health improves shortly after release, although results have shown that the negative impact of detention can be ongoing.

After years in detention, the family’s situation has been brought to a head by their youngest daughter, Tharunicaa, being transferred to hospital in Perth with a serious blood infection. Medical experts have advocated for the family to be reunited as the little girl recovers.

Read more:
View from The Hill: the Morrison government has escape hatch in Tamil family case – if it wants to use it

What are the legal options now?

The family’s future remains uncertain. Hawke said:

I will consider at a future date whether to lift the statutory bar presently preventing members of the family from reapplying for temporary protection, for which they have previously been rejected.

The parents came to Australia by boat without visas, so the law classifies them as unlawful maritime arrivals. Their children, although born in Australia, are also classified as unlawful maritime arrivals. This means they are not allowed to apply for any visa in Australia unless the immigration minister personally allows it under section 46A of the Migration Act.

Read more:
As a young child is evacuated from detention, could this see the Biloela Tamil family go free?

The minister has previously allowed the father, Nades, to apply for a protection visa. The mother, Priya, has also applied and included the older daughter in her application. All had applied for protection visas, claiming they would face persecution if returned to Sri Lanka. Their claims were not successful and they were then detained in 2018.

Attempts to remove them from Australia were stopped by an injunction issued by the courts on the basis that the youngest daughter had not had the opportunity to apply for a protection visa.

The minister may allow them to apply for any visa under section 46A, or alternatively allow the family’s claims for protection to be reassessed under section 48B.

Section 48A of the Migration Act allows the minister to personally allow a person to apply again for a protection visa where they have previously been refused if he considers it in the “public interest” to do so. The minister’s guidelines state he can exercise this power if he considers there are “exceptional circumstances”, including new information, or where there is a significant change in the circumstances of the case.

In the case of the Biloela family, this could include a change to the circumstances of their case that has arisen since they last applied, which are known as sur place claims. In May 2021, an asylum tribunal in the United Kingdom issued new country guidance addressing the risk of persecution for Sri Lankan nationals. It sets out the risk of persecution as a result of sur place activities that are (or perceived by the government to be) in opposition to the government of Sri Lanka.

This is important in the case of the Biloela family, as they are clearly identifiable due to the large amount of national and international media coverage, which has included references to their previous asylum claims.

Read more:
It’s time to give visas to the Biloela Tamil family and other asylum seekers stuck in the system

The immediate need for a trauma-informed response

Community detention is an appropriate compassionate response and a step in the right direction. However, the failure to exercise a discretion either granting the Murugappans a visa or allowing them to apply again leaves the family in limbo.

Prolonged uncertainty and ongoing trauma can have devastating impacts. There is a well documented body of evidence that when people are traumatised and at the same time feel trapped by their circumstances, it becomes increasingly difficult to make decisions, sustain healthy, satisfying relationships or manage life’s uncertainties. Efforts must be made to reduce that uncertainty. A trauma-informed approach is essential to reduce ongoing distress and prevent retraumatisation.

Specialist support for both parents and children are essential. How children experience traumatic events, how they express their distress, and what actually helps, depends in large part on the children’s age and stage of development. It also depends on the circumstances of the entire family. The goal must be to restore certainty to these children’s lives and the lives of their parents.

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

Nicholas Procter has previously received grant funding and sitting fees from the Department of Home Affairs. This article is part of a series on asylum seeker policy supported by a grant from the Broadley Trust.

– ref. Biloela family to be released into community detention – what happens now? – https://theconversation.com/biloela-family-to-be-released-into-community-detention-what-happens-now-162661

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Niro Kandasamy, Lecturer, Australian Catholic University

Immigration Minister Alex Hawke has announced the Murugappans will be moved from detention on Christmas Island, to community detention in Perth.

This follows mounting public concern for the Tamil family, particularly regarding the health of four-year-old Tharunicaa, who was medevaced to Perth from Christmas Island last week.

Read more:
Biloela family moved to Perth in holding decision by Immigration Minister Hawke

But the government is yet to make a final decision about where the family can live in the long-term. The family has previously had its refugee claims rejected.

Priya and Nades Murugappan have been trying to stay in Australia for the best part of a decade, through multiple appeals. All the while, Sri Lanka has one of the worst records of state-perpetrated violence against civilians in the early 21st century.

Tamils and the Sri Lankan civil war

Tamils are an ethnic group native to Sri Lanka. Many Tamils have sought to come to Australia due to fear of persecution in their home country. This is due to links either real or perceived with the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (Tamil Tigers), a separatist group fighting for an independent homeland for Tamils in north and east Sri Lanka.

The Tamil Tigers fought and lost a brutal 26-year civil war with the Sinhalese majority government, which ended in 2009. This included serious allegations of genocide and the military’s intentional shelling of government-designated “no fire zones”. It is estimated at least 100,000 Tamils died in the final stages of the war.

In 2012, the United Nations admitted its “failures” in protecting the Tamils. Namely, its failure to “act within the scope of institutional mandates to meet protection responsibilities”.

Post-war persecution

The post-war period has also been marked by the ongoing persecution of the Tamils.

In 2018, the Human Rights Watch reported that military occupation of the north and east of the island “is a cruel legacy”
of the war and encroaches on Tamil civilian life. In 2019, the International Truth and Justice Project reported Sri Lankan police had committed torture against civilians, with many of the perpetrators who orchestrated such crimes occupying senior positions in government.

Read more:
As a young child is evacuated from detention, could this see the Biloela Tamil family go free?

Earlier this year, the United Nations Human Rights Office published a damning report on the deteriorating human rights situation in Sri Lanka, observing:

deepening impunity, increasing militarization of governmental functions, ethno-nationalist rhetoric, and intimidation of civil society.

Tamils in Australia

According to the 2016 census, there more than 27,000 Tamil people — who were born in Sri Lanka — living in Australia. But it could be many more.

Tamils seeking asylum in Australia reportedly face some of the lowest acceptance rates. And Australia’s position when it comes to Sri Lanka — and the safety of Tamils — has drawn criticism from human rights experts at home and overseas.

The Department of Home Affairs relies heavily on the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade country information report on Sri Lanka to decide whether to give permanent protection to Tamil asylum seekers. The current (2019) report says:

Sri Lankans face a low risk of torture on a day-to-day basis. In the case of individuals detained by the authorities, DFAT assesses the risk of torture to be moderate. Where it occurs, some mistreatment may amount to torture. DFAT assesses that Sri Lankans face a low risk of torture overall.

This is also despite reports from Tamils deported from Australia they have been targeted by local security forces on their return to Sri Lanka.

In May this year, the United Kingdom’s Upper Tribunal (which handles immigration appeals) issued a damning critique of the DFAT report, finding:

None of the sources are identified, there is no explanation as to how the information from these sources was obtained, and there is no annex containing, for example, records of any interviews.

The landmark decision by the tribunal challenges decisions in recent years by the UK government — which has been “considering ceasing” the refugee status of Tamil refugees as recently as 2017. This year, the German government has been deporting Tamils to Sri Lanka, amid public opposition. New Zealand maintains its offer to resettle Australia’s offshore refugees, which includes Tamils.

Australia’s relationship with Sri Lanka

Australia has a special security relationship with Sri Lanka that can’t help but affect its response to Tamil persecution and asylum seekers.

This relationship has been steadily intensifying since the 1970s, when the Indian Ocean gained strategic importance for both countries. In recent years, the Indian Ocean has become increasingly important for Australia’s national security as part of its geographical location in the Asia-Pacific region.

Along with joint exercises, Australia has gifted Sri Lanka patrol boats to stop people smuggling. This April, it gave the police five drones “to support crime fighting”.

In 2015, Human Rights Watch reported both governments “colluded” when it came to the treatment of asylum seekers.

Australia and Sri Lanka colluded to ensure that asylum seekers leaving Sri Lanka were either returned or else not allowed onto Australian territory.

Australia sent back many asylum seekers to Sri Lanka after cursory interviews at sea; those found to have legitimate claims were processed in other countries. In an apparent bid to secure Sri Lanka’s assistance in stopping migrants and asylum seekers, Australia failed to call for better human rights protections […]

Australia has also opposed international investigations into war crimes in Sri Lanka. Until today, it has also ignored a 2019 UN request to release the Murugappan family into the Australian community.

The Australian government will likely continue to grow its special relationship with its Indian Ocean neighbour.

But as more and more Australians show their support to asylum seekers like Priya, Nades, Kopika, and Tharunicaa, the Australian government needs to seriously confront its relationship with a country descending deeper into authoritarianism and human rights abuses.

Niro Kandasamy is affiliated with the Tamil Refugee Council.

Parts of this research have been funded by the Contemporary Histories Research Group Award in History and Policy, Deakin University

– ref. Why do Tamil asylum seekers need protection — and why does the Australian government say they don’t? – https://theconversation.com/why-do-tamil-asylum-seekers-need-protection-and-why-does-the-australian-government-say-they-dont-162609

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

At its peak, more than 3.8 million Australians were on JobKeeper — three in every ten Australian workers.

Adding in those workers already employed by government, it meant four in every ten received a paycheck that originated from government, more than in Russia.

Yet when JobKeeper ended at the end of March, it looked like a mere blip in employment. The unemployment rate actually fell, for the sixth consecutive month.

The Bureau of Statistics said the cutoff had no “discernible impact”.

Treasurer Josh Frydenberg went further. The economy had “strengthened, even after the end of JobKeeper”.

Since the end of JobKeeper 132,000 people had come off income support.

The treasurer is right. After March the number of Australians on JobSeeker and related support payments fell 9%.

Changed rules pushed people off benefits

But it’s possible for people to come off benefits at the same time as people are losing jobs, especially if something else is driving them off, as it was at the end of March.

At the end of March the coronavirus supplement that topped up unemployment benefits stopped. The payment dropped from $715.70 to $620.80 per fortnight.

And job seekers were once again required to search for a minimum of 15 jobs a month, climbing to 20 from July.

Read more:
New finding: jobseekers subject to obligations take longer to find work

While burdensome for employers (if all of Australia’s job seekers actually apply for those jobs, employers will be lumbered with 17 million applications per month, climbing to 23 million) it’s also unhelpful for job seekers.

There’s evidence to suggest job seekers get real jobs sooner if they don’t have to go through charades.

The “dob in a job seeker” hotline will have further dissuaded them from applying for benefits.

These changes make the drop in the number of claimants understandable, much more so than the suggestion they got jobs, which in net terms they did not. Employment fell after the end of March, by 30,600 according to Bureau of Statistics figures which will be updated on Thursday.

94,100 fewer workers?

How is a drop in employment consistent with a drop in the unemployment rate?

The unemployment rate fell to 5.5% in April not because employment grew, but because 33,600 people who had previously identified themselves as unemployed dropped out of contention, changing their status to “not in the labour force”.

Had they continued to not work but continued to describe themselves as “unemployed”, the unemployment rate would have been 5.7%.

And it would have been higher still if those shifted to zero or reduced hours with the end of JobKeeper had been called unemployed. Employment fell 0.2%, but hours worked fell 0.7%.

Read more:
Josh Frydenberg has the opportunity to transform Australia, permanently lowering unemployment

Rough maths suggests this means the number of people actually working might have fallen 94,100.

An analysis prepared by Melbourne University employment specialist Jeff Borland for the Fair Work Commission puts the number of jobs lost between 45,000 and 97,000.

He gets 45,000 by comparing the number of people who left employment between March and April this year with the number who left between March and April in previous years.

He gets 97,000 by comparing the average (rapid) growth over the previous four months as we emerged from recession with the growth between March and April.

One in 11 JobKeeper jobs

A touch over one million Australians remained on JobKeeper to the end, suggesting that as many as ten in every 11 of them kept their jobs when JobKeeper ended. One in every 11 might have lost their jobs.

The Australians most knocked around were the youngest. Since the end of JobKeeper, women under the age of 30 have on balance lost jobs while women over that age have continued to gain jobs.

Men under the age of 40 have lost jobs while men over that age have gained them.

The treasury’s deepest concern about jobs since the start of COVID (it mentions it right at the top of that section of the budget) has been scarring.

The unlucky young people who happen not to secure jobs during downturns can fail to secure them for years, being passed over by newer, fresher young people who are barely affected.

Even where these people get jobs, if they enter the market when the youth unemployment is five percentage points higher than normal, they can expect to earn roughly 8% less in their first year, and 3.5% less after five years. It takes about a decade for the effect to fully disappear, and it’s worse for women than men.

Vacancies, plus mismatch

Australia’s record-high vacancy rate (2% of all jobs were vacant at the end of March) makes it look as if scarring needn’t be much of a concern. But jobs are vacant for reasons.

It might be that the mix of jobs we will need is changing, or that employers can for the moment no longer rely on migration to give them the mix of skills they want. Or it might simply be that the general bounceback in jobs has been so fast that the right employers and the right workers are still working out how to find each other.

Read more:
The four GDP graphs that show us roaring out of recession pre-lockdown

Many businesses will die as a result of the end of JobKeeper. Businesses are forever dying. Some have been kept alive for longer than they would have been, and some have exited JobKeeper into a changed environment.

We’ve managed to end JobKeeper without a catastrophe, but that doesn’t mean there hasn’t been damage, and it doesn’t mean young lives won’t be scarred.

After a textbook exit from a recession — the sharpest V-shaped recovery ever — it would be awful if we left a slice of young Australia behind.

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

– ref. The end of JobKeeper wasn’t a blip. It might have cost 100,000 jobs – https://theconversation.com/the-end-of-jobkeeper-wasnt-a-blip-it-might-have-cost-nearly-100-000-jobs-162744

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alison Carver, Senior Research Fellow, Behaviour Environment and Cognition Program, Mary MacKillop Institute for Health Research, Australian Catholic University

Greenery around primary schools may improve students’ academic performance, while traffic pollution may be detrimental, our study shows.

With increasing urbanisation in Australia and globally, consideration needs to be given to the location of schools. Children need to grow and learn in environments that promote their physical health, as well as their cognitive development and academic learning.

Our research mapped greenery and traffic exposure around 851 primary schools across greater Melbourne.

We examined how greenery and traffic-related air pollution were associated with the average 2018 NAPLAN scores in years 3 and 5. The scores were in five domains: reading, writing, spelling, grammar, punctuation and numeracy.

People tend to see green leafy suburbs as more wealthy, and socioeconomic status is a significant predictor of academic scores. So to ensure we were looking at the effects of the greenery itself, we compared schools in the same socioeconomic bracket. We found more greenery was associated with better NAPLAN scores. Meanwhile, higher exposure to traffic-related pollution was associated with poorer scores.

The importance of urban greenery

A growing body of evidence shows access to green space — which includes parks, trees, shrubs and grass — is linked to children’s healthy development.

We know greenery in urban areas may boost mental health among older adults and can offset traffic emissions.

Research conducted internationally suggests greenness surrounding schools can lead to better cognitive development in primary school-aged children. But there is still debate over whether greenery around schools can boost academic performance.

Exposure to traffic-related air pollution at school, where children spend much of their waking hours, has been associated with poorer performance in tests of brain health and development. Air pollution may be more detrimental to the health of children compared with adults, due to children’s physiology and rapid growth.

We wanted to investigate if greenery and traffic pollution have clear links with academic performance, an indicator of cognitive development.

Children perform better with more greenery

We measured the amount of greenery in the school grounds, and then the traffic pollution and greenery around the school grounds within distances of 100m, 300m, 1,000m and 2,000m.

We found school-level academic performance in reading, numeracy, grammar and punctuation was better on average for schools located in areas with more greenery.

Our statistical modelling included data on socioeconomic levels of the area as well as variations in schools, such as parental occupation and proportion of Indigenous students.

Read more:
People’s odds of loneliness could fall by up to half if cities hit 30% green space targets

We compared the NAPLAN scores of similar socioeconomic-status schools and found higher scores in greener areas. For example, when comparing schools with the highest and lowest levels of green within 300 m, we found statistically significant differences of an average 20 points in reading scores for year 5.

Poorer performance was associated with higher levels of traffic-related air pollution surrounding schools. Reading scores in year 5 were around 16 points lower, on average, in schools with the highest levels of traffic-related air pollution within 300m of schools, compared with those with lowest levels.

The specifics of the NAPLAN scores aren’t as important as the associations we found with greenery and traffic pollution. Our findings show preliminary evidence that greener environments with low traffic levels around primary schools may promote children’s academic performance.

Read more:
Higher-density cities need greening to stay healthy and liveable

Our exploratory study is the first of its kind in Melbourne, a metropolis with projected growth and plans for future school developments and traffic infrastructure.

How can greenery help?

Greenery can help reduce air pollution in several ways including filtering the air through plant surfaces and foliage.

But other factors (not examined in our study) that may play a role in the association between greenery and academic performance are related to the type and location of greenery.

Better performance among children in greener areas could be due to attention restoration, stress reduction or reducing harmful environmental exposures (such as noise from traffic and air pollution).

Town and school planners, as well as educators, should consider where schools are located and how their surrounding environments may be improved to promote childhood learning and health.

Additional steps to reduce traffic levels around schools should be encouraged where possible, as well as active transport and use of public transport to reduce the number of vehicles on the roads.

The research in this article was conducted in collaboration with Joep Claesen and Dr Gonnie Klabbers at Maastricht University in the Netherlands, and Professor Mark Nieuwenhuijsen, ACU and ISGlobal, Spain.

Amanda J. Wheeler 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. Green space around primary schools may improve students’ academic performance – https://theconversation.com/green-space-around-primary-schools-may-improve-students-academic-performance-161673

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katharine Kemp, Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Law & Justice, UNSW, UNSW

Five antitrust laws proposed in the United States aim to aggressively rein in the market power of “big tech” companies and change the way they do business.

The set of bills, introduced on June 11, targets the enormous economic power wielded by the likes of Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google (owned by parent company Alphabet).

The expansive proposals range from breaking up different businesses run by big tech, to more effectively preventing mergers known as “killer acquisitions”, in which big tech companies buy up rivals to stamp out threats to their market power.

The proposals would represent a massive change to US antitrust laws. US courts applying these laws currently tend to favour the growth of large companies and regard their economic power as a sign of superior economic efficiency.

Each of the bills has some support from both Democrats and Republicans. It’s remarkable the proposals have survived to this stage, in the face of record lobbying by big tech companies in Washington.

Even if only some of the proposals are passed as law, they will likely have significant consequences for the way big tech does business globally.

Read more:
‘Big Tech’ isn’t one big monopoly – it’s 5 companies all in different businesses

Who is targeted as “big tech” and why?

The five bills — collectively called “A Stronger Online Economy: Opportunity, Innovation and Choice” — would apply to any “covered platform” which:

• has at least 50 million active monthly users in the US
• has an owner with minimum net annual sales or market capitalisation of US$600 billion
• and is a critical trading partner for the supply of any product or service on or directly related to the platform.

This would capture at least Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google. The proposals are the result of a 16-month investigation into these companies by the US House Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust.

The investigation famously saw the chief executives of Apple, Amazon, Facebook and Google each testify before members of the committee. This culminated in a 450-page report published by the majority Democrats in October last year.

The report slammed various strategies used by the companies as being monopolistic and harmful to innovation, competition and consumers. It said:

To put it simply, companies that once were scrappy, underdog startups that challenged the status quo have become the kinds of monopolies we last saw in the era of oil barons and railroad tycoons.

How the proposals would change big tech

The measures included in the bills are extensive, but four key proposals stand out. First, big tech companies could be forced to split or sell certain businesses, in cases where running both the business and the platform creates a conflict of interest.

For example, Amazon has been accused of using data gained about third-party sellers in its marketplace, to gain a competitive advantage for its own Amazon Basics products.

Similarly, Apple might be stopped from selling its own products in competition with others in its app store or music store.

Second, platforms could be prevented from advantaging their own products over rivals’ products on their platform, unless they could prove it wouldn’t harm competition.

Google, for instance, has been accused of advantaging its services such as Google Shopping in search results. This kind of preferencing may prevent rival services getting a leg up, even if they offer a better service.

Third, the proposals target “killer acquisitions” made by big tech companies. These refer to cases where Amazon, Facebook, Apple and Google buy up smaller competitors.

These acquisitions may prevent better or more innovative products emerging. They remove a vital competitive threat, and venture capitalists may be discouraged from funding remaining rivals.

Consider WhatsApp, which began as a champion of privacy in instant messaging. Those privacy protections have been eroded since Facebook was allowed to buy WhatsApp in 2014.

Under one of the bills, big tech companies would face greater hurdles to achieve killer acquisitions. It would place the onus on the acquiring company to first prove it doesn’t compete with the target company.

Finally, another proposal would require platforms to allow consumers to easily and securely transfer their digital history on a platform to themselves or to another platform. For instance, they could seamlessly transfer their Facebook history to another platform, and make the switch between platforms without losing their data.

How likely is it the proposals will become law?

Lobbyists for big tech are already hard at work in Washington, arguing such laws would weaken successful US companies, which would then be overtaken by rivals from China.

On the other hand, there are representatives from both major US political parties backing each of the bills, which could increase the chances of success.

However, this doesn’t amount to a general consensus between the parties. Each tends to support measures against big tech for different reasons.

Many Republicans believe the platforms have a bias against their party and want to see more conservative-friendly rivals emerge. Democrats, meanwhile, focus on threats to democracy from the platforms’ economic power and their ability to spread misinformation, including about public health and politics.

While it’s unlikely all the proposals will ultimately become law, the strategy and support from both sides of politics means at least some changes will probably be legislated.

Splitting the measures into different bills also increases the chances some will be passed. If they were all included in one, a lack of support for one or two proposals could stop them all in their tracks.

Consequences in Australia and the world over

The effects of the proposed antitrust legislation will be felt well beyond the US.

Where measures are successfully imposed on a US company, it may decide to implement the same changes globally. For instance, Google last week announced it would make changes to its operations globally to comply with commitments Google made, following abuse of dominance complaints from the European Union (EU).

The EU has already been considering its own more stringent laws against large digital platforms. Lawmakers in other countries are likely to be influenced by these moves.

In Australia, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has had its Digital Platforms Inquiry extended into an ongoing five-year inquiry and is expected to make recommendations to government throughout this period.

Read more:
ACCC ‘world first’: Australia’s Federal Court found Google misled users about personal location data

Katharine Kemp receives funding from The Allens Hub for Technology, Law and Innovation. She is a Member of the Advisory Board of the Future of Finance Initiative in India, the Centre for Law, Markets & Regulation and the Australian Privacy Foundation.

– ref. US lawmakers are taking a massive swipe at big tech. If it lands, the impact will be felt globally – https://theconversation.com/us-lawmakers-are-taking-a-massive-swipe-at-big-tech-if-it-lands-the-impact-will-be-felt-globally-162757

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Troy Baisden, Professor (Environmental Sciences), University of Waikato

Climate Explained is a collaboration between The Conversation, Stuff and the New Zealand Science Media Centre to answer your questions about climate change.

If you have a question you’d like an expert to answer, please send it to climate.change@stuff.co.nz

Could biofuels replace all fossil fuels in New Zealand? What are the economic and climate benefits and costs of biofuels, compared to other low-carbon solutions, such as hydrogen?

A quick look at the numbers suggests New Zealand would have enough land to produce biomass energy to replace the nation’s current fossil fuel use. But this doesn’t mean we have the technology or could do so economically — nor in ways driven by people’s choices.

The Climate Change Commission’s final advice to government, tabled last week, runs the numbers on costs, benefits and alternatives but has no realistic scenario suggesting a complete switch to biofuels would be feasible. After considering submissions, the commission found biofuels and other alternatives, including green hydrogen, could replace more fossil energy than its first estimates suggested.

New Zealand’s current demand for fossil fuels is about 570 petajoules (PJ), which breaks down into 70PJ of coal, just under 200PJ of natural gas and just over 300PJ of liquid fuels. Forests covering about 11% of New Zealand’s land could produce this much energy.

For comparison, the pastures covering about half the country produce 700-900PJ of energy livestock can metabolise. This drives exports of dairy, sheep and beef products.

The pros and cons of biofuels

Some insights spring from efforts to compare different forms of energy. Even when converted into the same units, fuels and energy are not easily interchangeable.

It may help to put energy into more familiar terms. A dinner serving is around 1 megajoule (MJ), a billionth of a PJ. Compare that to 38MJ of energy content in one litre of diesel fuel — which converts to approximately 10kWh of electricity, worth two or three dollars on a home electricity bill. The electricity is convenient at home, but hard to take with you like a litre of fuel.

Liquid biofuels are convenient for transport but harder to produce. And combustion engines waste 65-75% of their energy as heat, regardless of whether they burn fossil fuel or biofuel. Also, any new biofuel production that isn’t from waste usually means we stop producing something that previously had value.

The conversion of biomass to biofuels also loses a significant amount of energy, and the commission therefore expects biofuels to remain relatively costly. Battery electric vehicles have changed all this, because they are about 90% efficient, making the same energy go three times further than liquid petrol or diesel.

Read more:
Move over, corn and soybeans: The next biofuel source could be giant sea kelp

Many biofuel feedstocks have environmental impacts, from nitrous oxide emissions and soil carbon loss from crops to methane emissions associated with tallow, which is produced as a meat byproduct in sufficient quantity to offset about 2% of liquid fossil fuel use. Forestry slash and waste are even more plentiful and should have lower impacts, aside from possibly contributing to erosion.

Saving energy

The most beneficial solution is energy conservation. The commission suggests current policies will reduce coal and gas demand to just over 40PJ and 100PJ by 2035, respectively. But growing demand for energy in the transport sector means liquid fossil fuels are expected to increase to a plateau of 400PJ before slowly declining after 2035.

The commission produced a demonstration path, which reduces fossil coal, gas and liquid energy use to 25PJ, 80PJ and 270PJ by 2035, respectively, greatly cutting emissions and the need for new renewable energy.

A good example comes from replacing the use of coal for process heat with wood, most importantly in dairy factories that dry milk.

Read more:
Climate explained: could the world stop using fossil fuels today?

After conservation, increasing the use of renewable electricity can play a big role. In addition to electric road transport, short regional flights could also be electrified. But batteries and efficient electric motors require mining for lithium and energy and are far from impact-free.

Impacts of biofuel production

If produced in quantities that exceed current waste streams, biofuels would need land that produces economically valuable agricultural or forest products. Using land for biofuel also limits its use as a forest carbon sink, although new forests planted for biofuels are a temporary carbon sink as they grow. Thus, the costs and benefits of biofuels depend very much on where and how they are produced.

Growing, transporting and producing biofuels would have some visible impacts, just as today’s fossil fuel production has a footprint that includes mining, drilling, refining, storage and transport. Depending on the location, new forests might change local landscapes and economies, with specific effects such as lower river flows.

In 2018, Scion estimated that converting 30% of transport fuel to biofuel would require an area three times the size of Stewart Island and use 55 truckloads per hour.

The idea of a biofuel economy is both fascinating and uncertain because it could have dramatic effects on land use, across large areas, with potential benefits such as reduced nitrate leaching or erosion.

Future environmental effects are hard to predict because biofuel technologies are still developing, and the future costs of energy and emissions are uncertain. But so are the costs and benefits of many alternatives.

Ideas and debate continue to develop regarding the use of hydrogen as a fuel, either in transport or to augment batteries, if efficiency can be improved, or for combustion where it could even be added to natural gas. But hydrogen is only green if it is produced with clean, renewable power.

Troy Baisden receives research funding from the New Zealand government and is affiliated with Te Pūnaha Matatini Centre of Research Excellence in Networks and Complexity. He also owns shares in the renewable electricity sector.

– ref. Climate explained: could biofuels replace all fossil fuels in New Zealand? – https://theconversation.com/climate-explained-could-biofuels-replace-all-fossil-fuels-in-new-zealand-162502

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jorgo Ristevski, PhD candidate, The University of Queensland

Say hello to Gunggamarandu maunala, or the “hole-headed river boss” — the biggest extinct croc yet found in Australia, and an important addition to the jigsaw of crocodylian evolution.

The newly named species, known from a partial skull that was unearthed in Queensland’s Darling Downs region, belongs to a group called the tomistomines. Before this, tomistomines had never been found in Australia.

Today, there are only two crocodile species living in Australia: the Australian freshwater crocodile and the Indo-Pacific crocodile (also known as the estuarine or saltwater crocodile). The latter is the largest living reptile in the world, capable of reaching more than six metres in length and weighing more than a tonne.

As impressive as these two species are, there were many more types of crocs in Australia’s prehistoric past. Currently, there are 21 named species of extinct Australian crocodylians spanning the past 66 million years, an era known as the Cenozoic. Of these, 19 belong to a group called the Mekosuchinae, which was found only in Australia and the southwest Pacific.

Mekosuchines came in many shapes and sizes, ranging from less than two metres long to well over five metres, and with diverse snout shapes that indicate different lifestyles and methods of acquiring prey. Some were semi-aquatic ambush predators similar to today’s crocodiles and alligators, whereas others likely hunted on land. The last mekosuchines persisted on a few Pacific islands until they went extinct not long after human colonisation.

Endemic crocodylian overlords?

Crocodylian palaeontology in Australia has been particularly active over the past 30 years, especially during the 1990s when many significant discoveries were made. Since then, almost all studies have indicated that the vast majority of extinct crocodylians from Australia were mekosuchines. This has led to the perception that mekosuchines were the dominant, if not only, crocodylians in Australia, until the relatively recent arrival of true crocodiles (that is, members of the genus Crocodylus) such as the two species that survive today.

A continent represented by just a single group of crocodylians for more than 60 million years is rather unusual. With the exception of Antarctica, all other continents had representatives of more than one crocodylian group at some point of the Cenozoic. Crocodiles, gharials and alligators still live in Asia today, and the Americas are home to crocodiles, caimans and another species of alligator. Why should Australia be any different?

Read more:
Crocodiles today look the same as they did 200 million years ago – our study explains why

As it turns out, our new discovery reveals crocs were not as lonely on this continent as we once thought, because Gunggamarandu maunala is Australia’s first recorded tomistomine crocodylian.

The name Gunggamarandu maunala is based on words from the languages spoken by the Barunggam and Waka Waka nations in the Darling Downs region. Gunggamarandu translates as “river boss”, and maunala means “hole head”, in reference to the large openings on the top of its skull that served as sites for attachment of large jaw muscles.

Tomistomines are yet another group of crocodylians with a long fossil record, spanning more than 50 million years. Except for Antarctica, Australia was the only other continent where fossil remains of tomistomines had never been found. With the discovery of Gunggamarandu, Australia is now officially a member of the “once inhabited by tomistomines” club.

Today, there is only one living species of tomistomine in the world, the so-called false gharial, which lives in fresh water on the Malay peninsula and some Indonesian islands. One of the most obvious characteristics of this species, and its extinct relatives, are their long, slender snouts.

An Australian croc… from Europe?

The discovery of a new crocodylian species is exciting in its own right, but the significance of our study doesn’t end there. As the first known tomistomine from Australia, Gunggamarandu proves that crocodylians on this continent were more diverse than we realised.

The region where Gunggamarandu was discovered – the Darling Downs – is the southernmost locality for any tomistomine in the world.

It’s not possible to tell exactly how big Gunggamarandu maunala was, because all we have so far is a partial skull. But the proportions of the fossil suggest it is the largest known extinct croc from Australia.

What’s more, CT scans of the skull allowed us to digitally reconstruct the brain cavity of the animal, resulting in the most detailed look of these anatomical features for an extinct tomistomine yet.

All of these are exciting discoveries. But arguably our most surprising finding regards the ancestry of Gunggamarandu. It is most similar to tomistomines that lived in Europe more than 50 million years ago, despite the fact Gunggamarandu maunala is between five million and two million years old.

This implies a “ghost lineage”, stretching some 50 million years into the past, linking the European and Australian tomistomines. It also suggests that more tomistomines, closely related to Gunggamarandu, may await discovery in Asia.

Exactly when tomistomines arrived in Australia is unclear, but the marine barrier between Southeast Asia and Australia would have been sufficiently small to cross for a crocodylian from at least 25 million years ago.

Read more:
Friday essay: reckoning with an animal that sees us as prey — living and working in crocodile country

Steven W. Salisbury has received funding from The Australian Research Council and the National Science Foundation.

Jorgo Ristevski 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. Prehistoric ‘river boss’ is the largest extinct croc species ever discovered in Australia – https://theconversation.com/prehistoric-river-boss-is-the-largest-extinct-croc-species-ever-discovered-in-australia-162667

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gregory Moore, Doctor of Botany, The University of Melbourne

The savage storms that swept Victoria last week sent trees crashing down, destroying homes and blocking roads. Under climate change, stronger winds and extreme storms will be more frequent. This will cause more trees to fall and, sadly, people may die.

These incidents are sometimes described as an act of God or Mother Nature’s fury. Such descriptions obscure the role of good management in minimising the chance a tree will fall. The fact is, much can be done to prevent these events.

Trees must be better managed for several reasons. The first, of course, is to prevent damage to life and property. The second is to avoid unnecessary tree removals. Following storms, councils typically see a spike in requests for tree removals – sometimes for perfectly healthy trees.

A better understanding of the science behind falling trees – followed by informed action – will help keep us safe and ensure trees continue to provide their many benefits.

Why trees fall over

First, it’s important to note that fallen trees are the exception at any time, including storms. Most trees won’t topple over or shed major limbs. I estimate fewer than three trees in 100,000 fall during a storm.

Often, fallen trees near homes, suburbs and towns were mistreated or poorly managed in preceding years. In the rare event a tree does fall over, it’s usually due to one or more of these factors:

1. Soggy soil

In strong winds, tree roots are more likely to break free from wet soil than drier soil. In arboriculture, such events are called windthrow.

A root system may become waterlogged when landscaping alters drainage around trees, or when house foundations disrupt underground water movement. This can be overcome by improving soil drainage with pipes or surface contouring that redirects water away from trees.

You can also encourage a tree’s root growth by mulching around the tree under the “dripline” – the outer edge of the canopy from which water drips to the ground. Applying a mixed-particle-size organic mulch to a depth of 75-100 millimetres will help keep the soil friable, aerated and moist. But bear in mind, mulch can be a fire risk in some conditions.

Root systems can also become waterlogged after heavy rain. So when both heavy rain and strong winds are predicted, be alert to the possibility of falling trees.

Read more:
Why there’s a lot more to love about jacarandas than just their purple flowers

2. Direct root damage

Human-caused damage to root systems is a common cause of tree failure. Such damage can include roots being:

• cut when utility services are installed
• restricted by a new road, footpath or driveway
• compacted over time, such as when they extend under driveways.

Trees can take a long time to respond to disturbances. When a tree falls in a storm, it may be the result of damage inflicted 10-15 years ago.

3. Wind direction

Trees anchor themselves against prevailing winds by growing roots in a particular pattern. Most of the supporting root structure of large trees grows on the windward side of the trunk.

If winds come from an uncommon direction, and with a greater-than-usual speed, trees may be vulnerable to falling. Even if the winds come from the usual direction, if the roots on the windward side are damaged, the tree may topple over.

The risk of this happening is likely to worsen under climate change, when winds are more likely to come from new directions.

4. Dead limbs

Dead or dying tree limbs with little foliage are most at risk of falling during storms. The risk can be reduced by removing dead wood in the canopy.

Trees can also fall during strong winds when they have so-called “co-dominant” stems. These V-shaped stems are about the same diameter and emerge from the same place on the trunk.

If you think you might have such trees on your property, it’s well worth having them inspected. Arborists are trained to recognise these trees and assess their danger.

Read more:
The years condemn: Australia is forgetting the sacred trees planted to remember our war dead

Trees are worth the trouble

Even with the best tree management regime, there is no guarantee every tree will stay upright during a storm. Even a healthy, well managed tree can fall over in extremely high winds.

While falling trees are rare, there are steps we can take to minimise the damage they cause. In densely populated areas, we should consider moving power and communications infrastructure underground.

By now, you may be thinking large trees are just too unsafe to grow in urban areas, and should be removed. But we need trees to help us cope with storms and other extreme weather.

Removing all trees around a building can cause wind speeds to double, which puts roofs, buildings and lives at greater risk. Removing trees from steep slopes can cause the land to become unstable and more prone to landslides. And of course, trees keep us cooler during summer heatwaves.

Victoria’s spate of fallen trees is a concern, but removing them is not the answer. Instead, we must learn how to better manage and live with them.

Read more:
Here are 5 practical ways trees can help us survive climate change

Gregory Moore 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 act of God, or just bad management? Why trees fall, and how to prevent it – https://theconversation.com/an-act-of-god-or-just-bad-management-why-trees-fall-and-how-to-prevent-it-162754

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kate Maguire-Rosier, Honorary Associate, Department of Theatre and Performance Studies, School of Literature, Art, and Media, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, University of Sydney

Review: SandSong, directed and choreographed by Stephen Page and Frances Rings, Bangarra Dance Theatre

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander readers are advised the following article contains the name of someone who has passed. The family of Ningali Lawford-Wolf has given the media permission to use her name.

SandSong opens in scratchy black and white images. An Australian coat of arms, colonial maps of the country deemed “Terra Nullius”, a placard with the text “Stop Black Deaths” flash and flicker against a soundscape echoing the same sense of static and interference.

This is a history centering the disruptions of black bodies by white others.

The screen gives way to a stage with a pile of rocks left of centre. An ethereal female body begins to emerge.

The pile of rocks, undulating human bodies, becomes a boat this woman rows, and the water beneath. Bodily extremities quiver, waterlilies rustling on the surface in response to a gentle morning breeze. The woman and the pile of flesh beneath her move as one, suggesting little difference between body and earth.

SandSong: Stories of the Great Sandy Desert, is a contemporary Aboriginal Australian ballet. It borrows from traditional dance stories — particularly from the Kimberley regions including Fitzroy Crossing, a community the company visited in May 2021 — and also draws on Bangarra’s signature style of Indigenous contemporary dance with hints of modern dance.

Stephen Page and Frances Rings have exquisitely choreographed a rich, evocative and powerful piece of contemporary dance. Sublime music by Steve Francis is perhaps the most outstanding element of the work with its melodic acoustic instrumentals overlayed with voices speaking in Language.

Expressionist and visceral

Movement is at times sinuous, at others, sinewy. The stumps of leafless branches materialise in the repeated image of flexed feet; men wear leaves around their calves and women hold coolomons for preparing onions to eat or digging sticks for finding potatoes in cracked earth.

In the most visceral scene, a mumbling masculine voice spits numbers punctuated by the crackle of a whip. Bodies contort, hands rub skin, torsos collapse sharply, joints twist and writhe. Each person looks poisoned or twitching high and stoned: a derailed existence. It is, without a doubt, an auction. Humans are not poisoned nor are they drugged, but merely expressing the dehumanising horror of slavery.

In one scene, after appearing to manufacture baskets on stage, female dancers each wear their basket wrapped around their chests and under one arm, a simple yet beautiful wearable prop (costumes by Jennifer Irwin). The magic of the baskets only appears with movement. As dancers walk, reach and twirl, the baskets morph from a bearer of food, into a baby on their backs and a cage that traps them.

The expressionist movement in this scene, including its strong shapes and spiralling lines, echoes the spirit of Martha Graham and powerfully reinforce the shapeshifter aesthetic so palpable throughout SandSong.

Page and Rings’ new choreography is joined by traditional dances, such as when the male dancers of the company perform Marjarrka, a dance belonging to the Lawford, Tighe, Cox and James families.

Each man enters the stage and stomps his feet into the ground, causing his shoulders to shake. The men all perform the routine slightly differently. Some skip onto stage. Others walk. Some bend low. Others gaze steadily ahead. Others again step to a different beat. The dance is about dispossession — a recovered totem previously stolen: recreating the original choreography gesture for gesture, exactly as it was originally performed, in order to continue telling the truth.

Read more:
Firestarter review — Bangarra’s story is a film of national and personal tragedies, with light in the dark

A similar meditation occurs when the lithe, young female dancers transform into older women with slower movement performing Junta, a traditional bush onion dance. Their careful embodiment of the dance is transcendent.

Past intertwining with present

There is a discursive power in paying attention to moving Black bodies on stage at the prestigious Sydney Opera House. Bodies resist (protest), expend effort (dance) and remain present (survive). On stage, they demand our focus.

SandSong vividly enables these dancing figures to tell stories of First Nations Australian memories tainted by intergenerational trauma wrought by stolen lands and stolen lives.

It is also a tribute to the Wangkatjungka and Walmajarri people of the Kimberley. In particular, the work honours Wangkatjungka woman Ningali Josephine Lawford-Wolf, an artist and a friend of Bangarra. Ningali (as she is endearingly referred to) wished to collaborate on this work, but passed away suddenly in 2019.

Composer Francis excavated old tapes with Ningali speaking and singing, and used these tapes to create “playable instruments from her hums and […] new songs using her voice”.

The result is poignant, reminding us to dig up the past, see what finds you and apply the lessons to your present.

After skin is smeared in gold — a metaphor for the value of water in the desert after rainfall — the work finds redemption for the people of the Kimberley. A backdrop reminiscent of crinkled foil (set design by Jacob Nash) reflects the warm light and conjures the cloudy mist of a new dawn. A lone woman lies down to a voiceover reciting a poem that ends with the words: “You belong to Country. You belong to Country”.

SandSong is at the Sydney Opera House until July 10, then touring to Canberra, Bendigo, Brisbane and Melbourne.

Kate Maguire-Rosier is affiliated with Bangarra dancer, Emily Flannery, with whom she organised an Ausdance NSW independent artist residency in 2020.

– ref. Sinuous, sinewy and transcendent: SandSong proves Bangarra is one of Australia’s best dance companies – https://theconversation.com/sinuous-sinewy-and-transcendent-sandsong-proves-bangarra-is-one-of-australias-best-dance-companies-161887

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ruud Gerards, Coordinating Senior Researcher, Research Centre for Education and the Labour Market , Maastricht University

Under so-called mutual obligation rules, the Australian government requires the unemployed to complete activities (including training and applying for a certain number of jobs) in return for receiving unemployment benefits.

Failure to comply attracts demerit points which can lead to the loss of benefits.

The goal is meant to be to help the unemployed return to work more quickly.

But do they? Academic literature provides several reasons to think they might not.

One is self-determination theory.

The argument is that there are two types of motivation: self-authored (intrinsic motivation) and enforced by others (external motivation).

Both types can spur action, but often only the former leads to success.

Remember your parents told you to do something, rather than you deciding for yourself? We’re guessing it mattered for the end result.

External motivators needn’t work well

“Mutual obligations” and threats of penalties are external motivators. Self-determination theory says they are not likely to work well.

Another is scarcity theory.

The idea is that decision-making takes place in two separate parts of the brain — automatic decision-making in one part; careful, deliberate decision-making in another part.

The second part, scarcity theory argues, only works well if you have sufficient cognitive resources, or “bandwidth”, to use it.

Bandwidth is limited

The threat of penalties might create stress that uses up bandwidth that might otherwise be available for properly searching for jobs.

We followed the experiences of 6,253 unemployed Australians aged 15-65 who were part of the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia HILDA survey between 2001 and 2019.

Because of changes in the rules governing who was subject to mutual obligations and delays in administering mutual obligations, some were subject to obligations, some were not.

Read more:
The true cost of the government’s changes to JobSeeker is incalculable. It’s as if it didn’t learn from Robodebt

In what we believe is the first study to assess the effects of Australia’s mutual obligations requirements on job search and employment outcomes, we compared the experiences of otherwise-similar Australians who were subject to mutual obligations with those who were not.

We didn’t (for instance) simply compare people who had been out of work for a short period of time and not subject to mutual obligations with people who had been unemployed for longer and were.

We matched those who were similar across about 30 dimensions and differed mainly in whether or not they were subject to mutual obligations.

Those under obligations take longer to find work

We found that those subjected to mutual obligations search just as intensively (if not more) for jobs, but that they took longer to find employment and spent less time in employment twelve months on.

Twelve months on those who had been on mutual obligations who were in employment were in lower quality jobs in terms of hourly wage, hours worked and weekly wage, than those otherwise identical Australians who had not been.

We conclude that mutual obligation as a labour market policy instrument fails the test of assisting unemployed Australians into jobs. Where it does, it gets them into jobs which aren’t as remunerative.

Bandwidth seems to matter

It is consistent with the theory that energy (“bandwidth”) spent on compliance, reduces the energy available to properly search.

It lends support to the theories of self-determination and scarcity (of bandwidth).

Our findings suggest that removing mutual obligations would improve employment outcomes in addition to removing red tape.

But they do not suggest this is sufficient for getting unemployed Australians into good jobs.

Read more:
What happens when you free unemployed Australians from ‘mutual obligations’ and boost their benefits? We just found out

That will require sustained fiscal stimulus in excess of the kind the government is now providing to ensure there is enough work for everyone who wants work, including the 160,000 people presently underemployed.

Only then will we properly use our resources, and be able to provide a proper job for everyone who wants one.

Ruud Gerards receives funding from the Think Forward Initiative. https://www.thinkforwardinitiative.com/

Riccardo Welters receives funding from the Think Forward Initiative. https://www.thinkforwardinitiative.com/

– ref. New finding: jobseekers subject to obligations take longer to find work – https://theconversation.com/new-finding-jobseekers-subject-to-obligations-take-longer-to-find-work-162093

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Allen Rodrigo, Professor and Head, The School of Biological Sciences, The University of Auckland, University of Auckland

At the conclusion of the G7 summit yesterday, leaders called for a fresh and transparent investigation to determine how the COVID-19 pandemic began.

I welcome the renewed interest in the potential “lab-leak” origins of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. It wouldn’t be the first time an infectious pathogen was accidentally released from a research laboratory.

I know from personal experience. Back in 1994, on my first day of a fellowship at Stanford University, I picked up a damp courier parcel at reception and took it back to the lab. My professor put on latex gloves immediately. The parcel contained a vial with an HIV-infected lymph node.

The dry ice used to pack the sample had evaporated, soaking the cardboard. There I was, someone who had not worked with HIV before, with hands damp from handling a box containing live virus.

I didn’t get infected. But the experience left me acutely aware of how easily accidents happen. A 2018 review found 27 cases of laboratory-acquired infections between 1982 and 2016 in the Asia-Pacific region alone. The list of pathogens included everything from the virus that causes dengue fever to the SARS coronavirus.

Read more:
Fifty-nine labs around world handle the deadliest pathogens – only a quarter score high on safety

The American Biological Safety Association (ABSA) maintains a searchable database of reported laboratory-acquired infections. It documents “leakage from the plastic bag in the negative-pressure transport chamber” and exposure to “droplets when cleaning a spill”, among many other examples.

From a scientific perspective alone, it is important to investigate the lab-leak hypothesis because, if true, we have to tighten safety procedures to prevent future leaks.

Two lab-leak hypotheses

When the virus was first reported from Wuhan almost 18 months ago, people have raised the possibility that it emerged from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, where research on SARS coronaviruses was underway.

This lab-leak hypothesis comes in two flavours. First, the virus could have jumped from an animal (or animal tissue) infected with a SARS coronavirus as part of the research. The infected person subsequently infected others in the community.

The transfer of a pathogen from an animal to people is called a zoonotic transmission. This process also occurs outside of laboratories, perhaps when there is close contact with infected animals or they are eaten.

The second hypothesis suggests a purposeful genetic modification of a coronavirus that gave rise to a more infectious and human-transmissible variant, which then leaked into the community. This type of genetic modification is called gain-of-function, because the engineered virus acquires new biological traits.

It is unfortunate these hypotheses have been miscast as somehow equivalent, and often portrayed as alternative to the “natural origins” hypothesis.

When I and other computational biologists think of origins, we think about evolutionary ancestors: a virus’ evolutionary line of descent. If SARS-CoV-2 had evolved without human intervention from an ancestral variant found in one or more hosts, it is quite possible that such a host animal, or a sample from an infected host animal, was the subject of study in a lab.

Through some unfortunate misadventure, it is plausible that someone in that lab became infected.

Why an investigation is important

Arguments for or against these hypotheses are often couched in terms of likelihoods. In February, the World Health Organisation (WHO) listed four scenarios in its global study of SARS-CoV-2 origins: direct zoonotic transmission, indirect zoonotic transmission through an intermediate host, transmission through cold/food-chain products and accidental laboratory release.

Indirect zoonotic transmission through an intermediate host was deemed “likely to very likely” and accidental lab release “extremely unlikely”. The WHO panel rejected deliberate gain-of-function manipulation because it “has been ruled out by other scientists following analyses of the genome”.

But that wasn’t the last word, because the exact origin of the COVID-19 virus remains a mystery.

Read more:
The COVID-19 lab leak theory highlights a glaring lack of global biosecurity regulation

Genome sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 has shown the virus is related (about 96%) to a strain found in horseshoe bats. Although this seems like a high level of similarity, it implies that SARS-CoV-2 diverged from this strain several decades ago. Therefore, it remains unclear if the spillover was directly to humans or through an intermediate species.

In any case, such evolutionary analysis cannot distinguish between transmission in or outside a laboratory.

The WHO panel considered a lab-acquired infection as extremely unlikely because of the Wuhan laboratories’ strict biosafety protocols. But the ABSA database lists accidental infections happening even in labs with the highest biosafety accreditation, and these include SARS-coronavirus infections.

Read more:
The next pandemic is already happening – targeted disease surveillance can help prevent it

In its arguments for and against accidental lab release, the WHO report noted the Wuhan laboratories moved to a new location near the Huanan market in early December 2019, but “reported no disruptions or incidents caused by the move”. There is no reason to distrust the WHO panel’s conclusions, but it is nonetheless true that lab relocations present opportunities for error.

The lab-leak hypothesis is at least plausible and it’s therefore important to investigate it. If it were related to the operations of the lab, or its relocation, we need to re-examine safety protocols. For relocations, we may want to require independent monitoring and pre- and post-move quarantine of essential personnel.

Allen Rodrigo 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. The COVID-19 lab-leak hypothesis is plausible because accidents happen. I should know – https://theconversation.com/the-covid-19-lab-leak-hypothesis-is-plausible-because-accidents-happen-i-should-know-162430

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Donna Weeks, Professor of Political Science, Musashino University

Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga is probably a little relieved the G7 Summit came when it did.

Before departing for the UK at the end of last week, Suga had been subjected to three days of intense scrutiny in the Diet, Japan’s parliament, over the Tokyo Olympics and the country’s slow rollout of the COVID-19 vaccine.

When an opposition lawmaker pointed out that Suga was being singled out for criticism over the Olympics instead of Tokyo’s governor, the prime minister replied,

I’m very glad you said what I want to say. […] I am not trying to run away from [responsibilities], but I feel it is regrettable that this is the direction of the debate in parliament.

Suga’s political fortunes are increasingly tied to the success of the Tokyo games, which are scheduled to begin in just over a month. As the country grapples with a fourth wave of COVID infections, the pressure is building on the government from all quarters.

The public’s support for Suga’s government is hovering in the low- to mid-30% range, while medical professionals are warning the games could lead to the emergence of a new “Olympic” variant of the coronavirus.

Read more:
Olympic athletes speak up: current COVID plans aren’t enough to keep them safe

Proposed public viewing areas for Olympic events around the country are gradually being withdrawn as local authorities fear the spread of the virus. Notable figures selected to run in the torch relay are pulling out, citing “timetable clashes”. Some 10,000 volunteers have withdrawn from the games, as well.

To make matters worse, Kaori Yamaguchi, a Japanese Olympic Committee member and former judo medallist, said Tokyo had been “cornered” into hosting the games in a scathing opinion piece:

We are damned if we do, and damned if we do not. […] What will these Olympics be for, and for whom? The games have already lost meaning and are being held just for the sake of them.

Suga’s long game

All of this would appear to be very bad for Suga’s government. In the Diet last week, Suga took what many perceived to be a non-committal approach, failing to clearly answer questions put to him over the games.

He insisted he is responsible for ensuring the health and safety of the Japanese people, but didn’t offer specifics beyond this. He waxed lyrical about his memories of the 1964 Tokyo Olympics and his hope that everyone can experience the excitement of that time.

He did manage to announce, to the surprise of most observers, that the vaccination rollout is picking up and should be completed by November. Japan has administered 20 million vaccine doses so far, but just 4% of the population is fully vaccinated.

Read more:
Can the Olympics still be cancelled? Yes, but the legal and financial fallout would be staggering

By focusing his attention on the pandemic and offering vague responses on the Olympics, one could speculate Suga is playing the long game.

Elections are expected this year both nationally and for the Tokyo governorship.
Suga may be hedging on the Olympics. If the games are successful, this will work in his electoral favour, but if there are problems, he can claim the games were outside his purview.

Suga and his government do have some room for optimism, too. Though his public support has plummeted from around 70% last year, voters may be reluctant to transfer their support to what many see as a lacklustre opposition.

And though there is still much public opposition to the games going ahead, it is becoming clearer to people that the decision lies with the International Olympic Committee, not with government officials at the national and local level.

The fortunes of Koike and (possibly) Abe?

Interestingly, the three politicians with direct political carriage of the Olympics are women: Tokyo Governor Yuriko Koike; Hashimoto Seiko, the recently installed president of the Japanese Olympic Committee; and Marukawa Tamayo, the minister responsible for the Olympics.

Koike was comfortably re-elected last year and has been consistent in her push to apply tight restrictions to combat the pandemic. She fronts the media on an almost daily basis appealing to Tokyoites to “stay home” and observe all the necessary protocols to prevent the spread of the virus.

She has also garnered some support from her prefectural colleagues in a team effort to force the hand of the national government to implement stricter controls. As a result, her popularity has remained relatively high, with 57% of respondents in a recent poll approving of her leadership.

Koike was formerly a member of Suga’s Liberal Democratic Party prior to taking on Japan’s largest governorship. There has been speculation around whether she will make a return to national politics to realise her own prime ministerial ambitions. A strong show of leadership during this time won’t hurt her ambitions.

The recent machinations of former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe are not to be overlooked, either. When Abe made a surprise appearance at the 2016 Rio Olympics closing ceremony, he no doubt harboured ambitions to see a successful Tokyo Olympics as the swansong of his long time in office.

Abe resigned as prime minister last year due to health reasons, but not, significantly, from parliament. Suga was then elected by his party colleagues to replace Abe as prime minister.

Abe recently made some “observations” regarding Suga’s potential successor, and rumours swirled about a possible (but unlikely) return to the top job. Abe appeared to take himself out of the running, but polls show he still has some public support.

A new opinion poll suggests the Japanese public are reluctantly giving into the inevitable, accepting the games will get underway in just over one month.

With the upcoming elections increasingly being seen as a referendum on the government’s handling of both the Olympics and the vaccine rollout, Suga and his colleagues are probably hoping the same sense of inevitably will get them over the line, as well.

Read more:
The Tokyo Olympics are going ahead, but they will be a much compromised and watered-down event

Donna Weeks works at Musashino University in Tokyo, which was due to be a hub for the host city officials during the Games. She also was allotted tickets (paid for herself) for two events in the initial ticketing lottery.

– ref. Under pressure on the Olympics, Japan’s prime minister is saying little and hoping for a political lifesaver – https://theconversation.com/under-pressure-on-the-olympics-japans-prime-minister-is-saying-little-and-hoping-for-a-political-lifesaver-161740

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lara Herrero, Research Leader in Virology and Infectious Disease, Griffith University

We recently heard a new “hybrid variant” of the coronavirus has been detected in Vietnam, amid a spike in cases in the country.

The variant was originally described as a hybrid of the UK (now Alpha) and Indian (now Kappa B.1.617.1 and Delta B.1.617.2) strains of the virus. But what does this actually mean? And if we look at the science behind virus behaviour, is a hybrid really what we’re seeing?

What is a ‘hybrid’?

In virology, the scientific name for a hybrid is a “recombinant”. Recombination is when two strains infect a person at the same time and combine to make a new strain.

This process is common in influenza, where it’s often called an “antigenic shift”.

The major concern with viral recombination is the possibility the new strain will rapidly emerge with advantages of both strains, and you’ll get, for example, a strain that’s both more transmissible and faster at replicating. The same can be true for gradual mutation, but this takes more time.

Emerging evidence suggests coronaviruses can undergo recombination, which may have contributed to the origins of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. There’s moderate evidence SARS-CoV-2 itself has undergone some recent recombination, with early reports suggesting a possible recombination event between an Alpha (B.1.1.7) and Epsilon (B.1.429) variant.

It’s important to note these reports are early and some of the science is not yet peer-reviewed. So, the role of recombination in the evolution of SARS-CoV-2 still needs to be confirmed.

Read more:
What’s the difference between mutations, variants and strains? A guide to COVID terminology

According to early reports from the World Health Organization (WHO), genetic sequencing is now showing the strain circulating in Vietnam is a Delta strain that has developed some additional mutations.

Scientifically, and according to the WHO, this means it’s not a “hybrid” at all. Rather, it’s a mutated version of the Delta variant.

The Delta variant was originally detected in India and has since spread around the world, including to Australia. Early reports suggest it’s more transmissible and possibly more deadly than other variants, leading health authorities, including in Vietnam, to be on high alert.

We don’t yet know the details of which extra mutations are found in the Vietnam version of the Delta variant. But we have seen this phenomenon before, where mutations known in one variant are reported as accumulating in a different SARS-CoV-2 variant.

What we know, and don’t know

Late last month, Vietnamese health officials reported this so-called hybrid variant circulating was very dangerous and more transmissible than other strains of the virus. They said it was behind the surge in infections Vietnam experienced during May.

These initial reports were based on clinical observations. Whether this mutated variant is more infectious, and the degree to which it can be implicated in Vietnam’s current surge of infections, is not yet certain.

Read more:
What’s the Delta COVID variant found in Melbourne? Is it more infectious and does it spread more in kids? A virologist explains

When someone is diagnosed with COVID-19, it’s not always common to perform whole-genome sequencing on their viral sample. It’s often an expensive and time-consuming process undertaken by public health officials, epidemiologists and virologists to understand and predict the movement of an outbreak.

This means not all countries will have the capacity to rapidly provide whole-genome SARS-CoV-2 sequences. So the exact details of what strain is circulating where will always come after reports of case numbers.

It’s likely we don’t yet know if this altered Delta strain is the predominant one circulating in Vietnam. Vietnam has either not yet conducted full analysis of genomic data from enough patient samples, or is yet to make this information publicly available.

Additionally, we don’t yet know whether this mutated variant is more transmissible or causes more severe COVID-19 than the Delta variant or the original SARS-CoV-2. We also don’t know whether it will affect how well COVID vaccines work.

To answer these questions, we’ll need more detailed genomic data, time to see how things play out in the community, as well as data from scientific and clinical studies involving people infected with this variant.

New names

As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to evolve, so too do the SARS-CoV-2 strains driving the chaos.

Initially reports focused on the “UK variant” or the “Indian variant”, and so on.

Recognising the need for a universal naming system, the WHO has assessed the genomic classification of strains and provided new, more general names based on the Greek alphabet.

This list includes both “variants of interest” and “variants of concern”. While Delta is classified as a variant of concern, this altered Delta variant detected in Vietnam is not listed at this stage.

To be considered as a new variant of the virus, or strain, a variant needs to show distinct physical properties, and therefore behave differently, from the original virus or an existing strain. From the WHO’s perspective, this doesn’t appear to be the case for the mutated Delta strain. At least not yet.

Read more:
Coronavirus variants have new names: we can finally stop stigmatising countries

A stark reminder

Vietnam was a country that prided itself on containing the virus, with initial success in border control and public health measures. This resulted in periods without community transmission. At the moment, it’s recording more than 200 new cases a day (on June 10 there were 413).

Hybrid strain or not, Vietnam’s situation should be a reminder to the world — and particularly countries like Australia, with a similarly good track record in containing the virus — of the continued importance of social distancing and vaccination in our fight against COVID-19.

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

– ref. Is a hybrid COVID strain behind Vietnam’s latest wave? Not exactly – https://theconversation.com/is-a-hybrid-covid-strain-behind-vietnams-latest-wave-not-exactly-161879

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By William Terry, PhD Researcher, Southern Cross University

Environmental scientists see flora, fauna and phenomena the rest of us rarely do. In this series, we’ve invited them to share their unique photos from the field.

As a result of logging and severe bushfires, Australian wildlife is facing a severe shortage of tree hollows — holes in the trunks and branches of large old trees. More than 300 species of birds and mammals, including possums, bats, cockatoos, owls and kookaburras, rely on tree hollows for shelter or breeding.

In Australia, hollows are usually formed through the decay of a tree scar, and it can take hundreds of years for tree hollows big enough for medium-sized animals to form naturally.

This includes phascogales — the rat-sized, carnivorous marsupials that live in open woodlands across Australia and are the focus of my research and photography. But like many of Australia’s forest-dwelling mammals, phascogales are vulnerable to extinction.

So with hollows becoming harder to find, I venture into forests and study how well artificial hollows, made with chainsaws, can replace them. And, incredibly, it’s working: my research shows phascogales and other native animals are enthusiastically moving into the new real estate.

Meet the mysterious brush-tailed phascogale

Phascogales are an important species to Australia but, unfortunately, their cryptic behaviour and nocturnal habits mean people rarely see them.

Phascogales feed on insects after stripping bark from eucalypts. But through my close interactions and radio tracking, I’ve documented phascogales eating other more unusual foods, including bird eggs and sometimes even small birds, such as grey-shrike thrush.

I’ve also recorded them taking dead birds, such as the rosella pictured below. They even have a reputation among farmers as being a fierce chicken killer, but this may be exaggerated.

Phascogales have an unusual life. Shortly after mating between April and May, all males die at about 11 months of age from stomach ulcers. This frees up resources for the next generation of young joeys that will emerge from the nest in early summer.

But will they survive in the future?

Tragically, at least one species, the brush-tailed phascogale, is threatened with extinction, primarily due to habitat loss, climate change, and feral predators such as foxes and cats.

The brush-tailed phascogale (Phascogale tapoatafa tapoatafa) occurs across the eastern side of Australia, from southern Queensland to Victoria. It’s now extinct in South Australia.

Likewise, the much smaller red-tailed phascogale (Phascogale calura) once survived across a vast swathe of land from Western Australia to Victoria. Today, it survives only in small pockets in the Western Australia wheatbelt.

Household cats are a particularly major issue for phascogales, and many cat owners in central Victoria have a story about their cat bringing home a phascogale (so please keep your pet cat inside at all times).

Read more:
Don’t let them out: 15 ways to keep your indoor cat happy

Last year, research confirmed climate change would reduce the available areas phascogales could survive. This research found areas with a phascogale-friendly climate would decline by up to 79% in Queensland, 67% in Victoria and 17% in NSW, by 2070.

Climate change also threatens to bring longer, more frequent and severe heatwaves. For phascogales and many other mammals, this could be a death sentence.

Tree hollows with thick walls can protect the animals sheltering inside from the high temperatures outside.

But these are getting increasingly rarer, and this is where my research on chainsaw hollows comes in. Thick-walled hollows may be very important for the long-term survival of phascogales and other species in a warming climate.

Carving them a home

A chainsaw hollow is a cavity constructed inside a tree. A faceplate is then attached over the top, with a hole drilled into it for the animal to enter. They offer refuge for Australia’s endangered mammals and birds.

For our project, we carved 45 chainsaw hollows in dry forests and woodland where phascogales are known to occur. We also installed similar-sized nest boxes — which are more commonly used to offset the loss of hollows — on nearby trees. We monitored these for two and a half years.

Research from 2018 shows nest boxes offer little protection from outside temperatures. I’ve collected data, which is not yet published, that confirms this.

My research shows chainsaw hollows provide 27% more protection from extreme temperatures during heatwaves compared to nest boxes, which provided almost no protection.

Read more:
The world endured 2 extra heatwave days per decade since 1950 – but the worst is yet to come

So it’s no wonder we observed and recorded phascogales and the more common sugar glider (Petaurus notatus) more frequently sheltering in chainsaw hollows than in nearby nest boxes.

Other animals used the chainsaw hollows, too. This includes the feather-tailed glider, yellow-footed antechinus, and the white-throated treecreeper.

But like nest boxes, the chainsaw hollows showed signs they would be only an interim measure, requiring maintenance with bark growing over entrance holes and issues with a buildup of moisture.

In any case, further research into this species is needed, as it will aid land managers to conserve this enigmatic species as more challenges are thrown their way into the future.

Read more:
Photos from the field: the stunning crystals revealing deep secrets about Australian volcanoes

William Terry 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. DIY habitat: my photos show chainsaw-carved tree hollows make perfect new homes for this mysterious marsupial – https://theconversation.com/diy-habitat-my-photos-show-chainsaw-carved-tree-hollows-make-perfect-new-homes-for-this-mysterious-marsupial-159639

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christina Ho, Associate professor, University of Technology Sydney

The South Australian government in recent months announced it was relaxing its catchment zone policy for secondary schools. This means families can apply for their year 6 or 7 child to attend any public high school in the state in 2022.

The change is designed to enhance choice for families, who will no longer be stuck with just the option of their local school.

So, what are school catchment zones and why were they established? Would it be better to get rid of them altogether?

A history of school zones

Australian governments created the school catchment zone policy to manage the growth of mass secondary education in the 20th century. They wanted to ensure students were offered a place at the school closest to where they lived, and regulate enrolment numbers in schools. The government established high schools from the 1950s to the 1970s to be “neighbourhood schools”.

Parents at the time were not given the option of choosing a school outside their local area.

Read more:
Choosing a school for your kid? Here’s how other Australian parents do it

But in the name of “choice”, all Australian states now allow students to apply to any public school. Although schools first need to ensure they offer a place to any student living within their catchment zone before accepting students from outside the zone.

Education is not a marketplace

We all like to have choice. But what might be ideal for the individual does not always create fair outcomes for all.

Policies to enhance school choice reflect a neoliberal ideology, dominant since the 1980s. It assumes schools and families, or “consumers”, can compete in a free and fair marketplace.

Families go “school shopping”, comparing different schools’ educational programs, facilities, NAPLAN results or student cohorts.

Easing school zoning is one policy shift that aims to increase school choice. This process arguably improves the quality of education. As with the market, schools are compelled to do better to attract more students, or “customers”.

However, schools are not a marketplace but a social service. Not all schools are equally equipped to compete, and not all families are equally equipped to choose. Australian and international research has shown policies to boost school choice exacerbate inequality and social segregation in school systems.

Read more:
Australian schools are becoming more segregated. This threatens student outcomes

Well-educated, middle-class parents have the knowledge and resources to target the best schools for their children. This includes paying for private tutoring and other extra-curricular activities, so their kids are competitive applicants in a sought-after school.

These families are more able to bypass a “less desirable” local school.

Meanwhile, the “less desirable” schools start losing their better educated and well-resourced families. They may suffer declining enrolments and subsequent staffing cuts, making them even less appealing for future families.

This downward spiral makes it virtually impossible for them to compete effectively with other schools.

Australia has the fourth most segregated schooling system in the OECD. Disadvantaged students are heavily concentrated in disadvantaged and poorly performing schools, and the opposite is true of students from wealthy backgrounds.

How some parents avoid schools

In my Sydney-based research, a principal lamented that middle-class Anglo-Australian parents had expressed reluctance to send their children to her school. Because many kids from migrant and refugee families went to the school, these parents thought the academic standard would be inadequate.

Because these families repeatedly bypassed her school for other schools, schools in this area became increasingly segregated by ethnicity and socioeconomic status.

One of my parent participants recounted her observation of other parents standing outside the school gates, assessing whether the school would be too “rough” for their kids. The parent said:

They would stand outside the school, look at the kids coming out, and say, “I don’t see anyone that I want my kids to be friends with”.

Other policies around school choice

The idea of school choice isn’t just seen in school catchment zone policies. It’s also seen in governments spending more money on private schools. Or governments providing more public selective and specialist schools, such as performing arts or sports-focused schools.

For example, in NSW between 1988 and 2010, the number of public non-comprehensive secondary schools (selective and specialist schools) increased by 955% while the number of traditional comprehensive secondary schools fell by 24%.

Read more:
New South Wales has 48 selective schools, while Victoria has 4. There’s an interesting history behind this

Under the Howard government, federal funding for non-government schools tripled . According to Howard-era education minister Brendan Nelson, one of the greatest achievements of that administration was having the courage to “bring choice to education”.

With strict school zones in place, schools are more likely to reflect the full diversity of the local community. The policy allows students to mix and learn with others from different backgrounds. And it ensures more schools can benefit from the contributions of better-resourced families — from fundraising events to lobbying efforts. It is a means of putting schools on a more equal footing.

School zones may limit individual choice, but they can help create a more equitable and cohesive society.

Christina Ho receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. School catchment zones may be annoying for some parents, but they help ensure equality for everyone – https://theconversation.com/school-catchment-zones-may-be-annoying-for-some-parents-but-they-help-ensure-equality-for-everyone-160252

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ruud Gerards, Coordinating Senior Researcher, Research Centre for Education and the Labour Market , Maastricht University

Under so-called mutual obligation rules, the Australian government requires the unemployed to complete activities (including training and applying for a certain number of jobs) in return for receiving unemployment benefits.

Failure to comply attracts demerit points which can lead to the loss of benefits.

The goal is meant to be to help the unemployed return to work more quickly.

But do they? Academic literature provides several reasons to think they might not.

One is self-determination theory.

The argument is that there are two types of motivation: self-authored (intrinsic motivation) and enforced by others (external motivation).

Both types can spur action, but often only the former leads to success.

Remember your parents told you to do something, rather than you deciding for yourself? We’re guessing it mattered for the end result.

External motivators needn’t work well

“Mutual obligations” and threats of penalties are external motivators. Self-determination theory says they are not likely to work well.

Another is scarcity theory.

The idea is that decision-making takes place in two separate parts of the brain — automatic decision-making in one part; careful, deliberate decision-making in another part.

The second part, scarcity theory argues, only works well if you have sufficient cognitive resources, or “bandwidth”, to use it.

Bandwidth is limited

The threat of penalties might create stress that uses up bandwidth that might otherwise be available for properly searching for jobs.

We followed the experiences of 6,253 unemployed Australians aged 15-65 who were part of the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia HILDA survey between 2001 and 2019.

Because of changes in the rules governing who was subject to mutual obligations and delays in administering mutual obligations, some were subject to obligations, some were not.

Read more:
The true cost of the government’s changes to JobSeeker is incalculable. It’s as if it didn’t learn from Robodebt

In what we believe is the first study to assess the effects of Australia’s mutual obligations requirements on job search and employment outcomes, we compared the experiences of otherwise-similar Australians who were subject to mutual obligations with those who were not.

We didn’t (for instance) simply compare people who had been out of work for a short period of time and not subject to mutual obligations with people who had been unemployed for longer and were.

We matched those who were similar across about 30 dimensions and differed mainly in whether or not they were subject to mutual obligations.

Those under obligations take longer to find work

We found that those subjected to mutual obligations search just as intensively (if not more) for jobs, but that they took longer to find employment and spent less time in employment twelve months on.

Twelve months on those who had been on mutual obligations who were in employment were in lower quality jobs in terms of hourly wage, hours worked and weekly wage, than those otherwise identical Australians who had not been.

We conclude that mutual obligation as a labour market policy instrument fails the test of assisting unemployed Australians into jobs. Where it does, it gets them into jobs which aren’t as remunerative.

Bandwidth seems to matter

It is consistent with the theory that energy (“bandwidth”) spent on compliance, reduces the energy available to properly search.

It lends support to the theories of self-determination and scarcity (of bandwidth).

Our findings suggest that removing mutual obligations would improve employment outcomes in addition to removing red tape.

But they do not suggest this is sufficient for getting unemployed Australians into good jobs.

Read more:
What happens when you free unemployed Australians from ‘mutual obligations’ and boost their benefits? We just found out

That will require sustained fiscal stimulus in excess of the kind the government is now providing to ensure there is enough work for everyone who wants work, including the 160,000 people presently underemployed.

Only then will we properly use our resources, and be able to provide a proper job for everyone who wants one.

Ruud Gerards receives funding from the Think Forward Initiative. https://www.thinkforwardinitiative.com/

Riccardo Welters receives funding from the Think Forward Initiative. https://www.thinkforwardinitiative.com/

– ref. New finding: jobseekers subject to mutual obligations take longer to find work – https://theconversation.com/new-finding-jobseekers-subject-to-mutual-obligations-take-longer-to-find-work-162093

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ou Yang, Research Fellow, The University of Melbourne

The solution to most problems in most markets is more competition.

Whether it’s the market for hairdressers, for massage therapists or for general practitioners, usually, the more of them there are in any town or suburb, the greater is the range and quality they offer and the lower the price.

It’s part of the thinking behind a range of government legislation designed to increase competition and consumer choice in residential aged care.

Yet in research just published by the Melbourne Institute using the de-identified records of 2,900 nursing homes provided to the aged care royal commission we found no such effect.

No matter how competition was measured, we found no statistically-significant differences in price or quality as indicated by a range of measures including nursing hours worked per resident, assaults per resident, complaints per resident, the use of antipsychotic drugs and avoidable early deaths.

We measured the amount of competition for each nursing home in three ways: by the number of competitors within a 10-kilometre radius, the distance in kilometres to the nearest competitor and a measure of market concentration known as the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index.

Read more:
Aged care, death and taxes after the royal commission

We found great variation in competition (much more in cities, much less in regions) along with slight decreases in competition in urban and remote areas (notwithstanding government measures designed to promote it) and minor increases in competition in regional Australia.

But we found no evidence linking competition to measures of quality of care, with the possible exception of registered nurse hours, although this linkage wasn’t present in all measures of competition.

Competition was weakly associated with price if at all.

On the other hand, we found strong links between ownership and quality of care.

For most measures of quality, government-owned facilities provided much higher quality of care than for-profit providers and not-for-profit providers.

On prices, government-owned facilities charged by far the lowest price per resident per day — 23% lower than for-profits and 8% lower than not-for-profits.

In trying to think of the reasons why competition should not result in competition on prices or on the quality of service, a number of possibilities present themselves.

Residents know little about what they are getting

One reason is that demand for aged care places often arises suddenly due to significant changes in health conditions such as falls, dementia and loss of balance meaning they have little choice but to use the first facility that becomes available.

Another is that consumers have little information about quality with which to make decisions. Unlike the United States and the United Kingdom, Australian authorities do not yet provide a five-star system of ratings that can be easily understood.

Read more:
4 key takeaways from the aged care royal commission’s final report

And prices are extremely hard to understand.

Demand often arises from consumers who experience sudden changes in their cognitive and physical conditions that make it difficult to search for information, and weigh options and exercise choice.

With users hamstrung, there are few market forces to discipline providers.

We could empower users…

Measures that would help include publishing quality ratings (recommended by the royal commission), simplifying prices (not recommended, although the commission recommends an independent pricing authority) and providing consumer advocates to help people navigate through the system (recommended).

Given that most consumers transition from home care to residential care, it would help if advocacy services were integrated into home care services.

An alternative would be to abandon the pursuit of competition and set up a system of enforced standards, funded for different categories of care along the lines of the casemix system used in hospitals.

…or regulate more strongly on their behalf

Although this was recommended in the commission’s final report it would be harder to implement than it is in hospitals.

Aged care is about making life comfortable whereas health care is about fixing problems, making consumer preferences much more important in aged care.

Harnessing the power of consumer preferences is a worthy goal, and there is a great deal we can do to move toward it, but there’s a long way to go.

Anthony Scott receives funding from NHMRC and ARC

Yuting Zhang receives funding from Australian Research Council and National Health and Medical Research Council, National Institutes of Health in the US.

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

– ref. There are problems in aged care, but more competition isn’t the solution – https://theconversation.com/there-are-problems-in-aged-care-but-more-competition-isnt-the-solution-154943

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stephanie Gardner, Postdoctoral Research Associate, UNSW

Review: Playing with Sharks: The Valerie Taylor Story, directed by Sally Aitken

A new documentary Playing with Sharks: The Valerie Taylor Story shines a light on Valerie Taylor AM, a pioneering ocean explorer.

With flashbacks, interviews and expert commentary it reveals her extraordinary underwater life and transition from champion spearfisher to passionate marine conservationist.

As a marine biologist, I’m aware of the environmental crisis our oceans are facing, and the importance of sharks to the ocean ecosystem.

A bad reputation

Increasing numbers of shark encounters around the world have people feeling more on edge and less like a swim.

In 2020, there were eight fatal shark bites recorded in Australia from 26 reported incidents. This was slightly higher than the 23 recorded in 2019 (with no fatalities). So far this year, there have been ten incidents with one death. This increase can be explained by changes in shark population size, human behaviour and reporting methods.

While these statistics are undoubtedly awful, it is important to recognise the role the media plays in shaping people’s perceptions.

Sharks have gained a bad reputation as “cold-blooded killing machines”, yet there is a higher chance of being killed by cows, motor vehicles, dogs and even vending machines. National Geographic estimates you have a one in 218 chance of dying from a fall but a one in 3.7 million chance of being killed by a shark.

Read more:
Fatal shark attacks are at a record high. ‘Deterrent’ devices can help, but some may be nothing but snake oil

Making friends

This film is about changing attitudes. The title itself is a nod to the positive association Valerie Taylor enjoys with sharks, who she regularly refers to as her “friends”. But it wasn’t always that way for the Sydney-born diver who left school at 15 to draw animations and started diving in the 1950s.

In 1974, Valerie and her late husband Ron were excited to film underwater shark sequences for Steven Spielberg’s blockbuster movie Jaws.

With its suspenseful score and blood in the water, the film terrified audiences. But in this film Valerie shares the couple’s pain when they realised they’d contributed to damaging the sharks’ image. She says a spike in public fear led to reckless shark culls.

“I only ever killed one shark,” Valerie says, recalling her spearfishing days. “I wish I hadn’t.”

Valerie and Ron vowed from that moment on to only shoot sharks with their cameras.

Read more:
Friday essay: The Meg is a horror story but our treatment of sharks is scarier

The perfect animal

Valerie and Ron’s journey from spearfishers to conservationists highlights their role in a broader transition from fear to admiration for these complex, majestic creatures.

“Nature made the perfect animal,” Valerie marvels in the film. “That wonder has never gone away.”

Valerie and Ron used cinematography to balance the reality of shark behaviour with the Hollywood horror narrative (they were later made Members of the Order of Australia for their conservation efforts).

Footage in the documentary of Valerie underwater with sharks accurately shows the interactions between humans and sharks. The message is that sharks don’t see humans as food.

To prove her point, Valerie dons a chain mail suit and puts her arm in a shark’s mouth. Archival footage shows her using fish bait to lure the shark towards her, before moving her forearm into its jaws. “The sharks don’t have crush power,” she says. “This is a misconception”.

She’s correct. Sharks use their sharp teeth to slice flesh and head-shaking to rip off chunks, so they don’t need to rely on biting down. In fact, the bite force quotient (which compares bite force to body mass) is higher for a Tasmanian devil than for a Great White Shark.

In another clip, Valerie coaches a Whitetip Reef Shark to swim over pink coral for a photograph. Delightedly she announces, “They learn faster than you can teach a dog”. Based on my own diving experiences with sharks I would agree they show aptitude for intelligent, learned behaviour.

Sharks play a critical role in healthy ocean ecosystems because they are a top predator, keeping potentially destructive fish populations at a healthy level and preventing algae overgrowth that advances the decline of coral reefs. Tiger Sharks, for example, have been shown to prevent green turtles from overgrazing seagrass beds.

Read more:
Tide turned: surveys show the public has lost its appetite for shark culls

A woman underwater

Like Girls Can’t Surf before it, Playing with Sharks explores gender imbalances. The viewer gets to see how Valerie created her own deeply-rewarding adventure story in a male-dominated world, from hand-feeding a Great White from the back of a boat to untangling one caught in wire with her bare hands in waist-deep water.

Tiny and blonde, she fought to be taken seriously, even at the top of her game with a spear in her hand. The film pays tribute to Ron’s appreciation of her fearlessness and love for the ocean. “She was aggressive, not one of those wimpish women”, he recalls of their meeting, nicknaming her: Give-it-a-go Valerie.

This visually stunning documentary interweaves historical footage with insights from diving legends, scientists and Valerie herself to highlight the power of passion to challenge ideas.

This film is an accessible and inspiring documentary. If viewers watch curiously with even a fraction of Valerie’s sense of adventure then they will have taken part in her mission.

Valerie Taylor: Playing with Sharks screens nationally 17–20 June.

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

– ref. New documentary recalls how Valerie Taylor played with sharks to prove a point – https://theconversation.com/new-documentary-recalls-how-valerie-taylor-played-with-sharks-to-prove-a-point-161808

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

The Biloela Tamil family will finally be released from detention.

Immigration Minister Alex Hawke will announce this on Tuesday, but we have yet to learn the terms of that release.

There are several options. These include letting the Murugappan family live in the community while their current legal action continues, allowing them to apply for a non-refugee visa (the parents have been denied refugee status), or simply giving them some sort of other visa now.

The first course would be churlish, bring more criticism on the government, add to its taxpayer-funded legal costs, and risk inviting a new round of controversy at some later point.

The last option would be the simplest, cleanest way to deal with the whole unfortunate saga.

We should be clear about this. The government would not be removing the family from detention this week if the younger child Tharunicaa hadn’t become seriously ill, and had to be transferred from Christmas Island, where they have been since 2019, to a Perth hospital (accompanied by her mother).

To the extent the government is exercising compassion now, it is compassion driven by the bad publicity it is suffering.

The timing is also to pre-empt the parliamentary sitting, starting Tuesday, during which Michael McCormack is acting prime minister until Scott Morrison returns from overseas.

When the pictures of hospitalised Tharunicaa appeared in the media, there was a public outcry. Some Coalition backbenchers, including Trent Zimmerman and Katie Allen, started to speak out publicly to say enough was enough.

Former Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce went close to an accusation of racism, suggesting if the girls’ names were “Jane and Sally” and they played in the local netball team “we’d think twice about sending them back to another country which they’re not from”.

“Why not send them to Southern Sudan, why not send them to Rwanda to Belarus? They’re also countries they were never born in,” Joyce said, arguing they should be enitled to stay in Australia because they were born here.

Joyce’s message had cut-through, although on moral rather than legal grounds – they are not entitled to citizenship because they were born in Australia.

The Nationals Ken O’Dowd, whose electorate of Flynn covers Biloela, has been a long term advocate for the family, who have strong support in the town. He told the ABC he had spoken to Hawke who “wants a favourable outcome”.

Others in government ranks take a tougher line, worrying about the precedent of making an exception, and the message that would be sent.

They raise their binoculars to the horizon. Could that be a people smuggler boat?

Well no. More likely the ocean version of a mirage.

Even before Tharunicaa’s medical evacuation, Hawke had been asked as part of the legal process to review the case and consider whether he should lift the ban on the Murugappans being allowed to seek another sort of visa. O’Dowd said this involved more than 2,000 pages of reading.

The child’s evacuation shortened Hawke’s time frame and, given the public storm, effectively ensured the family had to be let out of detention.

Scott Morrison, questioned in the United Kingdom, had a tone of irritation in his answers, as he said options were being worked through.

Asked whether the family would be settled in Australia, he said, “Well, when we have more to say on that matter, well, settled? Well, that wouldn’t be government policy for a pathway to permanent settlement. That is not the government’s policy.”

Pressed further, he said, “Well, I just said there are options that are being considered that are consistent with both health advice and the humanitarian need and the government’s policy.”

Acting Prime Minister Michael McCormack had a bob each way, saying the government didn’t want to do anything to encourage people smugglers; on the other hand, this was a “humanitarian government”, and he personally was a “compassionate person”.

The formal decision about the family rests in the hands of Hawke as minister. We usually hear little about Hawke, and when we do it’s often in his role as a member of Morrison’s inner factional circle and a numbers man. He can be expected to have been working closely with his leader.

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

– ref. View from The Hill: Biloela family to be released but Hawke has yet to reveal the terms – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-biloela-family-to-be-released-but-hawke-has-yet-to-reveal-the-terms-162696

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ran Porat, Affiliate Researcher, The Australian Centre for Jewish Civilisation, Monash University

Israel’s 36th government was approved today, with a slim majority of 60–59 in the Knesset (parliament).

The new prime minister is the leader of national-religious party Yamina, Naftali Bennett. A religious person, former commander in an elite army combat unit and successful high-tech entrepreneur, Bennett was forced to form a unity government with centrist Yair Lapid, head of Israel’s second-largest party, Yesh Atid.

Lapid is slated to become prime minister in 2023. Other coalition partners include the left-wing Meretz and Labour parties; the right-wing parties Tikva Hadasha (“New Hope”) Israel Beiteinu (“Israel is our home”); and Benny Gantz’s centrist Blue and White party.

Read more:
Historic change: Arab political parties are now legitimate partners in Israel’s politics and government

The cherry on top of this ideologically mixed-up parfait is the Arab Islamic party Ra’am, headed by Mansour Abbas, which has successfully carried out Abbas’s strategic plan to be the first Arab party leader to join an Israeli government.

His move signifies the preference of many Arab Israelis to focus on domestic priorities, such as reducing crime and retrospectively attaining permits for illegal constrictions in Arab towns, rather than Palestinian nationalism.

The ultra-orthodox parties are the big losers. For the first time in many years, they are outside the government, disconnected from the fountain of public funding that has long flowed to their religious and educational institutes.

Challenges facing the new government

The eight parties forming the government had only one thing in common — a determination to oust Israel’s longest serving prime minister, the charismatic Benyamin “Bibi” Netanyahu.

As head of the right-wing Likud party, Netanyahu has been the face of Israel for the past 12 years, as well as during his earlier stint as prime minister from 1996–99. Famous for his political wizardry and clever coalition manoeuvres, he ended up losing the trust of almost everyone in the political arena. Many of his former allies were among those who ousted him.

The ideologically diverse new government will now need to deliver change, and fast. Another flare-up of tensions with Hamas, designated a terrorist organisation by many nations, is likely in the cards. A budget must be approved swiftly, after two years without one. Netanyahu can no longer be blamed if the government fails to deliver.

The complex set of coalition agreements between the parties means the government will most likely focus its attention domestically and avoid major initiatives on divisive topics, such as the Palestinian issue. One key task will be to work to heal the social tensions that have resurfaced in Israel in recent years, dividing Arabs and Jews, secular and religious, and left and right.

The coalition needs to find a way to work together efficiently or it could face a rapid collapse. Now the official opposition leader, Netanyahu has made clear he is not going anywhere and will work tirelessly to oust the new government.

But Netanyahu may go somewhere in the future – to jail. He is facing several indictments over bribery, fraud and breach of trust. His trial could take years, and was the prime motivator for Netanyahu’s almost desperate attempts to hold on to power. Many rallied against him because he is seen as corrupt and decadent.

New peace treaties in the region

In Washington, there will have been a sigh of relief. Netanyahu alienated former US President Barack Obama over the latter’s drive to sign the problematic 2015 nuclear deal with Iran. The current president, Joe Biden, was among the first to call Bennett, signalling US hope for greater leverage over the new government.

Netanyahu’s overall legacy will be marked by unequivocal diplomatic, economic and political achievements, alongside his deliberate strategy to turn Israelis from different sectors against each other, exacerbating long-lasting internal rifts.

Under his premiership, Israel became a world leader in fighting the COVID-19 pandemic. Drawing on his personal ties with the CEO of Pfizer, Netanyahu mobilised the health system to inoculate almost the entire adult population of Israel in record time.

Using his close relationship with former US president Donald Trump, he also orchestrated a move of the US embassy to Jerusalem, solidifying the city’s status as Israel’s capital.

Netanyahu maintained a staunch and uncompromising position against Iran’s aspirations to develop a nuclear weapon, which helped Israel secure the Abraham accords, peace treaties with four Muslim countries. Israel also undertook covert flirtations with Saudi Arabia, the leader of the anti-Iran camp.

Netanyahu’s reign ends with Israel enjoying an emboldened status in the region and a strong economy.

Read more:
After 12 years of Netanyahu, here’s what to expect from a new coalition government in Israel

Managing the conflict with the Palestinians

Netanyahu’s track record in dealing with the Palestinians is far more disputed. He won office after the murder of Labour Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in 1994, and effectively broke away from Rabin’s Oslo peace agreements with the Palestinian leadership, without repudiating them completely.

Following a surge in bombings by Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad in the mid-1990s, Netanyahu was elected in 1996 to slow down Israel’s retreat from territories in the West Bank. He also delivered to his base continued expansion of settlements in that disputed area — a move opposed by many in the international community.

In the past 12 years, Netanyahu worked to mostly manage — not resolve — the conflict. His approach to the two-state solution has been ambiguous at best, even though he showed some willingness to make concessions during the US-led talks in 2014. Trying to soothe Hamas with Qatari money – part of his managerial approach — backfired dramatically in the latest war with Gaza.

With this scorched earth legacy behind him, Netanyahu has been removed from power, at least for the time being. The Bennett-Lapid government is not expected to stray much from existing Israeli foreign policies. Israel’s strong strategic actions against Iran are here to stay.

Read more:
Benjamin Netanyahu was on the brink of political defeat. Then, another conflict broke out in Gaza

With regards to the Palestinians, there is very little that can be done until another long-serving leader is ousted – 86-year-old Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, who is increasingly seen as corrupt and dysfunctional.

The new government remains on shaky ground. All its participants know a single actor among them can take the government down. But no one has an appetite now for another election; they have too much to prove and a lot to lose if they do. It seems that at least for the next 12 months, Israel will finally have a government.

Ran Porat is a research associate at The Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council (AIJAC). The views in this article are private and do not represent any academic institute related related to Dr. Porat.

– ref. Netanyahu leaves behind a complex legacy in Israel. His successor will need to deliver change — and fast – https://theconversation.com/netanyahu-leaves-behind-a-complex-legacy-in-israel-his-successor-will-need-to-deliver-change-and-fast-162660

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tony Walker, Vice-chancellor’s fellow, La Trobe University

What a difference a year makes in international diplomacy.

A year ago, then-US President Donald Trump was obliged to abandon his plans for a G7 summit at the presidential retreat of Camp David outside Washington.

Various excuses were advanced by participants, including the inadvisability of travelling across the world in the midst of a pandemic. But in reality few, if any, G7 leaders wanted to associate themselves with Trump in what was hoped would be the last days of an ill-starred presidency.

A year later, these same leaders gathered at an English coastal retreat – in the shadow of a persistent COVID-19 pandemic – to celebrate the end of a disruptive chapter in diplomatic history. Relief was palpable in the interactions of representatives of the United States, United Kingdom, France, Germany, Japan, Italy and Canada.

America was back, not in its “America First” guise, but as the proclaimed leader of the free world, to use an old-fashioned description.

However, in the four years of the Trump presidency, during which Washington effectively abandoned its global leadership role in favour of an inward-looking posture defined by its embrace of an America First doctrine, the world had changed, and shifted dramatically.

Read more:
Grattan on Friday: Scott Morrison’s quest to be a Biden ‘bestie’

In 2016, the final year of the Obama administration, the G7 summit in Japan focused on the issue of climate in the wake of the Paris Agreement signed in April of that year. Its other priorities were disputes in the South China Sea and, interestingly enough, the need to strengthen a global response to pandemics in light of experiences with the Ebola virus in Africa.

That global response has been found to be inadequate. This prompts the question: what notice did global health authorities, principally the World Health Organization, take of the G7’s 2016 communique?

Five years later, the challenges identified in the 2016 document have been vastly magnified. This has been brought about by a combination of lack of US leadership on issues such as climate, and a broader global failure to manage China’s rise.

In 2016, China’s activities in the South China Sea in defiance of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) were a growing concern, as were signs of its increasing assertiveness under its nationalist leader, Xi Jinping.

But the consensus view then was that China’s rise could be accommodated without undue disruption to a rules-based international order. That has proved a significant miscalculation.

Fast-forward to the 2021 G7 in Cornwall, where concerns about China’s rise in its various dimensions stalked the round-table discussions and bilateral meetings. No other issue came close to matching worries about China: not climate change, nor the ongoing challenges of the pandemic.

In the end, the G7 communique was relatively restrained on China. This reflected differences of opinion among participants about how to manage a difficult situation. The US and Canadians would have liked stronger language. The Europeans favoured a less hawkish approach. Japan was somewhere in the middle.

References to China were nevertheless pointed, in contrast to previous G7 communiques, which have danced around the issue of Beijing’s challenges to a rules-based global order.

From an Australian perspective, the communique’s reference to China’s resort to economic reprisals to punish those who found themselves at odds with its policies will have been welcome:

With regard to China, and the competition in the global economy, we will continue to consult on collective approaches to challenging non-market policies and practices which undermine the fair and transparent operation of the global economy.

On human rights, the G7 was commendably forthright:

We will promote our values by calling on China to respect human rights and fundamental freedoms, especially in relation to Xinjiang and those rights, freedoms and high degree of autonomy for Hong Kong enshrined in the Sino-British joint declaration and the Basic Law.

Significantly, Taiwan made its way into a G7 communique for the first time. Here, the world’s leading democracies issued a fairly blunt warning to Beijing not to further destabilise relations across the Taiwan Strait:

We underscore the importance of peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait, and encourage the peaceful resolution of cross-Strait issues. We remain seriously concerned about the situation in the East and South China Seas and strongly oppose any unilateral attempt to change the status quo and increase tensions.

Predictably, Chinese commentators dismissed the G7 process as a sideshow, claiming “the world’s economic and political centre of gravity had shifted”, as the nationalist Global Times put it.

Morrison, as an official guest, will have been relieved the G7 did not reach a consensus on the timing for a phase-out of coal for generating electric power. On the other hand, he will not have overlooked strong language in the communique calling for a commitment to achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions “as soon as possible”.

Australia will have had no issue with other G7 initiatives such as calls for a global minimum tax to ensure greater global equity. Nor will it object to a proposal for liberal democracies to contribute to an infrastructure fund to compete with China’s Belt-and-Road initiative in the developing world.

Morrison will no doubt have been disappointed he did not have a “one-on-one” meeting with US President Joe Biden. Instead, he had to make do with a three-way conversation involving the summit’s host, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson. It is not clear whether this was a snub, but those briefing journalists in advance of the G7 should not have raised expectations.

In one respect, Morrison will have found the Cornwall G7 awkward. No other leader of a Western liberal democracy had aligned themselves as closely with the Trump White House.

Read more:
Spot the difference: as world leaders rose to the occasion at the Biden climate summit, Morrison faltered

In his attempts to position himself alongside Trump, Morrison echoed the then US president’s antagonism towards international institutions, broadly summed up by the Morrison’s reference to “negative globalism” in a Lowy Institute speech in 2019. These were sentiments the former US president used to promote his version of an America First policy, in contrast to the multilateralist tendencies of his predecessors.

Morrison’s adoption of this Trumpism, now quietly discarded in his public statements, sits uncomfortably with the new president’s emphasis on Washington’s global leadership in partnership with like-minded countries and institutions.

Pointedly, the G7 communique reiterated liberal democracies’ commitment to “multilateralism”.

If nothing else, Australia’s prime minister should have concluded in Cornwall that his own personal investment in a Trump presidency was not the most prudent course. The world has shifted.

Tony Walker 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. G7 showed that post-Trump, the world has shifted – https://theconversation.com/g7-showed-that-post-trump-the-world-has-shifted-162598

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Noor Gillani, Deputy Editor, Science and Technology

Speculation has been rife about the contents of an unclassified report set to be released later this month from the Pentagon’s Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP) task force.

The document, expected to drop on June 25, will supposedly provide a comprehensive summary of what the US government knows about UAPs — or, to use the more popular term, UFOs.

While the report is not yet public, the New York Times recently published what it claimed was a preview of the findings, provided by unnamed senior officials who were privy to the report’s contents.

According to the Times’s sources, the report does not provide any clear link or association between more than 120 incidents of UFO sightings from the past two decades, and a possibility of Earth having been visited by aliens.

If the Times’s sources are to be believed, there’s clearly still no good reason to interpret an unexplained object in the sky as evidence of aliens. But does that mean aliens aren’t out there, somewhere else in the universe? And if they are, could we ever find them? Or might they be so different to us that “finding” them is impossible in any meaningful sense?

We asked five experts.

Four out of five experts said aliens do exist

Here are their detailed responses:

If you have a science or technology-related question you’d like posed to Five Experts, email it to: noor.gillani@theconversation.edu.au

Read more:
The US military has officially published three UFO videos. Why doesn’t anybody seem to care?

– ref. Do aliens exist? We asked five experts – https://theconversation.com/do-aliens-exist-we-asked-five-experts-161811