Review: Australiyaniality Holmes à Court Gallery, Perth.
Australiyaniality is an awkward name for an exhibition that has embedded within it a call to action.
An amalgam of ideas exploring Australia, identity, place and “Liyan” – a word borrowed from the Yawuru people of Broome that describes the “internal spiritual core of strength that keeps you strong personally and culturally” – the exhibition attempts to reframe our attitudes to this continent and the life we have built here.
The very awkwardness, almost un-pronounceability of the title, evokes the scale of the challenge curator Matthew McVeigh has posed. His aim is to galvanise the community to rethink what it means to be Australian. And this exhibition – featuring 27 artists – is a raucous, overwhelming, exciting and at times confusing immersion into ideas about national identity.
Matthew McVeigh, ABOriginal, 2018, neon, blood group information and Aboriginal Etymology text.Janet Holmes à Court Collection
One’s first reaction is awe at the sheer audacity of the visually dislocating hang. It occupies an old warehouse in North Perth, one half of which has been renovated to house the Janet Holmes à Court art collection.
McVeigh and ten other artists have transformed the massive northern wall of the complex into a giant pin-up board of artworks and ideas documenting the racist underbelly of our national narratives. Titled The Relativity of Historia Nullius, it includes images of dispossession, colonialization, enslavement, and neglect.
Some are witty, like the appropriated FOODLAND grocery chain sign. In the shape of a boomerang, overpainted with images of bush tucker, it playfully rebukes our consumerist culture.
Equally playful is McVeigh’s ABO, a neon work that flicks from one letter to the other. At first it seems like an ugly, racist jibe. On closer inspection we see it documents the classification of human blood types based on the inherited properties of red blood cells, to reinforce our shared humanity.
Other works, like Harold Thomas’ large Aboriginal flag with a clock at its centre – going in reverse – suggest the possibility of a new beginning.
Sharyn Egan’s poignant Our Babies recreates the toys she made as a child out of found materials like sardine cans, rags, and pieces of gravel. These treasured objects acted as comforters when she and her friends cried themselves to sleep in a dormitory, separated from their families.
Most of the artworks document the disgraceful treatment of Aboriginal Australians and highlight historian Lorenzo Veracini’s notion of Historia Nullius. McVeigh describes this as the “distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based history of Australia based on race, colour descent, national or ethnic origin.”
This view of history undermines the human rights of all but the colonisers. As McVeigh and his collaborators suggest, it must be overthrown if we are to achieve a collective “Liyan”.
Throughout this large space, additional artworks by Brook Andrew, Gordon Bennett, Ann Zahalka and others explore similar issues. One of the most engaging works is Paul Caporn’s The Australian Anecdotal History Museum, a Combi Van parked in the warehouse gallery surrounded by the accoutrements of a well-established campsite.
In the van, a selection of objects donated by fellow artists and friends is displayed, each with an anecdote detailing its personal significance to the donor. Some wax lyrical, others are bluntly descriptive. Together, they reinforce the idea of the personalisation of history and the human proclivity to assign objects with a special power or meaning.
Paul Caporn The Australian Anecdotal History Museum 2018 (from a distance).Janet Holmes à Court Collection
This project is an attempt to open up a dialogue and to move the debate outside the confines of a gallery and into the mainstream.
For this reason, some of the bold graphic works like FOODLAND and ABO could perhaps be released from the gallery and harnessed for use on billboards, in social media, and through established media channels. The Australian Anecdotal History Museum could, for instance, take to the roads and tour through shopping centres.
As a contributing curator, McVeigh has pulled together a group of works that develop his thesis and expand on his own artistic practice. Not surprisingly, it is a partisan view with a heavy emphasis on the ongoing mistreatment of Aboriginal Australians and a nod toward the problems of integration faced by other groups, such as the Indian community.
By tackling such a vast subject with a limited lens and an emphasis on the problems we face rather than sign posts toward a more positive future, it’s possible viewers will leave the gallery with a sense of despondency at the overwhelming task ahead.
Still, as McVeigh announces in his manifesto pasted up on the entry wall: “The works are not a means to an end, a solution to instantaneously fix injustices and imbalances. They will be, however, about working towards providing a way forward to reach a new collective consciousness.”
In the wake of the Uluru Statement from the Heart, this exhibition reminds us that the responsibility lies with every Australian to nurture their “Liyan” and create a just and equitable country we can all call home.
Australiyaniality is at the Holmes à Court Gallery, 10 Douglas Street, Perth, until November 25.
FijiFirst leader Voreqe Bainimarama with supporters during a FijiFirst family fun day in Savusavu before the 2018 general election. Image: FijiFirst FB page
By Wansolwara Staff
It’s official. FijiFirst has won the 2018 general election in Fiji, raking in 227,241 votes (50.02 percent) from 2173 stations counted and securing a second four-year term in office.
FijiFirst dominated the polls in the later counting ahead of the Social Democratic Liberal Party (SODELPA) in an earlier tight contest. SODELPA finished in second place with 181,072 votes (39.85 percent).
The National Federation Party (NFP) finished in third place with 33,515 (7.38 percent) followed by Unity Fiji with 6,896, Humanity Opportunity Prosperity Equality with 2,811 votes and Fiji Labour Party (FLP) with 2,800 votes.
Caretaker Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama, FijiFirst leader, finished off on a strong footing, raking in 167,732 votes in the results by candidate tally.
SODELPA’s Sitiveni Rabuka came in second with 77,040 votes followed by Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum with 17,271 votes.
-Partners-
National Federation Party leader Biman Prasad finished off with 12,137 votes, followed by the leading woman candidate Lynda Tabuya with 8,795 votes.
Supervisor of Elections Mohammed Saneem announced the results at the National Results Centre this afternoon after the final results were released on the FEO elections app.
Official results handover The official elections results were then handed over to Electoral Commission Chairman Suresh Chandra.
“After receiving the results of the 2018 general election, the Electoral Commission will now retire and calculate the seat allocation for the 51 seats for the next term of Parliament,” Chandra said.
Thereafter the announcement of the allocation of Parliament seats will be made followed by the return of the Writ of Election to President Jioji Konrote this afternoon.
It is understood that FijiFirst will probably take 27 seats in Parliament while SODELPA could settle for 21 seats and NFP with 3 seats. This, however, will be confirmed by the Electoral Commission after its deliberations.
This article is republished under the content sharing arrangement between USP’s Wansolwara student journalism newspaper and AUT’s Pacific Media Centre.
The final results in the Fiji general election announced by the Fiji Elections Office (FEO) in Suva today. Source: FEO
Diplomats, officials and party representatives today at the National Results Centre in Suva awaiting the final declaration of the Fiji general election. Image: Nanise Volau/ Wansolwara
Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama’s FijiFirst party has triumphed in the general election and will govern for a second four-year term after winning most votes
FFP polled 227,241 votes – just over half the total votes – followed by the Social Democratic Liberal Party (SODELPA) in second place with 181,072 votes (39.85 percent) while the National Federation Party (NFP) came third with 33,515 votes (7.38 percent).
SODELPA and NFP will again form the opposition for another four years.
Other parties gained less than the 5 percent threshold needed to gain seats in the 51-seat Parliament.
Wansolwara News reported earlier that it was understood that after the official handover of results from the Fiji Elections Office, the Electoral Commission would announce the allocation of seats in Parliament before the Writ of Election would be presented to President Jioji Konrote later today.
The final results in the Fiji general election announced by the Fiji Elections Office (FEO) in Suva today. Source: FEO/Wansolwara
The governor of Papua New Guinea’s Manus Province has hinted that he could obstruct Australia’s bid to build a naval port on Manus Island.
Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison announced on November 1 that his country would fund the development of a deepwater base at the old Lombrum Naval Base used during the Second World War.
The move is seen as a counter to China’s aspirations to develop the site.
Manus Governor Charlie Benjamin told Reuters news agency that he had not been consulted on the development and that it would have to benefit the local residents.
“I have my people living on the island and we are the ones affected,” Benjamin said.
-Partners-
“The government might have the right but if we decide to put our foot down, there will be problems.”
The Manus governor has previously been critical of central government’s lack of consultation over the Australian-run refugee detention centres based on the island.
Military outpost Manus is PNG’s northernmost and smallest province with 50,000 people and an Australian-funded navy base there could provide a military outpost for Canberra in the Pacific.
Prime Minister Morrison has said Australian vessels would be regular visitors.
RNZ Pacific’s Johnny Blades reports from APEC (Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation) that the United States will join Australia in expanding the Lombrum Naval Base on Papua New Guinea’s Manus Island.
US vice-president Mike Pence made the announcement at the APEC leader’s summit in Port Moresby yesterday.
Pence, who is representing his country at APEC in the absence of President Donald Trump, used his speech to assert US partnership with Pacific Islands and other allies in the wider region.
Without elaborating on details, he confirmed the US would partner with PNG and Australia on a joint naval base on Manus, reported Blades.
This article is republished under the Pacific Media Centre’s content partnership with Radio New Zealand.
The newly built APEC Haus in Papua New Guinea’s capital Port Moresby which is hosting the 2018 APEC leaders summit this weekend. Image: Johnny Blades/RNZ Pacific
The Supervisor of Elections tells four parties “not to play around with elections” and “be honest”. Image: Wansolwara
By Wansolwara Staff
Fiji’s Supervisor of Elections has hit out at four political parties for making claims that the tabulation process for the provisional results of the 2018 General Election was “not transparent”.
Without mincing his words at a press briefing tonight, Mohammed Saneem urged leaders of the political parties – Social Democratic Liberal Party (SODELPA), National Federation Party (NFP), Unity Fiji and Fiji Labour Party (FLP) – “not to play around with elections” and “be honest”.
Claims of a breach in the Protocol of Results process surfaced after a joint statement was sent to the Electoral Commission on Thursday alleging that political party agents and candidates were not shown documents from which the provisional results were posted on the national results tally during the tabulation process.
There were further claims from political parties that incorrect data was also recorded on the FEO App, particularly for votes recorded at the Namosi Village community hall for some of their party candidates.
Responding to these issues, Saneem presented original copies of votes recorded at that particular voting venue and openly compared those with the election records presented by party agents at that polling venue.
There were notable differences in the data collected.
-Partners-
“The parties claim that No. 571 on their record is zero; the Protocol of Results says 571 has one vote, the pink slip for 571 has one and the FEO App has one. For 591 (Biman Prasad), according to the parties, he has five votes.
According to the original, he has four votes, the pink slip has four votes and the FEO App has four votes.
For 688 (Bainimarama), their records say 36, the original pink slip says 96 and the FEO App has 96,” he explained to the media and representatives from the international multinational observer group.
“The Namosi Village community hall is a pre-poll station and that means counting for this station was actually done at the count centre (in Suva). We have evidence, properly justified and signed by agents and staff, nothing is being hidden.
Party records ‘incorrect’ “The records of those parties are extremely incorrect. They were highly inaccurate results projected here for the sake of publicity and this is why the FEO is urging all members of the public to rely on the FEO information as the most accurate for this general election.
“We will pause and provide the political parties that have got agents present here with the records from the results management system as well as the protocols of results and we will reconcile to make sure that everybody in the results centre has the same amount of data including the data on the app.
“I hope this settles the entire question about attempts to create doubt about the results.”
Saneem further clarified that the Fijian Elections Office had three verification processes before data is accepted into results software or results management system.
This article is republished under the content sharing arrangement between USP’s Wansolwara student journalism newspaper and AUT’s Pacific Media Centre.
Fiji general election … a disappointing low voter turnout but the atrocious weather is an insufficient reason. Image: Wansolwara
ANALYSIS:By Dr Crosbie Walsh
With the final results from 1715 (79 percent) of the 2173 polling stations now counted, who will form the next Fiji government is still too close to call, although the trend since earlier announcements — and the preliminary results announced on Thursday — indicate a narrow win for FijiFirst.
As of 1pm today, FijiFirst had 49.93 percent of the vote, SODELPA 39.96 percent and National Federation Party (NFP) 7.36 percent. The other parties had a combined total of 2.74 percent, well below the 5 percent threshold to win a seat.
What has been most disappointing is the low voter turnout. The atrocious weather did not help but in itself is an insufficient reason.
There are likely to be a mix of reasons but their relative importance will remain unknown. They could perhaps have chosen not to vote because they are happy with the status quo under FijiFirst.
They could have expected FijiFirst to win, so why bother? They could have been overwhelmed and confused by the many pressures to vote from FijiFirst and the pressures and rumours from the Opposition.
-Partners-
Or they could have thought the election result would not improve their lives whatever the outcome.
So what can we deduce from the results so far?
‘Work in progress’ Bainimarama’s FijiFirst seems likely to win 27 seats, SODELPA 20 and NFP 4 seats in the 51-seat chamber.
The aim of the 2013 constitution in abolishing race-based elections which favoured the chiefly Taukei appears to be a work “still in progress”. SODELPA is essentially a Taukei party with 43 of its 51 candidates Taukei, 4 Indo-Fijians and 4 Others.
NFP, a traditional Indo-Fijian party, had made serious efforts to be more multiracial. Nineteen of its 51 candidates are Taukei, 29 Indo-Fijians and 3 Others.
FijiFirst is the most balanced party with 26 Taukei, 23 Indo-Fijian and 2 Others. It even has two chiefs! But no paramount chiefs.
Two heads of Confederacies, Ro Teimumu Kepa (Burebasaga) and Naiqama Lalabalavu (Tovata), are SODELPA candidates. The Kubuna headship is at present vacant.
A Rotuman, Pasepa Lagi, out-polled Bainimarama and all other candidates in Rotuma.
A casual examination of voting by the type and location of polling station shows race and parochial interests to still be very evident.
Village voting People voting in Taukei villages generally voted SODELPA, no doubt due to the influence of village heads (turaga ni koro). This pattern did not seem to be influenced by whether or not the FijiFirst government had spent money on local development.
So much for the social media and opposition claims that FijiFirst was buying votes. Those in (mainly Indo-Fijian) settlements voted FijiFirst or NFP.
In urban areas, voting also seemed to be greatly influenced by race, and to a lesser extent by economic wellbeing.
Three types of polling stations deserve special mention. Those located in military areas voted overwhelmingly for FijiFirst (which reduces the prospect of another coup); police areas were about equally divided between FijiFirst and SODELPA, and Corrections were predominantly SODELPA.
One further initial observation is the different distribution of candidate preferences. Bainimarama was the first choice with 36.8 percent for FijiFirst votes.
SODELPA’s Rabuka only accounted for 17 percent with other candidates scoring higher than with FijiFirst.
Interestingly, Ro Teimumu Kepa only won 1.2 percent of SODELPA votes. This suggests more parochially-orientated voting for SODELPA and perhaps what could be called more nationally-orientated voting with FijiFirst.
But individual SODELPA candidates may have been better known in particular locations.
The geography of how people voted in 2014 and 2018 by polling station would make a very good topic for a master’s thesis. There are certainly enough hypotheses to test.
Retired University of the South Pacific development studies professor Crosbie Walsh is a New Zealand-based academic. His articles are published by Asia Pacific Report with permission.
Some critics say that China’s latest behaviour toward foreign journalists casts doubt over its vow to treat neighbours with “respect”. Image: Natalie Whiting/ABC News/My Land, My Country
By Scott Waide
Papua New Guinea’s freedoms of speech, expression and access to information were challenged yesterday when Chinese officials barred both local and non-Chinese media from attending meetings at three Asia-Pacific Economy Cooperation (APEC) venues.
It began in Parliament when Chinese President Xi Jinping was giving an address after a guard of honour.
EMTV journalist Theckla Gunga, who was assigned to cover the Chinese President’s visit, reported that just after 11am, Chinese officials accompanying their president ordered the microphones to be removed from the speaker where they had been placed to record the speeches.
“Chinese officials who are organising the official opening of the Chinese-funded six lane road have refused to give audio feeds to media personnel,” she said in a WhatsApp message.
“Microphones belonging to both local and international media have been removed,” said Gunga.
-Partners-
The officials, however, allowed Chinese state-owned broadcaster CCTV to record President’s Xi speech.
Gunga and other journalists spent about 10 minutes arguing with the Chinese officials but were still refused.
‘No media, no media’ One hour later, EMTV Online reporter Merylyn Diau-Katam faced another group of Chinese officials at the gate of a Chinese government-funded school.
“Before the President arrived a bus full of Chinese media personnel were driven into the gate on a bus,” she said.
“And when we wanted to go in, we were told our names were not on the list even though we had APEC accreditation passes,” Diau-Katam.
“No media. No media, a Chinese official said,” she said.
Diau-Katam was not the only one refused entry. In the group was a photographer from Japanese public broadcaster, NHK and other media. A PNG government official also spent several minutes arguing with the Chinese security to let him in.
At 5pm yesterday, Chinese officials again booted out local and international media from a meeting between the Chinese President and Pacific Island country leaders.
EMTV anchor and senior journalist, Meriba Tulo, was among others told to “get out” of the meeting while Chinese media were allowed into the room.
The Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) was also told to leave. They spoke to Post-Courier’s senior journalist, Gorethy Kenneth. She said Chinese officials from Beijing were initially angry with the presence of international media.
“I said: ‘We are here to cover the meeting, our names have been submitted.’ And they said: ‘No, all of you get out,’” Kenneth said.
Scott Waide’s blog columns are frequently published by Asia Pacific Report with permission. He is also EMTV deputy news editor based in Lae.
Fiji general election votes are still being counted and finalised at the National Results Centre in Suva. Image: Mereoni Mili/Wansolwara File
By Wansolwara Staff
The ruling FijiFirst party has taken a narrow lead in the Fiji general election final results today ahead of the opposition Social Democratic Liberal Party (SODELPA) after 1401 of 2173 stations were counted.
As of 5am today and with 772 stations yet to be counted, FijiFirst has so far topped the results by party with 131,629 votes compared with SODELPA’s 115,150 votes.
The National Federation Party (NFP) trails in third place with 19,312 votes followed by Unity Fiji with 4239, Humanity Opportunity Prosperity Equality (HOPE) Party with 1725 votes and Fiji Labour Party with 1664 votes so far.
Final Fiji election progress results as at 5am today. Source: FEO
FijiFirst leader Voreqe Bainimarama has maintained a strong lead ahead of SODELPA’s Sitiveni Rabuka in the official results by candidates, raking in 97,352 votes so far compared with Rabuka’s 47,764 votes.
All smiles … caretaker Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama in lead in final progress results in the Fiji election today. Image: Sri Krishnamurthi/PMC
Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum is in third place with 9840 votes followed by Biman Prasad on 6975 and Lynda Tabuya with 5170 votes.
Alipate Nagata has placed in the top 10 results by candidates with 4117 votes ahead of Niko Nawaikula with 3820, Ro Teimumu Kepa with 3571 votes and Mosese Bulitavu with 3561 votes so far.
-Partners-
Some notable changes so far with the final results include an increase in the number of stations being counted.
Provisional results and early counts from the final results were from 2170 stations. However, the Supervisor of Elections, Mohammed Saneem, has since clarified that there are now 2173 polling stations after the inclusion of three more polling stations to account for the postal ballots.
Voting today Wansolwara’s Laisenia Nasiga reports that registered voters who cast their votes on polling day (Wednesday, November 14) at the 22 polling venues that were later adjourned as a result of bad weather will still have to vote today.
According to Supervisor of Elections Mohammed Saneem, 7498 people were expected to cast their votes at these 22 polling venues.
“If a voter’s finger contains indelible ink, they will still be allowed entry into the polling venue to mark their ballot paper. The voter will then have to ink another finger,” Saneem told a press briefing in Suva yesterday.
“Any voter who has already voted at these locations will be allowed to vote again. All votes that were received from these places on Election Day will be cancelled. They will not be counted.
“We will be using freshly printed ballot papers as well as new ballot boxes to facilitate elections at these venues and voters can come and vote between the hours of 7.30am to 6pm.”
The final election result is expected tomorrow.
This article is republished under the content sharing arrangement of USP’s Wansolwara student journalism newspaper and AUT’s Pacific Media Centre.
Chinese President Xi Jinping (left) and Prime Minister of PNG Peter O’Neill shaking hands. Image: Solomon Kantha/My Land My Country
COMMENTARY:By Scott Waide
In November every year, the Papua New Guinean National budget usually takes centre stage. But not this year.
This week, the 2019 budget came two days before the start of the biggest meetings of APEC (Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation). People were interested in it for a day, then it faded into the background.
Then BOOM… Enter China-US geopolitics…
On Thursday, Chinese President Xi Jinping, the most influential world leader in the Asia-Pacific arrived in Port Moresby with the largest delegation of officials.
They came on two large planes and the festivities for his delegation demonstrated just how important China’s money is to the Papua New Guinea ( government.
World politics is being played out on PNG soil. It already is, by the way.
-Partners-
From the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) meeting in Singapore, US Vice President, Mike Pence indicated he would be revealing how “dangerous” the Chinese One Belt One Road Initiative is to the rest of the world including the Pacific.
Infrastructure projects This announcement comes on the back of US$60 billion funding (about NZ$87 billion) aimed at the Asia-Pacific region. Also note that China has allocated the same amount to African countries for various projects including infrastructure.
Australia has announced its own funding initiatives for the Pacific of 7 billion Kina (NZ$3 billion).
In the foreign ministers’ meeting, the US-China tension is already being felt as the US and China tussle over free trade and other issues.
On the ground in Port Moresby, there is a strong US and Australian military presence.
From China, a strong trade presence and message about building relationships. From the outset, China appears to have all its moves planned out and is ticking off each item on its list of things to do.
At least for the government, the attention from world leaders is important. Maybe APEC is an opportunity. Maybe it is a double edged sword – with opportunity on the one side and debt on the other as has been the case in other countries like Sri Lanka.
What stands out is China’s willingness to engage. President Xi is here for four days. America’s Trump and Russia’s Putin both sent their number twos.
As US Vice-President Pence, tweeted and jetted into Cairns, President Jinping met with Pacific Island Forum leaders and representatives in Port Moresby in the afternoon.
Scott Waide’s blog columns are frequently published by Asia Pacific Report with permission. He is also EMTV deputy news editor based in Lae.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ben Wellings, Senior Lecturer in Politics and International Relations, Monash University
Behind the scenes at Westminster and the teetering fate of the British government lies an even more profound change in British politics: the very real possibility of the break-up of the United Kingdom.
In this situation Australia needs to tread carefully and maintain its good relations with what has emerged as its more stable European partner, the European Union, while offering silent support for whatever governments or countries could emerge from Brexit.
Is the UK headed for dissolution?
The United Kingdom is made up of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.
The publication of the Brexit draft withdrawal agreement – a hefty 585-page tome – has revealed what has been implicit in the “British” vote to leave the EU all along: that Brexit is an expression of English nationalism that will unwittingly lead to the break-up of the UK.
Behind the government’s rhetoric of “global Britain”, there is no such thing as the “British people” in a political sense any more. The referendum revealed significant divisions between attitudes to EU membership in Scotland, Northern Ireland and England. While Prime Minister Theresa May tried to reposition “global Britain” in relation to Europe and the rest of the world, Britain itself dissolved from within.
Prime Minister Theresa May refers to the UK as a “precious union”. If only more people felt the same. An LBC-YouGov poll in March found that a majority of (mostly English) voters wanted to leave the EU rather than keep Northern Ireland in the UK.
In October, research published by the Centre on Constitutional Change showed that a clear majority of English leave voters would be happy to see Scotland and Northern Ireland out of the UK as the price of Brexit.
The irony is that it is the resistance of 10 MPs from the Ulster loyalist Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) and about 60 hard-line English Conservative Brexiteersis most likely to plunge the UK into an existential crisis. Their intransigence will destroy the thing they profess to defend.
The text of the Brexit draft withdrawal agreement was at pains to appease concerns among the Ulster unionist community about maintaining the integrity of the UK (unsuccessfully as it turned out).
The prospect of the agreed backstop – a single customs territory that the UK could not leave without EU consent and which would ultimately keep Northern Ireland in a special relationship with the EU after Brexit – was not something Brexiteers and the DUP could stomach.
For them, the deal was a “capitulation”. It was a breach of “blood red” lines that invoked the prospect of a return to conflict in Ulster.
Across the Irish Sea, Nicola Sturgeon, the Scottish first minister, asked: if Northern Ireland got special treatment, why not Scotland too?
In fact, the withdrawal agreement made no mention of Scotland at all. This disregard for the overwhelming Scottish vote to remain in the EU has pushed Scotland closer to another referendum on independence.
Brexit has divided opinion across Britain long after the 2016 vote to leave the European Union.Neil Hall/EPA
Brexit has created a new and deep cleavage in British politics that cuts across old political divisions. Far fewer people identify as Labour or Conservative than identify as “leave” or “remain”.
Add the national dimension to this politics and some new options emerge. Some hard Brexiteers must be considering ditching Scotland and Northern Ireland as an acceptable cost for “British” (read “English”) independence from the EU.
The ghost of empire has haunted the Brexit imaginary from before the 2016 referendum. Its critics derided “global Britain” as “Empire 2.0”. But the memory of empire cuts two ways. Brexiteers see the EU as a threatening imperium. The withdrawal agreement would leave the UK as a vassal state – a state that is subordinate to another – and therefore must be rejected.
Brexit has also left unresolved questions about who is actually in charge in Britain. Calls for a second referendum have grown, suggesting “the people” rather than government or parliament is the ultimate source of authority on this matter.
A second referendum has the advantage of presenting the electorate with a concrete proposal for leaving. It would temper the unrealistic and downright false claims of the leave campaign in 2016. It might end the talk of “respecting the wishes of the British people” to leave the EU.
In truth we don’t really know what exactly people voted for: only 6% of leave voters said they thought Britain would be better off economically by leaving.
But a general election would be a better bet. It would effectively be a referendum on the deal. It might also return a government with a majority – something Britain has lacked since May’s miscalculation last year.
Theresa May has spent much of her time navigating Brexit since she became prime minister following the referendum.David Levenson/EPA
Australia’s role
What does this mean for Australia? Australia was name-checked in Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday as a country offering the prospect of a quick free trade agreement. Britain needs Australia in a way that it hasn’t since world war two. It would be best at this delicate moment to stop recklessly encouraging the British government from the sidelines: no more talk of one-page free trade agreements.
Australia must continue with its (slow) progress on the Australia-EU free trade agreement negotiations begun in June. The EU has remained remarkably unified during the Brexit negotiations despite tensions of its own. The EU is coming out of its own crises of the past decade. Now it’s Britain’s turn to teeter on the brink of disintegration.
Chinese President Xi Jinping arrived in Port Moresby last night to attend the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) leaders summit and is poised to steal a march on rival world leaders.
With the US and Russian Presidents skipping the event, President Xi is in a strategic position to strengthen ties with both the host nation and other attendees.
The Nationalreports that President Xi said PNG was “truly a land of promise,” endowed with abundant natural resources.
“In recent years, thanks to the leadership of Prime Minister Peter O’Neill, the great work of the government, and the industrious and enterprising people of the country, PNG has thrived in national development, and its society has taken on a new look,” said President Xi.
-Partners-
Mutual trust This is the first state visit of President Xi where he reiterated his goal to fortify “mutual trust” and to take bilateral ties to next level.
“I look forward to working with your leaders to cement mutual trust, expand practical cooperation, and increase people-to-people exchanges in order to take our bilateral ties to a new level,” said President Xi.
EMTV Online reports that President Xi officiate at the opening of a new school today for PNG students, Butuka Academy.
“Only one of China’s many gifts to PNG,” he said.
President Xi said the rapid growth of the China-PNG relations was “an epitome of China’s overall relations with Pacific Islands countries”.
“The Chinese often say: ‘Distance cannot separate true friends who remain close even when thousands of miles apart.’ The vast Pacific Ocean is indeed a bond between China and Pacific Islands countries,” said President Xi.
President Xi said China would stand firm with Pacific Islands countries and all other developing countries.
Chinese President Xi Jinping arrives at Port Moresby’s Jacksons International Airport last night for a state visit and the APEC summit. Image: Loop PNG
Brighter future “The relations between China and Pacific Islands countries are now better than ever and face important opportunities of development,” he said.
“China will work with Pacific Islands countries to brave the wind and waves and set sail for a brighter future of our relations.”
The Post-Courier reports that early this year, President Xi met with Prime Minister O’Neill in the Great Hall of the People in Beijing as part of a trip that saw the Pacific nation signing on to the “One Belt One Road” initiative.
This was an initiative seen by the US as a threat, and it had injected US$113 million in Asian investment.
Prime Minister O’Neill, in this meeting with President Xi, said he wanted more cooperation on economy, trade, investment, agriculture, tourism and infrastructure.
After the APEC summit in PNG, President Xi is set to visit Brunei and the Philippines where he will engage in an in-depth conversation with the two head of the state strengthening bilateral ties.
The Free Papua Movement (OPM) Southern Commander Bernard Mawen has died. He was the “grand old man” of the OPM, one of the first to begin the armed struggle for independence in West Papua in the 1960s and he will be missed by his people.
I interviewed him in 1998 in his camp along the Fly river on the border where he lived among the thousands of West Papuan refugees forgotten on the PNG border, who live on little more than sago and bananas.
Indirectly, his OPM guerrillas remain a protective buffer for both PNG and Australia against Indonesian aggression but it’s unlikely you’ll hear any eulogies from Canberra or Moresby and certainly not from Jakarta.
He lived for his people, in the bush, and that’s all you can ask of a leader. RIP.
Official results continue to trickle in from Fiji’s National Results Centre in Suva today. Image: Eliki Drugunalevu/Wansolwara
By Wansolwara Staff
Official poll results for the Fiji 2018 general election are trickling in slowly as the Social Democratic Liberal Party leads the race by party after 527 of 2170 stations were counted.
SODELPA raked in 44,501 votes so far by party as of 6.27am today.
It was followed by FijiFirst with 37,469, National Federation Party with 5897, Unity Fiji with 1494, Humanity Opportunity Prosperity Equality with 552 and Fiji Labour Party trailling with 452 votes so far.
The party vote after 527 polling stations had been counted. Source: FEO
Leading the official results by candidates, FijiFirst leader Josaia Voreqe Bainimarama has maintained the top spot with 28,033 votes so far, followed by SODELPA leader Sitiveni Rabuka with 18,356 votes, Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum with 2598, Lynda Tabuya with 2530 votes and NFP leader Biman Prasad with 2269 votes from the 527 stations counted so far.
Anare Jale follows closely behind with 2173 votes, Ro Teimumu Kepa on 1516 votes, Alipate Nagata with 1385 votes and Ratu Suliano Matanitobua with 1365 votes. Simione Rasova sits on 1124 votes, followed by Niko Nawaikula with 1073 votes and Peceli Vosanibola with 1020 votes so far, ahead of Mere Samisoni’s 1007.
The politicians vote are 527 polling stations had been counted. Source: FEO
Supervisor of Elections Mohammed Saneem said they had started to release the final results tally on to the FEO App, which is compatible with mobile smartphones and can be downloaded from Google Play or Apple Store.
-Partners-
“There seems to be a misconception that this is a recount. Please note, it is not a recount but results that have now been physically transmitted to us from the polling places in protocol of results,” he said.
Data entry
After 636 polling stations had been completed. Source: FEO
“This data-entry process will continue until we have completed data entry from all the locations. So it is not a recount, it is data-entry starting from zero once again.
“There seems to be a misconception that the 584 venues would have to be recounted. No they will not be recounted. After 584 venues that were not included in the provisional results, there are three poll stations we are still counting, probably 360 or so venues that are yet to be counted, that is why the data this morning [yesterday] could not have all the information.
“Some 220 plus polling stations that did not transmit the results to us via mobile phone because some of those areas were in low-connectivity areas, and in some areas the staff directly transmitted the printout signed copy of the count results instead of calling us to let us know.”
Saneem said they would continue to update the FEO App with final results once counts were verified.
This article is republished under the content sharing arrangement of USP’s Wansolwara student journalism newspaper and AUT’s Pacific Media Centre.
Former National Party chief whip and current independent MP, Jami-Lee Ross.
Bryce Edwards’ Political Roundup: The Media’s fraught role in the Jami-Lee Ross scandal
[caption id="attachment_13635" align="alignleft" width="150"] Dr Bryce Edwards.[/caption]
The media has played a central role in this year’s huge scandal involving MP Jami-Lee Ross. Journalists, broadcasters, and political commentators have reported on the scandal – including choosing to withhold some information – and interpreted it all. Inevitably questions have been asked about how well the media have performed, and the decisions they have made.I raised some of these issues in my column yesterday, Lifting the bedsheets on MPs’ private lives. Further questions include how much the media have influenced the scandal themselves, in terms of what they’ve decided to report and not report, and the role some in the media have played in their interactions with the political players.What to report and what to leave hidden?
[caption id="attachment_18102" align="aligncenter" width="960"] Former National Party MP, and current independent Member of Parliament, Jami-Lee Ross.[/caption]
The media face plenty of tough decisions about what to report in politics, especially in incredibly fraught cases such as the Jami-Lee Ross scandal. One of the biggest issues the media have been grappling with is whether to name the National MP who was reported to be in a three-year relationship with Ross, and who anonymously made allegations about his behaviour in Melanie Reid and Cass Mason’s report, Jami-Lee Ross: Four women speak out. The same National MP was also reported to have sent Ross the infamous abusive text message in which she told him, “You deserve to die.”
Journalists and newsrooms around the country continue to debate whether the National MP should continue to have her name kept from the public. Veteran political journalist, Richard Harman raised this on the Kiwi Journalists Association Facebook page: “Like most political journalists, I believe I know who that MP is… The inexorable pressure is now moving towards naming the MP. It’s a very difficult ethical issue. I certainly have emails from people on the left making the same allegation as Whaleoil — that the Press Gallery is party to a cover-up. But equally at what point does this simply become prurient gossip?”
What follows is a fascinating debate amongst journalists, with varying views. Journalist, Graham Adams argues in favour of disclosure and is worth quoting at length: “My view is that she should be named (and I think most of the media are waiting for someone else to do it first!). Until she is named, it casts suspicion on other female MPs who are not involved, which is unfair. Also, the female MP whose name has been frequently mentioned on social media represents a conservative electorate, is socially conservative herself and has promoted family values from her first days in Parliament. I think the public should always been told when an MP’s publicly professed values are at sharp variance to their own private behaviour. That is an obligation the media should fulfil. Furthermore, she has no right to privacy when she has anonymously and publicly shamed Jami-Lee Ross in the Newsroom piece by Melanie Reid. She’s an MP and a highly educated professional whose actions should be held to account. If she had any courage, she would come clean herself.”
Adams then wrote in more detail about the whole issue, suggesting the media, and parliamentary press gallery in particular, can be accused of a “cover-up” by not reporting on the anonymous National MP – see: The Jami-Lee Ross saga: Questions around cover-ups continue.
He also raises the issue of whether the media is being inconsistent, and is going easy on the National MP because she is powerful. The comparison is made with the media choosing in 2013 to publish the identity of the woman who had an affair with then then mayor of Auckland, Len Brown: “The fact that five years later the media is so coy about naming a married National MP who anonymously gave Newsroom highly personal details about her relationship with another married National MP inevitably raises uncomfortable questions — including whether there is one rule for Parliament which has a dedicated press gallery that operates in a symbiotic relationship with politicians and another for councils which don’t. A casual observer might conclude that when you’re a woman like Chuang who is an ambitious nobody you’re fair game but when you’re a woman like the National MP who is an ambitious somebody the media will protect you.”
The Southland Times also favours disclosure of the woman’s name. In the editorial, ‘Moving on’ is not acceptable, the newspaper argues that the MP is a “hypocrite” for not abiding by National’s core value of “Personal Responsibility”. The paper raises whether the women’s abusive text to Ross “could be a breach of the Harmful Digital Communication Act”, and whether she therefore can “really stay in her role as an MP”. The newspaper elaborates on this issue in second editorial, Another issue arises from the Ross case.
The Listener’s Jane Clifton discusses how gender issues also come into the debate: “Until now, the line in the sand has been the hypocrisy test. Outside the old News of the World wilds, the journalistic orthodoxy has always been that such personal indiscretions as boozing or illicit affairs go unreported unless the public figure concerned is guilty of obvious double-standards. #MeToo shifted the public interest sand line to: was there an imbalance of power, and/or abuse?” – see: Why you should never say ‘now I’ve seen everything’ in politics.
On Facebook Graham Adams takes the view that it’s actually her gender that is protecting her from being outed: “I imagine that if gender roles had been reversed and a man had sent a similar text to the female MP that included personal abuse (including calling her fat and sweaty) and telling her that she ‘deserved to die’, he would have been outed just as soon as his identity had been established. Not many journalists would have hesitated. And he would have been widely and viciously pilloried for it. The MP has successfully cast herself as a victim despite her rank in society as an MP and a successful professional, which is presumably why journalists are hesitant to name her.”
The Press Gallery’s role in the Jami-Lee Ross scandal
As the above debate shows, some are questions about the role of the Press Gallery journalists in how the whole scandal has been covered, and what that says about their proximately to those in power. Certainly, there has always been a complex and symbiotic relationship between journalists and politicians – they rely on each other for the communication of politics to the public. Journalists need MPs to provide them with content for stories, and MPs need the media to distribute their news and views.
But does that mean journalists end up being compromised or complicit in the political agendas of the various political actors? Chris Trotter definitely thinks so – see his Otago Daily Times column Too close for comfort. Here’s Trotter’s main question: “What is the electorate supposed to do if those entrusted with reporting the actions of the principal political players, themselves become important actors in the drama?”
RNZ’s Jo Moir, has been very frank about her use of politician sources, when reflecting on her major scoop in the Jami-Lee Ross scandal, when she published the details of the anonymous texts that were sent to Simon Bridges and Speaker Trevor Mallard, asking for the leak inquiry to be called off. Moir discusses this in the RNZ Focus on Politics programme for 24 August – listen here: Focus on Politics for 24 August 2018.
Moir explains: “Sources are a journalist’s lifeline. And I would probably say even more so when it comes to Parliament and the Press Gallery. I mean every great story that comes out of this place is usually from some sort of a relationship between a Press Gallery reporter and a politician. The amount of information that you get “off the record” in this environment is huge. And that is all based on trust. So, the reality is that journalists go to the grave with that information. And you are just never going to make it in the game really if you don’t.”
Of course, Moir then unintentionally became part of Ross’ downfall, as the National Party’s PWC investigation report focused on the phone calls and texts that Ross had made to Moir in concluding that he was the likely leaker of Bridges’ travel expenditure details. In response to this allegation, Ross tweeted that his communications with Moir were because she was a “friend”.
Some have suggested journalists have relationships with MPs that go further than friendship. As Stuff political editor Tracy Watkins has said, the revelations about Ross’ sexual relationships “sent shock waves through Parliament. Labour MPs were just as rocked as their National counterparts. There was a feeling that a line in New Zealand politics had finally been crossed. And a fear that there may be no going back. Parliament is never short of gossip about affairs between MPs, between MPs and their staffers – and, yes, journalists as well” – see: The Jami-Lee Ross saga – dirty, ugly, nasty politics with no end in sight.
This raises the question of whether political journalists choose not to report on certain issues in order to protect their own privacy, or that of their colleagues. Ross, himself, has hinted at this in some of his statements.
Blogger Pete George thinks relationships need to be disclosed: “I think that the media should name the MP who is at the centre of this issue, but if they do they should also look at the wider issue of relationships and sex among MPs, journalists and staff. Journalists should disclose personal relationships if it relates to politicians they are reporting on and giving their opinions on. There are issues with journalists straying more and more into political activist roles, so the public has a right to know who may be influencing their opinions and their choice of stories and headlines…When they don’t want to go near the sex and relationship thing it suggests they could have secrets of their own they don’t want disclosed. This is not a good situation for the supposedly without favour fearless fourth estate to be in.”
The media’s fraught use of anonymous sources
The media quite rightly relies on anonymous sources to carry out its investigations into issues that are in the public interest. Leaks are made to journalists, and “off the record” briefings are important in establishing important stories about politics and power. A number of the stories published about the Jami-Lee Ross scandal have relied on secret sources. Most notable, were Melanie Reid’s Newsroom story with the allegations about Ross’ treatment of women, and the RNZ Checkpoint broadcast of details about the abusive text sent to him by the National MP he allegedly had an affair with.
The use of such sources has helped the public understand what’s been going on behind the scenes. But that doesn’t mean that it is without ethical problems and questions. One of the journalists with the most experience of this, and who has deeply considered the ethics, is Nicky Hager – see his useful piece: Dirty Politics, 2018.
Hager sees some parallels with the journalistic practices he covered in his 2014 book, where the media ends up running the agendas of political actors: “This is reminiscent of the way that Cameron Slater used to hand out scoops attacking opposition politicians to willing journalists (the scoops often having been quietly prepared in John Key’s office).”
But he warns against the media doing the bidding of various political players: “I believe media should not take politically motivated attacks (Slater called them ‘hits’) from political people and allow their identities and motives to remain hidden from the public. Otherwise the journalists are just being used.”
Ironically, perhaps, Cameron Slater has some similar views in terms of the various items published about the Ross scandal. He argues that senior National Party figures were involved in providing the material to the media that exposed allegations about Ross. Slater has three lengthy blog posts that go into detail about what he sees as the evidence that National orchestrated the leaks about their errant MP – see: Another hit job from David Fisher which I must correct and tell the truth that the National party fails to, Did Michelle Boag just tell a porkie on national television? and Farrar follows my lead and calls for a truce, pity is the party appears to want to destroy itself.
Of course, he’s not the only one who thinks that National had its fingerprints on the “hitjob” against Ross. Heather du Plessis-Allan explained the Newsroom story like this: “The party is in full attack-Jami-Lee mode. Why do you think at least four women have suddenly come forward accusing Ross of everything from bullying to ‘brutal sex’?”
Finally, for one of the best investigations into the media and political machinations behind the Jami-Lee Ross scandal, see Selwyn Manning’s article, National Affairs and the Public Interest.]]>
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Martin Boland, Senior Lecturer of Medicinal and Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Charles Darwin University
The chemical weapons convention (CWC) is one of the most successful arms control treaties in existence. It outlaws the production, stockpiling or research on offensive lethal chemical weapons.
Yet chemical weapons have recently featured in the news – such as the recent Novichok poisonings in the UK – and the convention is facing questions.
The chemical weapons convention is a legacy of the end of the cold war. The collapse of the Soviet Union reinvigorated the long-dormant chemical weapons control process. This culminated with most nations signing and ratifying the chemical weapons convention, which came into force in 1997.
Most nations accept that chemical weapons are an anachronism, with only limited military value against an enemy of similar technological sophistication.
But there has been a rise in recent years in the use of chemical weapon agents against civilian populations, as in the Syrian civil war), and as tools of assassination, such as in the murder of Kim Jong-nam and the attempted murder of former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter in Salisbury in the UK.
So are chemical weapons climbing out of the grave we thought we had consigned them to?
What is a chemical weapon?
It’s important to clear up a common misconception about the chemical weapons convention and how it handles lethal chemical agents.
Under the convention, the use of the pharmacological effects (what the chemical does to the body) of any chemical to achieve a military outcome (death or permanent disability) makes that a chemical weapon.
This means that novel agents, such as the Novichok (or A-series) chemicals alleged to have been used against the Skripals, are illegal, not because of their structure but due to the attempt to use them to kill.
This definition can create some complexities. If we take as a given that many chemicals are potentially lethal – it’s the dose that makes the poison – how do you regulate compounds that are likely to be used as weapons?
How should these be distinguished from those that could be fatal, but aren’t typically applied for ill-purpose? For example, the anticancer drug mustine – also known as nitrogen mustard – is a schedule 1 weapon under the chemical weapons convention (under the codename HN2).
Police action or short cut to new weapons?
Riot control agents are those such as pepper spray, 2-chlorobenzalmalononitrile (better known, slightly erroneously, as CS-gas). These compounds are designed to cause the victim discomfort. But the effects dissipate soon after the victim is removed from exposure – similar to if you get capsaicin in your eyes while cutting chillies, you can wash the compound away with lots of water or milk.
These agents are only lightly regulated under the chemical weapons convention. Their use is allowed as part of normal law enforcement, but prohibited in war.
Different to these, incapacitating agents are defined as those that cause the victim to lose consciousness, or otherwise become systemically incapacitated – but the effects of these are not reversible by removing exposure.
Examples include chemicals that cause massive sensory hallucinations and prevent the victim from recognising reality.
There is much debate about the ultimate safety of riot control agents, but in general they are seen as safe unless incorrectly used. On the other hand, a Russian incapacitating agent is believed to have caused many of the fatalities during the 2002 Moscow theatre siege.
So how can these agents be legal, while the agent used in Salisbury is immediately considered illegal? What is an appropriate level of chemical force that should be acceptable when applied to a person as part of civilian policing?
What level of research into, or stockpiling of, such compounds would suggest the goal is no longer to develop countermeasures, but is part of an offensive chemical weapons program?
The CWC was written to outlaw these things, but has its success only moved the goalposts? These are open questions that the review should address.
Responsibility of scientists
Questions about how responsible a scientist is for the use of their work probably go to Fitz Haber and beyond. The 1918 Nobel Prize winner is generally considered the father of modern chemical warfare for his suggestion that the Imperial German Army use chlorine, the first lethal chemical weapon of World War I.
Today there are several questions about how scientists should interact with the world, using their knowledge to educate the public through the media, while avoiding drawing attention to possible misuses of that knowledge (or allowing their messages to be manipulated to cause panic).
Is it a greater good for society for me to explain that nitrogen mustard (from the example above) treats cancer, than the risk that someone will now try to steal some mustine from the oncology clinic to misuse it?
There is also the problem of dual use technologies. These are techniques that can equally be used develop a new pharmaceutical, or could be applied to develop a new nerve agent.
How much regulation of day-to-day research and commerce is acceptable to prevent those who would do us harm having access to materials and knowledge?
In the 20 years since the ratification of the CWC, we have made discoveries and improved access to technologies that may make it easier to create a truly effective improvised chemical weapon.
The chemical weapons convention has almost reached the initial goal of the signatories, the elimination of chemical weapons. Now the convention needs to move with the times, to prevent backsliding from the prevailing culture that considers chemical weapons to be unspeakably barbaric.
The Gallows Bird is a historical trilogy I have coming out next year. There, we meet Mr Fingleston, a silk merchant and tailor.
The character of Mr Fingleston visited me in the early hours, over 20 years ago. I described him as an ivy bush of a man, small and messy with a moustache drooping below his chin.
The timing is important.
For most of my adult life I’ve been on a shadow journey to find my biological family. In 1983 after an overheard comment and some pre-internet sleuthing I found my mother. Shortly after she died in a fiery plane crash on her way to meet me.
From that point on I searched for my father. There were many wrong turns, false information, raised hopes and deep disappointments.
I found him, finally in 2017. Five years too late.
In finding my father, I discovered a new sister, a genealogist cousin and a very detailed family tree.
And yes, he has the same name as my invented character. Yes, he was a master tailor. And yes, he lived where my novel is set. Then I find I look just like my father. I share a skill set with one of my sisters and have the same passions as another. Our children echo one another.
It makes you wonder to what extent our behaviour is predicated on the long-ago past? On DNA and genetic determinism.
25 years ago, proponents of the Human Genome Project said DNA would change everything. It would lead to ‘a new understanding of what it means to be a human being.‘
“Genetics and the Sociology of Identity”, a social sciences publication, studies genetics’ penetration into social life. How we negotiate the space between self, others and institutions in light of DNA. They worry about genetic determinism. The idea that genes control your behaviour.
Reading the science (as a non-scientist) I am struck by how nervous the writers seem.
And so they should.
Because it’s stepping back in history. Way back. To Plato and Aristotle. To Essentialism and Determinism. To the idea that every entity has a predetermined, genetic set of essential attributes necessary to its identity.
That belief held sway through history all the way until Charles Darwin and Karl Marx changed the world by theorizing that external material conditions create identity.
This philosophy had to be if they were to end the inequities created by birth. (For men anyway. Women were still expected to behave in a gender deterministic way)
Nurture over nature.
Except DNA came along. Is DNA the elephant in the room of social sciences and social determinism?
Because DNA delivers a high degree of certainty about who we are. Race, ethnic origin, kinship, propensity to hereditary diseases and other traits.
But NZ law says otherwise. Under the Adoption Act 1955, I have no heredity rights. The act says I am ‘as if’ born to the people who adopted me.
I am a social experiment. My whole life It has been concomitant on me to play the part of the happy(ish) adoptee. To prove that social determinism is indeed a valid way to run society. While behind closed doors my behaviours and actions are still discussed as aberrations. A flaw in my genes.
It was not Karl Marx’s fault. It was my fault I did not fit the family deemed more socially acceptable than my unmarried birth mother.
Meanwhile, the Adoption Act 1955 remains firmly in place. Propped up by unthinking judges and social workers. And by successive governments.
Between 1955 and 1990 the government took over 103,000 children from their mothers. They did it in the name of social engineering. Not one of us has ever had our rights restored.
Yes, DNA has given me some freedom. But my files remain locked away, my legal right to my history is still denied.
The Adoption Act 1955 remains able to separate children from their parents.
Thanks to DNA, Plato’s idea of essential nature is again a determinant of identity. Science, medicine, insurance companies, employers, government departments, policing and childcare services all seek to ascribe status and identity using DNA.
Except in New Zealand legislation. which still believes nurture can cure nature.
And The Gallows Bird? Thank you for asking. It should be available in about six months. Send me an email if you’d like to join either my author newsletter or the Like a Stranger newsletter. hello@sadiesumnerbooks.comT
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Lindenmayer, Professor, The Fenner School of Environment and Society, Australian National University
Continued logging in Melbourne’s water catchments could reduce the city’s water supply by the equivalent of 600,000 people’s annual water use every year by 2050, according to our analysis.
We calculated water lost due to logging in the Thomson Catchment, which is the city’s largest and most important water supply catchment. Around 60% of Melbourne’s water is stored here.
Since the 1940s, 45% of the catchment’s ash forests (including mountain and alpine ash forest) have been logged. There are plans to log up to a further 17% of these forests under the VicForest’s existing logging plan.
Past logging in the ash forests has reduced the Thomson Catchment’s water yield, which is the amount of water that flows through the catchment, by 15,000 megalitres (a megalitre is a million litres) each year. This equates to around 9% of water yield from ash forests across the catchment.
By 2050, continued logging in these forests at the current rates could increase this loss to 35,000 megalitres each year, or 20% of water yield. This will be equal to the water use of around 600,000 people every year, based on estimated water use of 161 litres per person each day.
Thomson Catchment showing the extent of ash forest, with historic and planned logging (left) and annual rainfall distribution (right).DELWP, 2018; Xu and Hutchinson 2018; DSE 2007.
The city of Melbourne has some of the best quality water in the world. A key reason for this is that the city’s first water infrastructure planners closed many of the key water catchments to intensive human disturbance, such as logging.
But there also can be competition for water between different land uses in catchments that are not closed and open to logging. Indeed, it has long been known that logging can significantly reduce the amount of water produced from forests, especially thoseclose to Melbourne.
Research on forest hydrology shows that the amount of water yielded from ash forests is related to forest age. Catchments covered with old-growth ash forests yield almost twice the amount of water each year as those covered with young forests aged 25 years. This is because evapotranspiration, the process by which trees transpire water into the atmosphere as well as evaporation from the surrounding land surface, is higher in young forests compared with older forests.
Up to 200,000 trees per hectare germinate following logging or an intense fire which burns the whole stand. Intense competition between young trees results in rapid growth rates along with increased evapotranspiration. As the forest matures, the trees thin out, and after 200 years, an ash forest can have less than 50 trees per hectare. These older ash forests release more water back into the catchment.
With logging occurring every 60-120 years, large areas of ash forest are kept in a high evapotranspiration stage of growth, therefore releasing less water back into the catchment.
Perhaps the losses in water yield could be justified if the value of the timber and pulpwood produced from logging exceeded the value of water. However, previous research has shown that the water in these areas is 25.5 times more valuable than the timber and pulpwood from ash forests.
What can the Victorian government do?
The ash forests in the Thomson Catchment are logged primarily for paper manufacturing. Under the Forest (Wood Pulp Agreement) Act 1996, the Victorian government is bound to supply Australia’s largest pulp and paper mills at Maryvale, owned by the Nippon Paper Group, with at least 350,000 cubic metres of native forest logs each year. The Thomson Water Supply Catchment is allocated for logging under this Act.
If logging was stopped in the catchment, what is the alternative for these paper mills? The answer is to source wood from current plantations. In 2017, Victoria produced 3.9 million cubic metres of logs from plantations. This could supply the pulp and paper mills at Maryvale several times over.
A challenge facing Victoria’s forest industry is the loss of jobs. One major factor in this is out-of-state processing. Australia tends to import lower volumes of more processed and higher value wood products, including printing and writing paper. By contrast, higher volumes of less processed and lower value wood products, such as woodchips and unprocessed logs – largely from plantations, are exported.
Redirecting plantation sourced logs and woodchips from export markets to domestic processing can address some of these problems. In fact, detailed analysis suggests doing this would have an overall positive economic impact for Victoria.
Stopping logging in the Thomson Catchment and sourcing instead from well managed plantations could both boost water supply and create more jobs. Of course, some jobs would be lost for people who log from the catchment, but this would be more than compensated for by employment in the plantation processing sector.
The first Wood Pulp Agreement Act of 1936, which legislated supply of pulplogs from Victorian state forest to earlier paper manufacturers in Maryvale, featured a clause stating logging was to cease following the designation of the Thomson Catchment in 1967. This has clearly not occurred. In fact 63% of logging in the ash forests across the catchment has occurred since 1967.
The Thomson Catchment is the only one of Melbourne’s large water supply catchments open to logging. Given the critical importance of the Thomson Catchment, our work clearly indicates the Victorian government needs to cease logging and prioritise the supply of water to the people of Melbourne.
How digital media blur the border between Australia and China
/
RSS Feed
Share
Link
Embed
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tom Sear, PhD Candidate, UNSW Canberra Cyber, Australian Defence Force Academy, UNSW
In this series Hacking #auspol we explore whether covert foreign influence operates in Australia, and what we can do about it.
In September, the ABC website was blocked from being accessed inside China. The reason given was the ABC’s “aggressive” reporting on China. Prime Minister Scott Morrison responded by saying that:
China’s a sovereign country. They make decisions about what happens there, we make decisions about what happens here.
But things are a little more complex than that, particularly when it comes to news published on Chinese social media platforms. Apps like WeChat (known as Weixin 微信 in China) are widely used in Australia by the Chinese diaspora (people of Chinese descent now living in countries other than China).
Social media platforms like WeChat are subject to controls on what they may publish within China, but it’s unclear whether similar controls are placed on content published outside China. Tencent – the company that operates WeChat – wants to expand the adoption and use of its Official Account platform internationally. Some researchers suggest WeChat operates a “one app, two systems” model, with one policy operating in China and another internationally.
As part of our ongoing research, we present some initial findings from an analysis of news targeted at Chinese-language audiences in Australia. Over 18 months we used digital tools to capture news stories in both Australian-based WeChat Official Account news channels, and SBS Mandarin digital news channels. We then compared their content to see if news disseminated via WeChat could be subject to influence by the Chinese government.
The Special Broadcasting Service (SBS) makes news available to Australia’s Mandarin-speaking population via in-language content that appears on TV, radio and online. While SBS is funded by the Australian government, it operates with editorial independence.
WeChat is an all-in-one social media platform that combines services such as those offered by WhatsApp, Facebook, Uber and Apple Pay. It also acts as a news service via numerous WeChat Official Accounts (also called Public Accounts). These accounts allow government agencies, business corporations, and social organisations to post and distribute news stories to subscribers. WeChat users registered outside China are estimated at 100-150 million.
Our content analysis focused on the three most prominent “Official Account” WeChat news providers publishing Mandarin-language news in Australia: Sydney Today, ABC Media and We Sydney. It’s hard to verify exact subscriber numbers for these accounts, but they are estimated to each have more than 100,000 subscribers.
To understand the differences in the ways each platform prioritises content, we compared the stories published on the WeChat channels with the stories published on SBS Mandarin.
What the data show
Data were collected between 1 January 2016 and 1 August 2017. This timeframe includes two Federal government budget speeches, and the 2016 double dissolution election. Given the amount of data, we used a common analytic technique called topic modeling to analyse the content, which categorises stories according to theme.
We found that coverage of terrorism, and crime and justice matters increased on both WeChat and SBS during the data collection period. But when it came to stories about China, the coverage was markedly different. SBS paid far more attention to Chinese politics and Chinese foreign affairs than WeChat accounts – and that disparity has intensified since February 2017.
Stories related to terror attacks and criminal cases. Shaded bands are confidence intervals, which denote the range of possible variance on either side of the line.Author providedStories related to Chinese politics and foreign relations. Shaded bands are confidence intervals, which denote the range of possible variance on either side of the line.Author provided
Over the total time period SBS dedicated 67 out of 2,349 articles to Chinese politics and foreign relations, which is equivalent to 2.85% of the SBS output. Meanwhile, WeChat channels dedicated 37 out of 13,669 articles to those topics, which is equivalent to 0.26% of the output of those channels.
More tellingly, none of the WeChat channels has published a single article on Chinese politics and foreign affairs from March 2017 until the end of the collection period. This was around the time new measures were ramped up to enhance control of WeChat content in the lead up to Qingdao Summit, andahead of the 19th Party Congress. In October 2017, the Chinese government introduced new regulations that made Public Account and group chat account holders responsible for what is said by other users on their account pages (this included Official Accounts).
Even before the Sydney based WeChat channels stopped covering Chinese politics, of the 37 articles on this topic, 32 had similar content to news reports from China’s domestic news agencies, which tend to reflect the position of the Chinese government.
Comparative findings suggest that the differing content on WeChat and SBS could have markedly different effects on readers. For instance, SBS Mandarin content might serve to give readers a sense of informed civic inclusion and democratic participation in Australian society. On the other hand, the WeChat content might be more likely to emphasise stronger cultural ties to the homeland by creating “distraction and diversion” from sensitive political topics. The near absence of political coverage focuses the attention of WeChat readers on celebrity gossip and other entertainment topics rather than the politics of the People’s Republic of China.
This practice has been described as a form of “porous censorship”. While readers could seek out information on China from other sources, it takes time and effort to do so. The “flooding” of the daily news feed is effectively more of a tax than a ban on information – especially considering WeChat is a primary source of information for many Chinese living in Australia.
Even without specific coordination, WeChat news channels may advance strategic interests of the Chinese government in this way, signalling a new mechanism of foreign influence.
In its 2017-18 Annual Report, the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) expressed concerns about foreign powers secretly manipulating the opinions of Australians to further their own aims. The report specifically suggested that ethnic and religious communities have “been the subject of interference operations designed to diminish their criticism of foreign governments.”
The Chinese government has a keen interest in monitoring its growing diaspora populations, and that includes the content of diaspora media channels, including social media channels.
Influence campaigns on social media may take many forms. The most familiar is the kind of direct manipulation we’ve seen with Russian campaigns that aim to sow division among a foreign population. A less direct route is to ensure that legitimate news sources only report news that serve the strategic objectives of the government in question. Our study focuses on the second kind.
It’s important to remember that while idea of “Chineseness” suggests a homogenous identity, ethnicity and culture, in reality this group is made up of different experiences, views and political allegiances. Some people in this group may not have any particular affiliation with China. Nevertheless, they are part of the group the Chinese government has suggested is within its sphere of influence.
A key component of the diaspora is students. There may be between 150,000-200,000 thousandstudents from China in the Australian education system. Like the diaspora as a whole, the experiences of Chinese students in Australia are complex and not homogeneous.
University of Melbourne researcher Fran Martin argues for a more nuanced approach to Chinese international students lived experience of social media in Australia, pointing out that there is no singular experience of free speech in the Chinese student diaspora. And Xinyu Zhao, a PhD student at Deakin, argues that Chinese students are as clever about avoiding oversight of senior relatives in their use of social media as any other young person.
Controls on WeChat content
Social media have led to a proliferation of unofficial spaces of communication online, which has created challenges for the Chinese government’s efforts to regulate the content of online communications.
Social media companies in China are required to censor posts which the Chinese government identifies as “illegal”, and self-censorship among users is encouraged. Examples of illegal content includes phrasessuch as “Tiananmen June 4”, “free Tibet” and “Falun Gong”. The flow on effect of regulation and influence on these platforms when they are used outside China’s borders is more complex.
Certainly the Chinese Government does seek to influence the diaspora. There is a dedicated Chinese government department, the United Front Work Department (UFWD), for “overseas Chinese work”. It seeks to both “guide” ethnic Chinese, and conduct influence operations targeted at foreign actors and states that further the objectives of the Chinese government. Chinese President Xi Jinping has described the UFWD’s work as the Chinese government’s “magic weapons”.
The Australian Defence Department is concerned enough about the possibility of Chinese censorship and surveillance being enabled via WeChat that it has banned the app from work phones, pending security investigation.
There is a long history of countries attempting to impact the political discourse in other nations. This might involve various forms of lobbying and support for political parties and politicians, support of social and political movements, or the state-supported diffusion of cultural objects and information.
But not all state broadcasters are instruments of government propaganda or subject to government editorial control. Few in the West would decry the BBC and its various foreign language services, which have editorial independence from the British government. Indeed, the BBC often reports critically on British government activities.
WeChat is becoming an increasingly important media forum for Australian elections, with politicans beginning to use it to reach Chinese communities online. Some suggest that WeChat was important during the 2016 federal election in Victorian communities. And in 2017 Shadow Treasurer Chris Bowen was the first Australian politician to use WeChat Live.
Digital diasporas are accessible for potential foreign influence, and Chinese language social media in Australia are increasingly a focus for local political parties. This dynamic is changing the way we chat about politics.
How digital media blurs the border between Australia and China
/
RSS Feed
Share
Link
Embed
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tom Sear, PhD Candidate, UNSW Canberra Cyber, Australian Defence Force Academy, UNSW
In this series Hacking #auspol we explore whether covert foreign influence operates in Australia, and what we can do about it.
In September, the ABC website was blocked from being accessed inside China. The reason given was the ABC’s “aggressive” reporting on China. Prime Minister Scott Morrison responded by saying that:
China’s a sovereign country. They make decisions about what happens there, we make decisions about what happens here.
But things are a little more complex than that, particularly when it comes to news published on Chinese social media platforms. Apps like WeChat (known as Weixin 微信 in China) are widely used in Australia by the Chinese diaspora (people of Chinese descent now living in countries other than China).
Social media platforms like WeChat are subject to controls on what they may publish within China, but it’s unclear whether similar controls are placed on content published outside China. Tencent – the company that operates WeChat – wants to expand the adoption and use of its Official Account platform internationally. Some researchers suggest WeChat operates a “one app, two systems” model, with one policy operating in China and another internationally.
As part of our ongoing research, we present some initial findings from an analysis of news targeted at Chinese-language audiences in Australia. Over 18 months we used digital tools to capture news stories in both Australian-based WeChat Official Account news channels, and SBS Mandarin digital news channels. We then compared their content to see if news disseminated via WeChat could be subject to influence by the Chinese government.
The Special Broadcasting Service (SBS) makes news available to Australia’s Mandarin-speaking population via in-language content that appears on TV, radio and online. While SBS is funded by the Australian government, it operates with editorial independence.
WeChat is an all-in-one social media platform that combines services such as those offered by WhatsApp, Facebook, Uber and Apple Pay. It also acts as a news service via numerous WeChat Official Accounts (also called Public Accounts). These accounts allow government agencies, business corporations, and social organisations to post and distribute news stories to subscribers. WeChat users registered outside China are estimated at 100-150 million.
Our content analysis focused on the three most prominent “Official Account” WeChat news providers publishing Mandarin-language news in Australia: Sydney Today, ABC Media and We Sydney. It’s hard to verify exact subscriber numbers for these accounts, but they are estimated to each have more than 100,000 subscribers.
To understand the differences in the ways each platform prioritises content, we compared the stories published on the WeChat channels with the stories published on SBS Mandarin.
What the data show
Data were collected between 1 January 2016 and 1 August 2017. This timeframe includes two Federal government budget speeches, and the 2016 double dissolution election. Given the amount of data, we used a common analytic technique called topic modeling to analyse the content, which categorises stories according to theme.
We found that coverage of terrorism, and crime and justice matters increased on both WeChat and SBS during the data collection period. But when it came to stories about China, the coverage was markedly different. SBS paid far more attention to Chinese politics and Chinese foreign affairs than WeChat accounts – and that disparity has intensified since February 2017.
Stories related to terror attacks and criminal cases. Shaded bands are confidence intervals, which denote the range of possible variance on either side of the line.Author providedStories related to Chinese politics and foreign relations. Shaded bands are confidence intervals, which denote the range of possible variance on either side of the line.Author provided
Over the total time period SBS dedicated 67 out of 2,349 articles to Chinese politics and foreign relations, which is equivalent to 2.85% of the SBS output. Meanwhile, WeChat channels dedicated 37 out of 13,669 articles to those topics, which is equivalent to 0.26% of the output of those channels.
More tellingly, none of the WeChat channels has published a single article on Chinese politics and foreign affairs from March 2017 until the end of the collection period. This was around the time new measures were ramped up to enhance control of WeChat content in the lead up to Qingdao Summit, andahead of the 19th Party Congress. In October 2017, the Chinese government introduced new regulations that made Public Account and group chat account holders responsible for what is said by other users on their account pages (this included Official Accounts).
Even before the Sydney based WeChat channels stopped covering Chinese politics, of the 37 articles on this topic, 32 had similar content to news reports from China’s domestic news agencies, which tend to reflect the position of the Chinese government.
Comparative findings suggest that the differing content on WeChat and SBS could have markedly different effects on readers. For instance, SBS Mandarin content might serve to give readers a sense of informed civic inclusion and democratic participation in Australian society. On the other hand, the WeChat content might be more likely to emphasise stronger cultural ties to the homeland by creating “distraction and diversion” from sensitive political topics. The near absence of political coverage focuses the attention of WeChat readers on celebrity gossip and other entertainment topics rather than the politics of the People’s Republic of China.
This practice has been described as a form of “porous censorship”. While readers could seek out information on China from other sources, it takes time and effort to do so. The “flooding” of the daily news feed is effectively more of a tax than a ban on information – especially considering WeChat is a primary source of information for many Chinese living in Australia.
Even without specific coordination, WeChat news channels may advance strategic interests of the Chinese government in this way, signalling a new mechanism of foreign influence.
In its 2017-18 Annual Report, the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) expressed concerns about foreign powers secretly manipulating the opinions of Australians to further their own aims. The report specifically suggested that ethnic and religious communities have “been the subject of interference operations designed to diminish their criticism of foreign governments.”
The Chinese government has a keen interest in monitoring its growing diaspora populations, and that includes the content of diaspora media channels, including social media channels.
Influence campaigns on social media may take many forms. The most familiar is the kind of direct manipulation we’ve seen with Russian campaigns that aim to sow division among a foreign population. A less direct route is to ensure that legitimate news sources only report news that serve the strategic objectives of the government in question. Our study focuses on the second kind.
It’s important to remember that while idea of “Chineseness” suggests a homogenous identity, ethnicity and culture, in reality this group is made up of different experiences, views and political allegiances. Some people in this group may not have any particular affiliation with China. Nevertheless, they are part of the group the Chinese government has suggested is within its sphere of influence.
A key component of the diaspora is students. There may be between 150,000-200,000 thousandstudents from China in the Australian education system. Like the diaspora as a whole, the experiences of Chinese students in Australia are complex and not homogeneous.
University of Melbourne researcher Fran Martin argues for a more nuanced approach to Chinese international students lived experience of social media in Australia, pointing out that there is no singular experience of free speech in the Chinese student diaspora. And Xinyu Zhao, a PhD student at Deakin, argues that Chinese students are as clever about avoiding oversight of senior relatives in their use of social media as any other young person.
Controls on WeChat content
Social media has meant the proliferation of unofficial spaces of communication online, which has created challenges for the Chinese government’s efforts to regulate the content of online communications.
Social media companies in China are required to censor posts which the Chinese government identifies as “illegal”, and self-censorship among users is encouraged. Examples of illegal content includes phrasessuch as “Tiananmen June 4”, “free Tibet” and “Falun Gong”. The flow on effect of regulation and influence on these platforms when they are used outside China’s borders is more complex.
Certainly the Chinese Government does seek to influence the diaspora. There is a dedicated Chinese government department, the United Front Work Department (UFWD), for “overseas Chinese work”. It seeks to both “guide” ethnic Chinese, and conduct influence operations targeted at foreign actors and states that further the objectives of the Chinese government. Chinese President Xi Jinping has described the UFWD’s work as the Chinese government’s “magic weapons”.
The Australian Defence Department is concerned enough about the possibility of Chinese censorship and surveillance being enabled via WeChat that it has banned the app from work phones, pending security investigation.
There is a long history of countries attempting to impact the political discourse in other nations. This might involve various forms of lobbying and support for political parties and politicians, support of social and political movements, or the state-supported diffusion of cultural objects and information.
But not all state broadcasters are instruments of government propaganda or subject to government editorial control. Few in the West would decry the BBC and its various foreign language services, which have editorial independence from the British government. Indeed, the BBC often reports critically on British government activities.
WeChat is becoming an increasingly important media forum for Australian elections, with politicans beginning to use it to reach Chinese communities online. Some suggest that WeChat was important during the 2016 federal election in Victorian communities. And in 2017 Shadow Treasurer Chris Bowen was the first Australian politician to use WeChat Live.
Digital diasporas are accessible for potential foreign influence, and Chinese language social media in Australia are increasingly a focus for local political parties. This dynamic is changing the way we chat about politics.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ken Harvey, Associate Professor, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University
It seemed like a good idea at the time. But a few drinks with friends turned into a few more, and the next morning you’re not feeling so crash hot. Is there anything you can take to help?
Over recent years, a number of products have emerged that claim to prevent or cure hangovers if consumed while drinking and/or the morning after. Five products are now marketed in Australia: Rapid Recovery, Recoverthol, Rejoove, Hydrodol and Body Armour.
These products contain various combinations of:
Vitamins – B1 (thiamine), B2 (riboflavin), B3 (nicotinamide), B5 (calcium pantothenate), B6 (pyridoxine), B12 (cyanocobalamin) and C (ascorbic acid),
The smallest number of ingredients in a product was three, the average 15 and the most 33. Clearly, there is little consensus on what ingredients work.
There is a small published post-marketing evaluation of one of the Australian hangover products. This product contained three vitamins and one amino acid. This study also had many limitations.
In short, we found no evidence from robust clinical trials that supplementation with vitamins and amino acids prevents or reduces hangover symptoms.
Enjoying a few drinks can come with a price the next day.Kelsey Knight/Unsplash
What about herbs?
Silybum marianum (milk thistle) has been used traditionally for liver problems. However, there is no evidence supporting these traditional claims.
Pueraria lobata (kudzu root)inhibits aldehyde dehydrogenase, the enzyme that breaks down acetaldehyde. This increases toxic acetaldehyde levels that are thought to be largely responsible for hangovers; the opposite of what a hangover remedy should do.
This action is the same as produced by disulfiram (Antabuse®), a medication used to treat alcohol dependence by producing severe hangover symptoms immediately after alcohol is consumed (aversion therapy).
Researchers have suggested medicines containing kudzu root should have similar warnings to those provided for disulfiram. The same paper was also concerned that the use of kudzu root in hangover remedies may increase the risk of acetaldehyde-related cancer of the oesophagus, oropharynx, and nasal passages in genetically predisposed individuals, especially if combined with chronic alcohol and smoking habits.
Hovenia dulcis (Japanese raisin tree) was used in one randomised controlled trial that explored the effect of this ingredient in alleviating hangover symptoms in 26 males. The researchers evaluated 14 hangover symptoms and found those who took a standardised preparation of Hovenia dulcis were less likely to report headaches, dizziness and weakness than those who took the placebo.
But this study has a number of limitations. It used a small sample size; it included no women participants; it tested only one type of alcohol, Korean Soju; and the study period was short, just 12 hours. These results need replication with a larger number of mixed sex and age subjects and a variety of alcohol preparations.
In addition, the two Australian products that contain Hovenia dulcis do not appear to contain the standardised extract used in the above small trial and the amount varies: Rejoove) 75 mg (2 tablets recommended); (Body Armour 30 mg/mL (100 ml recommended).
Sorry folks, there’s still no proven cure for a hangover – though it can, of course, be prevented by drinking in moderation or avoiding alcohol.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Steven Tingay, John Curtin Distinguished Professor (Radio Astronomy), Curtin University
This article is part of our occasional long read series Zoom Out, where authors explore key ideas in science and technology in the broader context of society and humanity.
As an astrophysicist, probably the most common question I get asked is: “Are we alone in the universe and do aliens exist?”
There is no doubt: people love to think and talk about aliens. Hence, stories about the search for extraterrestrial intelligence get picked up and reported with gusto in the media.
But what really lies at the heart of this complicated and popular topic is evidence – the nature of any evidence of alien life, how we view and respect this evidence, and how this is communicated to the public.
Nowhere is this more important than in the coverage of scientific studies of a mystery object – ‘Oumuamua – that was recently discovered passing through our Solar System. For example, two publications in two respected peer-reviewed journals prompted very different reactions.
Hello ‘Oumuamua
‘Oumuamua, meaning scout or messenger in Hawaiian, is the name given to the first detected interstellar object to visit our Solar System. On discovery last year, ‘Oumuamua was classified as a comet, but this was later withdrawn when no evidence for cometary activity was detected.
‘Oumuamua was quickly found to have an orbit that does not belong to our Solar System. It has an origin elsewhere in our galaxy, and a trajectory that saw it traverse the inner Solar System over the course of a few months.
It passed close to the Sun and to Earth, and was found to have an unusual geometry, about 200 metres long and some 35 metres wide, rotating every seven hours.
Observations with ESO’s Very Large Telescope and others have shown that this unique object is dark, reddish in colour, and highly elongated. Credit: ESO.
The discovery of ‘Oumuamua generated a lot of attention in the scientific community, and in the media. Given its unusual geometry and its origin outside the Solar System, questions were soon asked as to whether ‘Oumuamua could be a spacecraft.
Observations were made with radio telescopes to search for any direct evidence of transmissions indicating intelligent life, including by a team led by me using an Australian telescope (the Murchison Widefield Array). We listened around FM radio frequencies, on the basis that any intelligent life on ‘Oumuamua may recognise FM frequencies popular on Earth.
No direct evidence of intelligent life was ever found in these searches.
Data from the Murchison Widefield Array, showing no detection of radio signals from ‘Oumuamua in the frequency range 70-105MHz (containing the FM band).Steven Tingay and co-authors, Author provided
More hard data on ‘Oumuamua
Extensive and impressive observations with a range of telescopes, including the Hubble Space Telescope, were made to accurately determine ‘Oumuamua’s trajectory. Results of the study, by a team of astronomers led by the European Space Agency’s Marco Micheli, were published in Nature in June.
These very careful observations showed that ‘Oumuamua accelerated as it left the Solar System, revealing the existence of “non-gravitational forces”. This means that the trajectory of the object could not be explained just by the gravity of the Sun and other major objects in our Solar System.
A range of possible explanations for the acceleration exist. One is that heated gas escaping from ‘Oumuamua (outgassing) could produce a force that caused the observed acceleration. This is commonly seen in normal comets.
But ‘Oumuamua still shows no evidence for cometary activity. Micheli’s team ran through six possible explanations and concluded that outgassing is the most likely option, even though there is no direct evidence that this is the case.
They showed that the acceleration of ‘Oumuamua is unusual, but within the bounds of what has been seen previously for Solar System comets.
One of the explanations discounted by the study team is that ‘Oumuamua was accelerated by radiation pressure from our Sun. Radiation from the Sun can push objects away from it.
But they concluded that this explanation is not preferred, because it means that the density of ‘Oumuamua would have to be very low. An object needs have a large surface area and low mass (low density) to be accelerated by radiation pressure.
Could it be aliens?
Another study by postdoctoral researcher Shmuel Bialy and distinguished astronomer Avi Loeb, from Harvard University, took a different approach.
Details of the study have just been published in November’s The Astrophysical Journal Letters, but were available online earlier.
The authors chose to assume solar radiation pressure to be the cause of the acceleration, and then determined the properties of ‘Oumuamua required to make this work. They require an object with thickness less than 1mm, an areal mass density of 1 to 2 grams per square centimetre, and a large area.
It is unlikely that nature would produce such an extreme geometry. The authors quickly mention this, before moving to a discussion that, under the assumption that solar radiation is the cause for the acceleration, ‘Oumuamua is artificial – that means the product of an alien civilisation.
The properties the authors derive under their assumptions are similar to those of solar sails being designed and built by humans as a possible way to travel interstellar distances.
Bialy and Loeb spend half of their article discussion section on the idea that ‘Oumuamua could be a defunct or active solar sail belonging to an alien civilisation.
Bialy and Loeb did not issue a press release about their study, but the media picked up the paper once it was accepted and available online, prior to this week’s journal publication.
(This is something that happened to me in 2012, leading to my published non-detection of aliens being run on the front page of the BBC news website.)
This is pretty normal. A lot of the media jump to aliens in the reporting of space and astronomy, even when the original reported studies have never mentioned aliens. Recent reporting of Fast Radio Bursts (FRBs) is an example.
What surprised me was the reaction of some of my colleagues to Bialy and Loeb’s paper. On social media, there have been some pretty personal attacks by scientists – on Loeb in particular – for being in the media for this work.
Both new studies lay out their assumptions, cite substantial evidence, and undertake rigorous calculations. Both were accepted by top-quality journals after independent peer review.
Both finish with bottom lines that the studies of ‘Oumuamua are inconclusive and we will need to examine more such objects that come through the Solar System in the future.
Both sets of authors also come up with different perspectives and motivate different questions. But Loeb has ended up in the media, talking about his paper, and is being panned by some colleagues for it.
Since the pre-journal paper was picked up he told me he has been swamped by media interest.
I use the discussions with the media as a platform for highlighting the standard scientific methodology: an anomaly is observed in data, the standard explanation fails to explain it, and so an alternative interpretation is proposed.
I encourage anyone with a better explanation to write a paper about it and publish it. Wrong interpretations can be ruled out when more data will be released on ‘Oumuamua or other members of its population in the future.
As for the negative reactions he has received, he referred to an article he recently published where he paraphrased another scientist known for his once-controversial theories.
As Galileo reasoned after looking through his telescope, “in the sciences, the authority of a thousand is not worth as much as the humble reasoning of a single individual”.
Let’s talk about evidence
Given my work on observations of ‘Oumuamua, a few journalists have contacted me for comment.
These have been great opportunities to discuss in depth with journalists the nature of evidence, the difference between something being consistent with observations and direct evidence for a conclusion, and the need for evidence to be commensurate with the impact of a claim.
If aliens are claimed, direct and robust evidence is required – not a conclusion based on a few observations that are difficult to explain, plus a bunch of assumptions.
But no scientist has claimed ‘Oumuamua is alien in this discussion – they have just raised questions and explored answers.
There is no point in shying away from a proper discussion on the search for extraterrestrial intelligence, or in being personally critical of colleagues.
Scientists should take every opportunity to engage with the public and the media on the topic, given the public’s interest and the media’s willingness to report.
It is interesting, fun, and scientific, and a great opportunity to discuss the scientific method and science in an engaging manner. The media reporting of ‘Oumuamua shows that (aside from a few headlines), the content of reports is generally pretty good and responsible.
Whatever ‘Oumuamua is (almost certainly not made by aliens, in my view), it is a fascinating object and presents lots of interesting scientific questions that will trigger further studies and observations.
We will never see ‘Oumuamua again, and we may never know exactly what it is. But seeing ‘Oumuamua in the news is likely to inspire some kids to take up a career in science.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ron Levy, Associate professor, Australian National University
A recent report suggested Australia’s head of state, Queen Elizabeth, wants Australia to “get on with” moving towards becoming a republic rather than holding a morbid “death watch”. The Queen is a sprightly 92 years of age, while her husband Prince Philip, 97, is in somewhat poorer health.
Federal Labor has announced its preference for not one, but two, new public votes on Australia becoming a republic, should the party win the next election. It would act in its first term in office. A republic is a system of government where the people, through their elected representatives, hold ultimate power.
The idea is to have an initial plebiscite to gauge Australians’ preferences – that is generally whether they are for or against dropping the British monarchy from our constitutional system. Then, if the answer to the first question is “yes”, a Labor government would hold another public vote, this time a binding constitutional referendum. If the answer were “no”, then no second vote would be necessary. Labor has not indicated specifics, such as how long after the first vote a second vote would be held.
The Queen is generally regarded as Australia’s head of state, although some scholars suggest the Governor-General, as the Queen’s representative in Australia, is technically head of state.
Is Labor crazy to propose not one but two national votes? What about the cost – in both money and time? What could be the rationale? And is there another option?
The main problem Labor’s two-vote solution aims to solve is that even supporters of a republic might not agree on what kind of republic it should be. That helped scuttle the republic the last time around in 1999.
Polling data on the subject ebb and flow. For instance, an Essential poll from May indicated support of 48 per cent, up from 44 per cent in January. A recent Newspoll showed backing for a republic had fallen to 40 per cent. In 1999 support stood at about three-quarters of the population.
But monarchists argued in 1999 that the precise model put to the people – appointment of an Australian president by two-thirds of parliament – wasn’t the right one. Their posters warned: “This Republic: don’t risk it” and “If you want to vote for the President … Vote No to the Politicians’ Republic”.
These arguments played on Australians’ doubts about the value of replacing the monarchy with just another elitist institution. Many republicans voted to reject the republic. With the vote split on the republican side, Australia remained a monarchy, essentially by default.
The Queen attended the 100th anniversary of Armistice Day on Nov 11 at Westminster Abbey in London without her husband Prince Philip.EPA
Labor’s two-vote approach avoids this trap through what some call a “mandate referendum” (or “mandate plebiscite” if it’s not binding). The initial vote shows whether there is popular support for a reform. Once that’s decided in the affirmative, all that is left is to choose the most popular specific option for reform.
Mandate referendums have worked. For instance, in South Africa, to push through reforms ending apartheid, President F.W de Klerk first held a referendum. Defying the pundits’ cynical expectations, 68.7% of white South Africans voted for reform. Then the hard work of dismantling the old system could begin. The popular vote put wind in the sails of reform, and within a few years legal apartheid was gone.
Labor’s plan is somewhat different in that if the first vote is “yes”, then the next step is a binding referendum – not simply negotiations as occurred in South Africa. The reason is Australia’s constitution can be changed only if a referendum is carried, which requires a double majority – a majority of voters overall, and a majority of the states.
South Africa’s system of apartheid – separating the white and black populations – was ended by first securing public in-principle approval through a referendum.
So the idea of a mandate vote has some historical backing. (French President Charles de Gaulle’s 1961 referendum on Algerian independence from France is another example.)
However, there are two caveats. First, the cost of not one, but two, public votes is bound to be an issue. Yet, in my view, we should not begrudge the costs of democracy. For instance, though elections to parliament cost hundreds of millions, that is no reason to cut back on elections. Democracy is worth the cost.
That said, there may be cheaper alternatives. For example, the vote can be run as a “preferendum” – a referendum in which the voters rank a number of choices, much as we do in parliamentary elections. So, instead of two referendums, we could have just one in which every option – from the status quo to several republican models – is included. During vote counting, the least popular option would be eliminated, and preferences distributed, until a majority favoured just one. (Granted, this approach would take some amendments to the law of referendums in Australia.)
The second caveat is that there is an obvious problem with deliberation amid referendums. When we give consent – whether to a medical procedure or a constitutional reform – that consent has to be informed. Another prominent slogan of the 1999 referendum was “Don’t know – vote no”. This resonated with some voters who couldn’t tell whether a two-thirds-appointed or a directly elected president would be best. Many had little knowledge of constitutional pros and cons. And we saw, famously, something worse in the Brexit vote, which was marred by disinformation campaigns.
Fortunately, it isn’t too hard to regulate to avoid disinformation, and to teach the public more about constitutional issues. We just need to be creative. Beyond the traditional information booklet sent to voters, we can also employ interactive online tutorials, Q&A-style television specials to debate the models, and local town hall-style meetings. All these should run before each public vote.
And note how Labor’s proposed two-vote model might actually have some benefits for deliberation. Brexit, which after all was a mandate referendum, is telling. Once a first vote endorses reform, this can clarify the mind. Suddenly reform is no abstract matter. Now there is a movement for a second Brexit vote on the specifics of exiting the European Union.
Similarly, Labor’s two-vote model may seem cumbersome, but running two votes, separated by several months or even a year or two, might have benefits. It could allow voters to think hard and learn about constitutional details in the intervening time.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jagannath Adhikari, Adjunct Research Fellow, School of Design and the Built Environment, Curtin University
China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has ambitions to reshape the global economy by connecting more than 60 countries across Asia, Europe and Africa through trade and infrastructure projects. All told, it’s envisioned that nearly two-thirds of the world’s population will in some way be connected through BRI projects in the future. Some economists estimate BRI could increase global trade by 12%.
Despite these benefits, many questions have been raised about China’s motivations for the initiative, and whether Beijing can afford the US$1 trillion it has committed to infrastructure projects and its partners can afford the debt they are taking on. Some fear BRI could be a Trojan horse for global domination through debt traps.
We had to take a decision to get out of this debt trap.
Nepal takes the plunge
Despite fears over loans they can’t pay back, many small countries have accepted BRI as an alternative pathway to economic prosperity. Nepal is one of them – it entered into BRI last year with great enthusiasm.
Then in June of this year, Nepali Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli travelled to China to sign agreements worth US$2.4 billion on everything from infrastructure and energy projects to post-disaster reconstruction efforts.
The highlight of the deals is an audacious plan to build a railway line through the Himalayas. The line will link the Tibetan border town of Kerung with the Nepali capital, Kathmandu, and tourist towns of Pokhara and Lumbini (Buddha’s birthplace). The railway is being trumpeted as a potential windfall for Nepal’s tourism industry, with some 2.5 million Chinese tourists expected to visit annually.
If the rail line is developed as proposed, Nepal would also be well placed as a major transit hub for trade between China and its rival, India. One study estimates Nepal’s trade could be boosted by 35% to 45% when the rail line and other BRI infrastructure projects are completed.
The Chinese government has already conducted a pre-feasibility study on the Kerung-Kathmandu railway. It estimated the 72.25km line from the Chinese border to Kathmandu would cost US$2.25 billion. (Other estimates say the cost might be much more.) Nepali railway officials say an incredible 98.5% of the line would run through tunnels and across bridges due to the forbidding, mountainous terrain.
Is Nepal falling into a debt trap?
The main debate in Kathmandu now is whether this proposed rail line is technically and financially feasible, and if it is someday completed, whether it’s destined to become a white elephant – an expensive but vastly underutilised transportation line.
Then there is the question of cost. Besides Sri Lanka’s struggles to pay back the US$8 billion in total it now owes Chinese firms, many other countries are in similar straits.
Economists worry that Laos, which has seen its debt reach 68% of GDP, will have difficulty paying off its share of a US$6 billion rail line being built by China. And in the Maldives, the opposition claims the country is facing a looming debt trap, with US$92 million in annual payments due to China to pay off an airport upgrade and bridge project – roughly 10% of the entire budget.
In Nepal, the burning question has been whether the trans-Himalayan rail line and other infrastructure projects would be built with similar loans, or if the government would be able to secure grants from China instead.
Economists and planners in Nepal believe the rail line would be beneficial to the country’s development, particularly because it would end Nepal’s reliance on its traditional ally, India, for trade, fuel, food and medical supplies.
But given the debt problems in Sri Lanka and other countries, the previous Nepali government was initially hesitant to follow the same path in its dealings with China. Last year, it pulled the plug on a US$2.5 billion hydropower plant being built by a Chinese firm because of the lack of a competitive bidding process.
But since Oli returned to power in February, he has pursued much more Beijing-friendly policies. Last month, he reinstated the hydroelectric plant contract. And though Nepal is still seeking grants from China to build the trans-Himalayan railway, it’s unclear whether Oli will make this a precondition to starting construction.
China is offering soft loans to fund the railway instead. It also sweetened the deal in September by giving Nepal access to four of its seaports, which will give Kathmandu a viable trade alternative to Indian ports for the first time.
Thus far, Nepal and China have not come to an agreement on the funding question over the BRI projects and construction has yet to start.
Thinking beyond debt traps
Indian politicians and media outlets have been sceptical of China’s efforts to woo Nepal, raising fears that BRI is a masquerade for Chinese domination through debt-swap arrangements. But India’s real concern is losing its long-standing influence over Nepal, with which it enjoys a US$5 billion trade surplus.
For Nepal and other small countries in the region, however, the benefits that BRI can bring – namely improved infrastructure and greater connectivity to the world – do appear to be too good to pass up. After all, Nepal’s main concern is economic growth, development and improved livelihoods for its people.
For the country to truly benefit from these projects, it needs to enter into them cautiously, with the right funding plans in place. The government views these projects as potentially massive political victories and could overlook concerns over safety issues and financing when signing deals with China.
But Nepal must not fall into the same debt trap as Sri Lanka; otherwise, its aspirations of a brighter future could turn into a mirage.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lisa Featherstone, Associate Professor in Australian History and the History of Sexuality, The University of Queensland
Last week in the New South Wales Supreme Court, Justice David Davies sentenced a 45-year-old man found guilty of murdering his wife to a maximum of 36 years with a minimum non-parole period of 27 years. He had burned her alive in the family home in front of their two children, and had blocked her escape. The crime involved “gratuitous cruelty”, said Justice Davies, adding it was “difficult to imagine the horror” of the victim’s last minutes alive. Her remains were found between a bed and a window blocked by bars.
During sentencing submissions, the Crown argued the case was an example of the worst possible category of murder, and called for a life sentence. The man and his victim cannot be identified for legal reasons.
Yet, Justice Davies did not hand down the maximum penalty for murder, claiming the prisoner did not require a life sentence as his victim was not “unknown” to him:
This was a murder committed, not at large against a person unknown to the offender, by a person with no prior criminal record. I do not mean to suggest thereby that the murder of a spouse or a partner is any less serious than the murder of a stranger. However, it is a matter which is relevant to the issue of community protection.
Community protection is one of a number of issues judges weigh up when sentencing.
Justice Davies also said the offender would be “a relatively old man by the time of his release”, and would thus pose a lower risk to the community. He noted the sentence is in line with other sentences in New South Wales, where, since 1991, a life sentence had been given only in cases of murder of a child alongside the female partner. A spokesperson for the NSW director of public prosecutions told us a possible appeal is still being considered.
The outcome of this case was a conviction for murder, and judicial acknowledgement of the serious violence and cruelty associated the perpetrator’s murder of his wife. But the intimate relationship between the perpetrator and victim was used to characterise the crime as falling short of the worst examples of murder. These approaches are common in the criminal law’s long-standing response to family violence.
A hierarchy of violence
Examining social and legal attitudes towards family violence shows there is a hierarchy of violence, where gendered assaults on family members are routinely viewed as considerably less serious than assaults on strangers. This hierarchy has pragmatic social and legal implications influencing reporting, policing and prosecution of family violence, with those crimes often remaining hidden in the private sphere of the home.
In sentencing decisions, domestic violence offenders are seen as posing a lower threat to the community at large. This framing of such crimes erases the threats to family members from these offenders as being regarded as “community” risk. As a result, families are seen as not deserving the same level of protection as other citizens. Further, criminological research shows serious family violence perpetrators do have versatile offending histories.
The relative public invisibility of family violence has a long history in law and culture, with domestic violence and intimate partner violence regularly being treated as less serious than offences against strangers.
1950s: familial sexual offences
In Australia in the 1950s, the nuclear family was the core of social organisation. Little public comment was made on intra-familial sexual abuse: it was largely a crime hidden from public discourse outside the criminal law and social welfare settings. Yet, higher courts dealt quite frequently with sexual abuse within the family, particularly criminal assaults on children by fathers and stepfathers.
Defendants, lawyers, judges and witnesses regularly explained familial sexual assaults as different to other forms of sexual crime. Often, familial sexual offences were often not understood as violence at all, but constructed as a problem of household morals (a husband’s alcoholism, a wife’s neglect, a child’s behaviour).
Courts were told that children would soon forget about the assault, or that the victim had not been “harmed” by the abuse, especially in cases of non-penetrative sex. An assault might have been criminal, but this did not mean that it was necessarily understood as abusive.
Judges’ statements from the period show that familial sexual abuse was seen as less serious than if a man had offended outside his family. In one sentencing hearing in 1954, an offender (who had pleaded guilty to the indecent assault of his 14-year-old daughter) was given a more lenient sentence, as the judge explained he had not assaulted children other “than his own”. The familial tie in this case was seen to lessen the severity of the crime.
Similarly, violence on intimate partners could also be understood as less serious than that against strangers.
1970s: rape in marriage
Until the 1970s and 1980s in Australia, rape in marriage was not a crime: following British common law, a husband had specific immunity from being charged with raping his wife. Under legal interpretations established in the eighteenth century, it was assumed that a wife gave her consent to sex for the life of the marriage, whether or not she agreed to an individual act of intercourse.
Public anger is growing over entrenched attitudes to domestic violence.Glenn Hunt/AAP
By the 1970s, a husband’s immunity had come into question. In part, this was due to rising rates of separation and divorce, around the key question: in the case of a family separation, when exactly did his right to sex end? It was questioned too by feminist agitation, as women’s liberationists argued that a married woman should not have fewer rights to bodily autonomy than a single woman.
We might now see criminalising rape in marriage as a popular, sensible reform. Yet there was surprising opposition to it across Australia. Over and over, public debate about rape in marriage showed that in both the law and in Australian culture, the rape of a man’s own wife was seen as less serious than “real rape” by a stranger.
Family violence
In Australian law and culture, it remains difficult to imagine the family as a site of violence, harm and trauma. As these case studies show, the minimisation of family violence has a long history.
Sentencing in intimate partner homicides is part of an enduring legacy of treating family violence as less serious than other forms of violence. It’s time we broke with the past and reframed our hierarchies of violence.
Media representatives on standby at Fiji’s National Results Centre in Suva. Image: Eliki Drugunalevu/Wansolwara
By Wansolwara Staff
The Fiji general election campaign blackout period is expected to end at 6pm tomorrow after the final votes are cast by 7498 voters at 22 polling venues that had to close on election day as a result of bad weather.
Initially, heavy rain and strong winds made 23 polling venues inaccessible to voters, prompting the Fijian Elections Office and Electoral Commission to announce the adjournment of voting in those affected areas on November 14.
The closure of those 23 polling venues meant 7852 voters were unable to cast their ballots at the time.
As of yesterday, Supervisor of Elections Mohammed Saneem said there were now 7498 voters yet to cast their votes at 22 polling venues.
-Partners-
He said any breaches to the Electoral Act regarding the blackout period would be reported to the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption.
Saneem also clarified that the release of provisional results could potentially influence the decision of voters who have yet to cast their votes.
However, he said the release of the provisional results also showed how transparent the election process was.
Saneem also addressed concerns about voters whose day of worship fell on Saturday, the day set for the polling to commence for the adjourned polling venues, saying they were looking into this issue.
In response to a statement released by four political parties, namely Social Democratic Liberal Party, Fiji Labour Party, National Federation Party and United Fiji Party, claiming the tabulation process was not transparent as political party agents and candidates were not shown the documents from which the provisional results were posted on the National Results Tally, Saneem said those parties misunderstood the tabulation process.
“When they came for the (election) training we told them that tabulation on the provisional results would be done by mobile calls by our officials from the fields. In order to verify the process, we will be doing the data entry here and the parties can follow through from the field themselves,” Saneem said.
“The final result is where the parties are given the photocopies of the documents used for data entry.
“A printout is also given to them post-entry of the results. The provisional results, we’ve always said, would be phone call results entered directly into the system and updated as required by law so I think it is all a failure to understand the electoral process.”
Saneem said they could not speculate a specific time for the completion of counting but assured the public they “will do it as early as possible”.
This article is republished under the content sharing arrangement of USP’s Wansolwara student journalism newspaper and AUT’s Pacific Media Centre.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Helen Phillips, Senior Research Fellow, Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania
The Antarctic Circumpolar Current, or ACC, is the strongest ocean current on our planet. It extends from the sea surface to the bottom of the ocean, and encircles Antarctica.
Scientists deploying a vertical microstructure profiler (VMP-2000), which measures temperature, salinity, pressure and turbulence, from RV Investigator in the Antarctic Circumpolar Current, November 2018.Nathan Bindoff
It is vital for Earth’s health because it keeps Antarctica cool and frozen. It is also changing as the world’s climate warms. Scientists like us are studying the current to find out how it might affect the future of Antarctica’s ice sheets, and the world’s sea levels.
The ACC carries an estimated 165 million to 182 million cubic metres of water every second (a unit also called a “Sverdrup”) from west to east, more than 100 times the flow of all the rivers on Earth. It provides the main connection between the Indian, Pacific and Atlantic Oceans.
The tightest geographical constriction through which the current flows is Drake Passage, where only 800 km separates South America from Antarctica. While elsewhere the ACC appears to have a broad domain, it must also navigate steep undersea mountains that constrain its path and steer it north and south across the Southern Ocean.
A satellite view over Antarctica reveals a frozen continent surrounded by icy waters. Moving northward, away from Antarctica, the water temperatures rise slowly at first and then rapidly across a sharp gradient. It is the ACC that maintains this boundary.
Map of the ocean surface temperature as measured by satellites and analysed by the European Copernicus Marine Services. The sea ice extent around the antarctic continent for this day appears in light blue. The two black lines indicate the long term position of the southern and northern front of the Antarctic Circumpolar Current.
The ACC is created by the combined effects of strong westerly winds across the Southern Ocean, and the big change in surface temperatures between the Equator and the poles.
Ocean density increases as water gets colder and as it gets more salty. The warm, salty surface waters of the subtropics are much lighter than the cold, fresher waters close to Antarctica. We can imagine that the depth of constant density levels slopes up towards Antarctica.
The westerly winds make this slope steeper, and the ACC rides eastward along it, faster where the slope is steeper, and weaker where it’s flatter.
Fronts and bottom water
In the ACC there are sharp changes in water density known as fronts. The Subantarctic Front to the north and Polar Front further south are the two main fronts of the ACC (the black lines in the images). Both are known to split into two or three branches in some parts of the Southern Ocean, and merge together in other parts.
Scientists can figure out the density and speed of the current by measuring the ocean’s height, using altimeters. For instance, denser waters sit lower and lighter waters stand taller, and differences between the height of the sea surface give the speed of the current.
Map of how fast the waters around Antarctica are moving in an easterly direction. It is produced using 23 years of satellite altimetry (ocean height) observations as provided by the European Copernicus Marine Services.Author provided
The path of the ACC is a meandering one, because of the steering effect of the sea floor, and also because of instabilities in the current.
The ACC also plays a part in the meridional (or global) overturning circulation, which brings deep waters formed in the North Atlantic southward into the Southern Ocean. Once there it becomes known as Circumpolar Deep Water, and is carried around Antarctica by the ACC. It slowly rises toward the surface south of the Polar Front.
Once it surfaces, some of the water flows northward again and sinks north of the Subarctic Front. The remaining part flows toward Antarctica where it is transformed into the densest water in the ocean, sinking to the sea floor and flowing northward in the abyss as Antarctic Bottom Water. These pathways are the main way that the oceans absorb heat and carbon dioxide and sequester it in the deep ocean.
Waters south of the Polar Front are becoming fresher due to increased rainfall there, and waters to the north of the Polar Front are becoming saltier due to increased evaporation. These changes are caused by human activity, primarily through adding greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, and depletion of the ozone layer. The ozone hole is now recovering but greenhouse gases continue to rise globally.
Winds have strengthened by about 40% over the Southern Ocean over the past 40 years. Surprisingly, this has not translated into an increase in the strength of the ACC. Instead there has been an increase in eddies that move heat towards the pole, particularly in hotspots such as Drake Passage, Kerguelen Plateau, and between Tasmania and New Zealand.
We have observed much change already. The question now is how this increased transfer of heat across the ACC will impact the stability of the Antarctic ice sheet, and consequently the rate of global sea-level rise.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Daniel Liang-Dar Hwang, Postdoctoral Researcher, The University of Queensland
Do you drink freshly brewed coffee to start off your day? Or is a cup of English breakfast tea a better option for you?
Your choice could be a result of your genes, and how they affect your experience of bitter flavours.
Published today, our new study shows that the liklihood of a person being a coffee drinker or a tea drinker is linked with the presence or absence of key genes that shape how bitter flavours taste.
Tea and coffee generally taste bitter because they contain bitter-tasting substances such as caffeine. Quinine is another substance that contributes to the bitterness of coffee, and is also found in tonic water.
A recent study by my colleagues and I revealed bitter taste receptor genes that are responsible for the perception of caffeine, quinine and a man-made bitter substance propylthiouracil (PROP). This latter molecule has the same bitterness as Brussels sprouts (for those of us who can taste it).
We knew from previous research that inherited factors play a role in the amount of coffee and tea a person drinks a day, and that the ability to digest caffeine plays an important role in the people’s consumption of caffeinated beverages.
But we didn’t know whether genes for bitter taste perception were involved in determining consumption of bitter-tasting beverages. Previous studies with small sample sizes reported no or inconsistent relationships.
In this new study, we examined the consumption of coffee and tea in a large Biobank cohort of more than 400,000 men and women aged 37 to 73 in the UK for whom we also had data about their bitter receptor genes.
We employed a method commonly used in epidemiology called “Mendelian randomisation” to compare coffee and tea intake between people who did or did not carry particular bitter taste receptor genes.
Caffeine ‘super-tasters’
Compared to an average person, we showed that people who carried the bitter taste receptor for caffeine were more likely to be heavy coffee drinkers, meaning they drank more than four cups of coffee a day. Every extra copy of the bitter taste receptor gene lead to a 20% higher chance of being a heavy coffee drinker. These “super-tasters” of caffeine also drank less tea.
As caffeine contributes to not only the bitterness of coffee but also its perceived strength and texture, people who are better at detecting caffeine may find coffee more enjoyable and flavourful.
In contrast, people who carried the bitter taste receptors for quinine or PROP drank less coffee and more tea. Compared to an average person, every extra copy of the quinine or PROP receptor gene was linked with a 9% or 4% higher chance of being a heavy tea drinker (meaning they drank more than 5 cups of tea a day).
When there is a need for caffeine, “super-tasters” of quinine and PROP could choose tea over coffee because they tend to be more sensitive to overall bitterness.
Don’t blame your genes
In this study we demonstrated that genes for bitter taste perception are linked with the amount of coffee and tea we drink.
We’re interested to see if this finding could lead to future studies investigating whether “super-tasters” of bitter molecules are more or less prone to drink high and perhaps even unhealthy amounts of coffee and tea, or other drinks containing bitter molecules.
But we can’t blame everything on your genes. Even if as a child or right now you dislike the bitterness of coffee or tea, you may have noticed that your taste and dietary behaviour change over time as you grow.
So, even if you carried the “wrong” genes in terms of tasting bitter flavours, you could still learn to enjoy deliciously bitter-tasting foods and beverages.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By George Rennie, Lecturer in Politics, University of Melbourne
One of the more noticeable ad campaigns in the upcoming Victoria state election comes from a seemingly unlikely source. The Shooting Industry Foundation of Australia (SIFA) seeks to unwind Australia’s gun regulations, and knows that state governments are as good a place as any to start.
SIFA is a key part of Australia’s gun lobby, and uses the same tactics as its American equivalent, the National Rifle Association (NRA). Like the NRA, SIFA seeks to co-opt democratic norms to force change, even when it is directly at odds with overwhelming public opinion.
SIFA’s “Not Happy Dan” television ad.
The NRA playbook
A common misconception about the NRA is that it’s a “grass-roots” organisation. This implies that policy comes from its many paid members, and then works its way up to the leaders, who dutifully implement the will of their constituents.
It succeeds because it uses America’s representative political system to get its way. The NRA knows that policy is made through leverage: financially supported groups of elected officials can promote its policies, even when the wider public favours tighter gun control laws and Democrats make efforts to try to pass them.
As with the NRA, SIFA is also willing to use a range of tools to get its way. And, as with America, the power to make gun control laws in Australia rests with the states, as well as the federal government.
Yet, SIFA knows there is little support in Australia for weak gun control laws and adopting the NRA’s more aggressive stances would backfire. Australians would react very negatively to an overt push to relax gun laws.
So, the group instead claims it wants to “simplify, not weaken” gun laws (though its principle sources of funding do indeed want to “weaken” rather than merely “simplify” these statutes).
And, when SIFA launched advertisements ahead of the Victoria election, they were not designed to change people’s minds on gun control. Instead, the ad blitz has relied on the catchy, if derivative, slogan “Not Happy Dan”, made famous by the “Not Happy Jan” Yellow Pages ads. And its focus is not on gun control, but rather the performance and competency of the Labor Government.
The “Flick ‘Em” campaign in last year’s Queensland election, funded by SIFA.
Undoing hard-won change
On the eve of the Victoria election, Melbourne was shocked by an attack by a madman with a knife on Bourke Street in the CDB. But the city also remembers what happened when a madman went on a rampage with a gun 30 years ago, not far away on Hoddle Street. Seven people were killed and 19 wounded.
This memory, along with many others, sits in stark contrast to the conspicuous lack of gun deaths following the introduction of tighter gun laws in Australia in 1996. This fundamentally underpins much of the country’s resistance to weaker gun laws, and the gun lobby knows it.
America’s guns laws were weakened through a gradual process. This involved the patient undermining of the popular will through the passage of favourable laws in state legislatures – the blocking of others – and a continuing narrative that linked guns with freedom and gun control with an evil or “nanny” state.
The Australian gun lobby has learnt from this American example, and its methods emulate it. Expect to see more from SIFA in the lead-up to other elections in the future – Australia’s very own NRA.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Philippa Middleton, Associate Professor, South Australian Health & Medical Research Institute
Pregnant women who increase their intake of omega-3 long-chain fatty acids are less likely to have a premature birth, according to a Cochrane Review published today.
Most pregnancies last between 38 and 42 weeks, but if a baby arrives before 37 weeks, the chances of poorer health for that baby increase. One in 12 babies in Australia are born prematurely – before 37 weeks.
The earlier a baby is born, the higher the risk of poor health, and a small number of babies don’t survive.
Some premature babies have to spend the first weeks or months of life in special intensive care units in hospital. Premature babies can develop conditions that last a lifetime, including problems with their lungs, gut, and immune system, and vision and hearing loss.
Problems with behaviour and learning are also more common in children born too early. These consequences result in substantial costs to health care systems and to families of premature babies.
What did we find?
The Cochrane Review, led by our research team at the South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, included 70 randomised trials with nearly 20,000 women.
It found increasing the daily intake of omega-3 long-chain fatty acids during pregnancy:
lowers the risk of having a premature baby (birth before 37 weeks) by 11%, from 134 per 1,000 to 119 per 1,000 births
lowers the risk of having an early premature baby (birth before 34 weeks) by 42%, from 46 per 1,000 to 27 per 1,000 births.
Most of the trials were conducted in high-income countries (Australia, the United States, England, The Netherlands and Denmark) and included women who were both at normal and high risk for poor pregnancy outcomes. Most women studied were pregnant with one baby.
The trials generally used supplements containing the omega-3 long-chain fatty acids docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) and eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA).
Omega-3 supplements reduce the risk of an early premature birth from 46 per 1,000 to 21.Aditya Romansa
Risk of premature birth
The causes of premature birth are still not well understood. But we know that when a pregnant woman’s labour starts, powerful hormones called prostaglandins take hold.
In the 1980s, researchers noticed women in Denmark had shorter pregnancies and more premature babies than their neighbours in the Faroe Islands who eat much more fish. The omega-3 long-chain fatty acids in fish seemed to be responsible – they are thought to help prevent premature birth by reducing the potency of prostaglandins that can trigger early birth.
Our review shows supplementation with omega-3 long-chain fatty acids during pregnancy is one of the few safe and effective strategies capable of preventing early labour and premature birth.
Fish or supplements?
Most of the trials included in this Cochrane review that reported on premature birth used omega-3 supplements, rather than dietary changes.
It is difficult to get the amount of the omega-3 long-chain fatty acids used in the many trials from food alone, unless you regularly eat fatty fish such as salmon, sardines or mackerel. To get the recommended amount of DHA that was used in many trials, you would need to eat at least two to three 150g serves of salmon every week.
The advice for pregnant women expecting a single baby is to consume daily fish oil supplements containing at least 500mg of DHA, starting at 12 weeks of pregnancy. The supplement does not need to contain more than 1000mg DHA+EPA. There appears to be no extra benefit of higher doses.
This advice is currently being integrated into national clinical practice pregnancy guidelines.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Helen Phillips, Senior Research Fellow, Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania
The Antarctic Circumpolar Current, or ACC, is the strongest ocean current on our planet. It extends from the sea surface to the bottom of the ocean, and encircles Antarctica.
Scientists deploying a vertical microstructure profiler (VMP-2000), which measures XXXXXX, from RV Investigator in the Antarctic Circumpolar Current, November 2018.Nathan Bindoff
It is vital for Earth’s health because it keeps Antarctica cool and frozen. It is also changing as the world’s climate warms. Scientists like us are studying the current to find out how it might affect the future of Antarctica’s ice sheets, and the world’s sea levels.
The ACC carries an estimated 165 million to 182 million cubic metres of water every second (a unit also called a “Sverdrup”) from west to east, more than 100 times the flow of all the rivers on Earth. It provides the main connection between the Indian, Pacific and Atlantic Oceans.
The tightest geographical constriction through which the current flows is Drake Passage, where only 800 km separates South America from Antarctica. While elsewhere the ACC appears to have a broad domain, it must also navigate steep undersea mountains that constrain its path and steer it north and south across the Southern Ocean.
A satellite view over Antarctica reveals a frozen continent surrounded by icy waters. Moving northward, away from Antarctica, the water temperatures rise slowly at first and then rapidly across a sharp gradient. It is the ACC that maintains this boundary.
Map of the ocean surface temperature as measured by satellites and analysed by the European Copernicus Marine Services. The sea ice extent around the antarctic continent for this day appears in light blue. The two black lines indicate the long term position of the southern and northern front of the Antarctic Circumpolar Current.
The ACC is created by the combined effects of strong westerly winds across the Southern Ocean, and the big change in surface temperatures between the Equator and the poles.
Ocean density increases as water gets colder and as it gets more salty. The warm, salty surface waters of the subtropics are much lighter than the cold, fresher waters close to Antarctica. We can imagine that the depth of constant density levels slopes up towards Antarctica.
The westerly winds make this slope steeper, and the ACC rides eastward along it, faster where the slope is steeper, and weaker where it’s flatter.
Fronts and bottom water
In the ACC there are sharp changes in water density known as fronts. The Subantarctic Front to the north and Polar Front further south are the two main fronts of the ACC (the black lines in the images). Both are known to split into two or three branches in some parts of the Southern Ocean, and merge together in other parts.
Scientists can figure out the density and speed of the current by measuring the ocean’s height, using altimeters. For instance, denser waters sit lower and lighter waters stand taller, and differences between the height of the sea surface give the speed of the current.
Map of how fast the waters around Antarctica are moving in an easterly direction. It is produced using 23 years of satellite altimetry (ocean height) observations as provided by the European Copernicus Marine Services.Author provided
The path of the ACC is a meandering one, because of the steering effect of the sea floor, and also because of instabilities in the current.
The ACC also plays a part in the meridional (or global) overturning circulation, which brings deep waters formed in the North Atlantic southward into the Southern Ocean. Once there it becomes known as Circumpolar Deep Water, and is carried around Antarctica by the ACC. It slowly rises toward the surface south of the Polar Front.
Once it surfaces, some of the water flows northward again and sinks north of the Subarctic Front. The remaining part flows toward Antarctica where it is transformed into the densest water in the ocean, sinking to the sea floor and flowing northward in the abyss as Antarctic Bottom Water. These pathways are the main way that the oceans absorb heat and carbon dioxide and sequester it in the deep ocean.
Waters south of the Polar Front are becoming fresher due to increased rainfall there, and waters to the north of the Polar Front are becoming saltier due to increased evaporation. These changes are caused by human activity, primarily through adding greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, and depletion of the ozone layer. The ozone hole is now recovering but greenhouse gases continue to rise globally.
Winds have strengthened by about 40% over the Southern Ocean over the past 40 years. Surprisingly, this has not translated into an increase in the strength of the ACC. Instead there has been an increase in eddies that move heat towards the pole, particularly in hotspots such as Drake Passage, Kerguelen Plateau, and between Tasmania and New Zealand.
We have observed much change already. The question now is how this increased transfer of heat across the ACC will impact the stability of the Antarctic ice sheet, and consequently the rate of global sea-level rise.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hulya Gilbert, PhD Candidate, University of South Australia
Children today spend more time in cars than previous generations. They also spend less time playing on the streets and in unstructured and unsupervised activity outdoors. The lack of opportunities for physical activity and the loss of freedom to explore their local neighbourhood is bad news for children’s physical, social and mental well-being.
We know surprisingly little, however, about the detailed reasons for individual private car use. An international study highlights that households with children have higher rates of car ownership and use. In Australia, official statistics on transport pay a great deal of attention to the “journey to work”, but car travel that can be attributed to child-related activities has not been fully explored.
Research on children’s travel patterns tends to focus on the “journey to school”. While school trips are important, this provides only a narrow image of children’s actual travel patterns. They also make many trips to non-school destinations and extracurricular activities such as sport, music and dance classes.
We recently reviewed local government policies related to sustainable mobility and child-and-youth-friendly cities. Our review found little consideration of children and young people in transport planning policies across Australia. This is despite the fact that the decline in their walking and cycling rates was widely recognised.
Several factors contribute to lower rates of walking and cycling among children and their limited use of public transport. These range from urban form to social and economic conditions.
Australian suburbs typically have low density and segregated land uses, which privilege the car over other travel modes. This situation is worse in outer suburbs which have limited public transport and poor provision for walking and cycling. These outer suburbs are also more likely to have lower socio-economic status and a larger proportion of families with children.
All together, these suburban conditions add to the social disadvantage resulting from limited access to services and activities that are critical for families with children. This further encourages private car use.
Changing social structures mean families usually are on tight schedules. These changes include increases in employment for women and in the number of both single-parent families and families where both parents are in paid work. Because the car is relatively cheap and easy to use for individual mobility in Australian cities, it is generally the uncontested way to manage these schedules.
In addition, the increased individualisation as a common characteristic of Western societies usually means parents are expected to provide strict supervision of children’s movements. In the conditions described above, the most practical way to do this is usually to drive them in a car.
Of course this increases the number of cars on our streets, particularly around schools and other common destinations for children. This then perpetuates parents’ concerns about traffic safety, leading in turn to even more private car use.
Notice the difference? Drop-off time at an inner-city Copenhagen school.Hulya Gilbert, Author provided
What is perhaps most striking about the trend towards chauffeuring children is that these facts are seemingly becoming accepted as unavoidable outcomes of modern society. They are largely ignored in transport planning.
We have argued that children have a pivotal role in sustainable mobility. Greater attention to the mobility needs of families with children will produce many social and environmental benefits.
The importance of children’s role in sustainable mobility can be grouped under two themes.
First, children’s needs in today’s lifestyles mean they have an active role in contributing to increased private car use. The daily lives of families with children offer a good example of the context in which carbon-intensive travel patterns occur. If their mobility needs can be met more sustainably (even partially) we are likely to achieve significant carbon savings.
A better understanding of children’s travel patterns would provide a solid foundation for sustainable mobility policies. Planning and transport policies that are responsive to children’s specific needs are likely to have more effective and longer-lasting outcomes, with many related benefits for social sustainability and public health.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Warren Hogan, Industry Professor, University of Technology Sydney
The financial services royal commission resumes for its final round of hearings on Monday, and reappearing before Justice Hayne will be the chief executives each of the big six institutions he has in his sights: the Commonwealth Bank, Westpac, AMP, Macquarie, ANZ, and the National Australia Bank.
At issue are shockingabusesoftrust, and when the government responds after receiving the report in February it will be under pressure to introduce tighter rules that more closely regulate bankers’ behaviour.
There’s another, better, path it could follow. It could loosen the rules and treat bankers more like doctors.
Crude attempts to regulate behaviour fail
We trust doctors, not because their behaviour is tightly regulated but because it is self-regulated. As professionals they strive to be trustworthy, in the same way as citizens who don’t cheat on their social security claims, or restaurant customers who don’t eat without paying.
A regulation imposed on top of a relationship of trust can ruin it.
In a famous study titled A Fine Is A Price, economists Uri Gneezy and Aldo Rustichini examined what happened when an Israeli daycare centre attempted to impose fines on parents who picked up their children late.
Surprisingly, the trial of the fine resulted in more, rather than fewer, late pickups.
In the eyes of the late parents, the fine changed late pickups from bad behaviour into an acceptable outcome of cost-benefit analysis. They simply interpreted the fine as a babysitting cost, and weighed it against the benefit of arriving when it suited them. Moral motivations were crowded out.
Doctors take vows
Professionals with ethics take vows to honour their duty to their clients, even where the costs of doing so are greater than the benefits of not doing so.
Service providers who don’t take ethics seriously weigh the costs and benefits of acting in the interests of their clients versus acting in their own interests. This ‘moral optimization’ may take account of ethics, but only if it pays.
Many financial services workers don’t take ethics seriously partly because they have been trained in economics or finance – disciplines which teach that cost-benefit analysis applies to everything.
A start would be to train them better. Their teachers could listen to the words of the creator of much of the theory used to justify performance pay, Michael Jensen of Harvard:
We teach our students the importance of conducting a cost-benefit analysis in everything they do. In most cases, this is useful – but not when it comes to behaving with integrity.
Recent research on the psychological power of money suggests that financial market participants are at risk of negative ethical tendencies when money is used as an incentive, or even when they are just reminded of its importance, so-called money priming.
Money is used as an incentive to in order overcome the so-called principal-agent problem in which agents, (workers or chief executives) are tempted to put they own interests ahead of those of the firm they work for.
It can work, but if high-powered financial incentives communicate that the recipient’s only goal should be to maximise profit, then a culture of material self-interest takes hold, constrained at best by the letter of the law. And this crowds out other interests, such as those of their customers.
This means high-powered financial incentives can solve one kind of untrustworthiness, but only by creating another.
Professionals such as doctors and teachers solve the principal agent problem in another way: through ethics.
Banking could be a profession
Rather than further regulation, we propose a greater focus on ethics through a program of professionalisation, including:
Establishing an interim professional body run by outsiders who come with a proven ethic of serving the public in fields such as education or health. After five years the finance industry can apply to the government to staff and run the body itself, subject to performance.
A winding back of regulation in order to signal that “you are professionals who have to take responsibility for ethical judgements”. The professional body could stand down senior managers deemed to be showing commitment to the new culture.
A fundamental change of bonuses so that they become incentives for ethical behaviour. We suggest an automatic bonus payment of 10-20% of total pay. It could be withheld for two reasons: either poor financial performance of the firm, or an ethical breach. In effect, it would be a negative bonus. Multiple ethical breaches would result in the loss of professional status and employment.
Regulation hasn’t worked
Automatic bonuses remove the extreme money priming of the finance industry, and they can be helpful in maintaining employment in the event of a downturn. They can simply be reduced instead of laying off staff, as happened during the global financial crisis.
Boosting regulation and boosting the capability of regulators, as many say they want, could work against developing the ethics and the trust that makes other professions work.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Julianne Schultz, Founding Editor of Griffith REVIEW; Professor, Griffith Centre for Social and Cultural Research, Griffith University
In October 2005 Stephen Colbert was just starting his eponymous show. It is somewhat chilling to realise that this was when he came up with the word truthiness: it seems so now.
It has taken a while to reach maturity and morphed into the even more menacing trumpiness. Truthiness captures the slippery world inhabited by those unencumbered by books, or facts, context or complexity – for those who just know with their heart rather than their heads – where things can just feel truthful.
Who would have thought that a little more than a decade later, the White House would be occupied by a man who makes the Colbert character seem almost reasonable. Quaintly charming. Trumpiness captures something even more sinister, statements that don’t even have to feel truthful, apparently ignorant rough-hewn words, weaponised for effect. Whatever comes out – alarmingly frequently words that sound as though they emanated from the crib sheet of a propaganda handbook.
In defining these words, Colbert provided a helpful predictor for a president who according to the Washington Post last week, had made 6,420 false or misleading comments in 649 days. That is industrial scale deception – small lies told over and over, medium sized lies that have become a new global lingua franca and big lies that take even his most ardent supporters by surprise and sometimes force a sort of retraction or denial – sort of, but only after they have already infiltrated the virtual world and got a life of their own.
This is not normal. It is not the way we have come to expect even a tainted public sphere, distorted by the commercialisation of public attention, to operate. The president’s mantra of fake news is, as he has admitted, a deliberate and determined effort to undermine confidence in what remains of a rigorous public sphere and professional journalism that takes itself seriously. In the unregulated, “more insidious” domain of the internet this is particularly dangerous.
Such industrial scale deception is at odds with the norms that characterise any flourishing civilisation. If truth is irrelevant to discourse, trust is not merely dented it is destroyed. Other norms of acceptable behaviour cannot be far away. What is happening now, goes well beyond spin or hollow speech. The New York Times correspondent Roger Cohen describes it as “corrosive, corrupting and contagious”.
In the shrunken global village this has dangerous implications everywhere, for public and personal behaviour. If the so called, “leader of the free world” can talk the way he does, without regard to fact or feeling, the level of civilisation is turned down everywhere he is heard.
What we are witnessing is behaviour contrary to the long-established moral core of a civilised society, arguably giving succour to evil, and deliberately destroying trust.
Democracy in retreat
So how did it come to this?
It is easy to feel that the world is going to hell in a handbasket – the news of catastrophe and disaster, the inflammatory US president, the distortion of social media, the global instability of superpower realignment, the palpable threat of climate change, the rise of authoritarian leaders – and that is for starters.
Freedom House, the Washington-based NGO, has been monitoring global freedom since 1941, when a very different US President articulated an expansive ethic that has since prevailed in “kin countries” and beyond. With the second world war in full, murderous, destructive fury, President Roosevelt declared that as human beings, all people were entitled to freedom of speech and expression, freedom to worship their god in their own way, freedom from want and freedom from fear. At the time it was ambitious rhetoric, demonstrably at odds with the wartime experience. But it provided guiding principles for a different future.
Last month in a very different context, Freedom House reported that around the world, political and civil rights sunk to their lowest level for a decade.
For the twelfth year in a row, democratic setbacks outnumbered gains. Democracy is in crisis. Values are under assault and in retreat in country after country. Young people are losing faith in politics. Trust has been eroded by commerce and the calcification of institutions. Millions of people are living without the rights we take for granted as a measure of civil, liberal, democratic society. Even nations that like to pride themselves on a deep democratic history are slipping on the scale, as trust in institutions is eroded and checks and balances slip out of equilibrium and technology remakes the way things are done.
Taking a wider view of the state of the globe provides a slightly more reassuring message, that that arc may still be bending the right way. But the tension between individual rights and popular will is fertile territory for authoritarian leaders and their shadow puppets.
Survival is deep in our make up, means we dwell on the negative, alert to threats and dangers, ready to respond to fear. But as Stephen Pinker and Kishore Mahbubani loudly proclaim, the bigger picture is not as bad as we might be inclined to think with one ear cocked to the latest news bulletin and an eye on the real Donald Trump’s twitter feed.
The Human Development Index shows that as a species we are living longer and better. Life expectancy at birth worldwide is now 71 years, and 80 in the developed world; for most of human existence most people died around 30. Global extreme poverty has declined to 9.6% of the world’s population; still limiting the lives of too many, but 200 years ago, 90% lived in extreme poverty. In just the last 30 years, the proportion of the global population living with such deprivation has declined by 75%. Equally unappreciated is the fact that 90% of the world’s population under the age of 25 can read and write, including girls. For most of the history of Europe, no more than 15% of the people could read and write, mostly men.
So despite the truthiness feeling that things are going wrong, a lot is going right, for a lot of people, in a lot of countries. But this is a moment at risk of being squandered.
‘Reason sweeteened by values’
Which invites the question of what is at stake, how might the level of civilisation here be turned up, by whom, and to what end?
This was a question addressed by Robert Menzies when in 1959, as Prime Minister, he approved the formation of the Humanities Council, the precursor of the Australian Academy of Humanities. At the time, with the Cold War in full swing, and the memory of the hot war still smoking, Menzies declared the Humanities Council would provide,
Wisdom, a sense of proportion, sanity of judgement, a faith in the capacity of man to rise to higher mental and spiritual levels. We live dangerously in the world of ideas, just as we do in the world of international conflict. If we are to escape this modern barbarism, humane studies must come back into their own, not as the enemies of science, but as its guides and philosophic friends.
Robert Menzies: saw a key role for the ‘humane studies’.AAP
Now we are more often likely to hear prominent politicians pillorying the humanities as esoteric and truth-defying, and humanities scholars as ideologues in cahoots with self-aggrandizing scientists who are addressing the existential crisis of climate change for personal gain.
To attack the university system at precisely the moment when it reaches more people, when its impact on the social, cultural and economic wellbeing of the nation has never been higher, seems perverse. Based on medium-sized lies, madness even, from the zone of truthiness.
As the debate triggered by the Ramsay proposal has shown there is a lot at stake. For all the noise in the press, the very fact that there are lots of different ways of approaching the study of civilisations, has not been addressed except by snide, often ill-informed or defensive comments about “relativism”.
I am not a scholar of civilisations or a philosopher, but I am aware of some of the complexity of these debates. The need to define civilisation, and to allow the notion of civilisations, has preoccupied fine minds, and lead to different conclusions. Are there six civilisations, as Samuel Huntington suggested remained when he wrote his most famous essay The Clash of Civilisations? Or the 26, not including the civilisation of the first Australians, which Arnold Toynbee had identified a few decades earlier in his monumental work A Study of History.
Some maintain that civilisations are shaped by religion, others by culture, cities, language, ideology, identity or as a response by human beings to nature.
Civilisations flower and die. Some leave artefacts, buildings and monuments that endure. Others leave stories, philosophies, language, knowledge and ways of being that echo and resonate long after. Some just disappear, some suicide. Others grow and respond to interaction, adapting and changing as they go. And we now know, many leave a measurable trail in the polar ice, as the recent discovery of the traces of lead from Ancient Rome from 1100 BCE revealed.
As Kenneth Clark reputedly said after devoting his life to popularising the study of civilisation, “I don’t know what it is, but I recognise it when I see it.”
A full moon rises behind the Propylaia of the ancient Acropolis of Athens, Greece, November 2016. Civilisations flower and die.Andrea Bonetti/EPA
I like to think of it as a shorthand for the way human beings coexist with each other, the world they have created and the natural environment which makes it possible. While recognising the contestability of values, I like the positive humanity of Clive Bell’s notion of “reason sweetened by values” and RG Collingwood’s, “mental process toward ideal social relationships of civility”.
For me, civilisation is pluralist, contestable, open, polite, robust; buttressed by law, culture and institutions and maintained by sustainable economic conditions across time and place.
The need for a bill of rights
The barbarism of the second world war galvanised the creation of civilising mechanisms and institutions. They varied from country to country, with different impacts , but the intention was generally to expand rights and enhance democracy.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which will turn 70 on the 10th of December, was the most singular global response: its 30 rights recognise and spell out “the inherent dignity and equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family”. Its symbolic power exceeds its legal effect, as George Williams has written. It forms part of customary international law and is seen as binding on all nations. It been translated into 500 languages. Australia has ratified two of the most important subsequent conventions which grew under its umbrella to define political and civil; social, economic and cultural rights – so it is not without effect here.
The Universal Declaration may well have faults and limits. Some regard it as “human rights imperialism” used by the West to run the world in ways that will protect and promote its interests. But when expansively applied, rather than as an embodiment of Western hegemony, it remains the best organising principle for civility that humanity has yet been devised. Ask women in Asia, India and the Middle East, democrats in Turkey, Hungary and Poland, activists in China or journalists in Russia.
Australians played an important role in the creation of the Declaration, but we have been tardy about its application. Ours is the only democratic nation which does not have a bill of rights – the only one. This is something that demands pause for thought. It is something we need to address if we are to foster an ethic for a distinctive, hybrid Australian civilisation.
An early morning view of Parliament House. Australia is the only democratic nation without a bill of rights.Lukas Coch/AAP
It is probably worth noting in passing that some of the most strident opponents of an Australian bill of rights are also amongst the most vociferous promoters of a narrowly defined agenda to study western civilisation. It is easy in this environment to forget that the demographics are with those of us who see the arc of history bending up. Surveys show most Australians would welcome a formalisation of rights.
Surely a clear statement of rights and responsibilities is central to any attempt to define a civilisation and the way we co-exist, respectfully, sustainably, creatively.
More than a pale shadow
Tony Abbott: ‘a long march through our institutions’.Joel Carrett/AAP
“Person by person the world does change,” Tony Abbott wrote in his essay for Quadrant that marked the beginning of the end of the Ramsay program at ANU. In his final paragraph, the former prime minister suggested that the “hundred bright young Australians” who received the proposed scholarships “might change the world”, and begin “a much more invigorating long march through our institutions!”
That makes me a little nervous. It sounds a bit like a fifth column, though I doubt that the students would be willing fodder for such a scheme. I suspect that if they were to embark on such a long march, they, like me, would prefer an open, inclusive, contested, respectful, non-ideological journey, grounded in the unique nature of this place as home to the oldest living civilisations, a product of British colonialism, the creation of people from every continent and our own imagining.
This country has a lot going for it, but we seem stuck in neutral. We need to regain ambition. To foster a remarkable country, one which learns from the mistakes of past and displaces complacent caution to imagine and create a robust, inclusive, generous, rights-based democratic order that will work well in the very different world of the 21st century.
It won’t come from politicians. It will, if history is a guide, be something that is worked up on the ground, in our universities, in our institutions, in our justice system, in business, community groups and on social media. As it takes shape, the politicians will follow and carry it forward.
There is a lot at stake. Person by person, we can help to turn the level of civilisation up in this place, so that it becomes much more than a pale shadow of the worst of the rest of the world.
This article is an excerpt of the 49th Academy Lecture delivered by Professor Julianne Schultz AM FAHA as part of the Australian Academy of the Humanities Symposium, ‘Clash of Civilisations: Where are we now?’ held at the State Library of NSW on 15 November 2018. The full lecture will be published in the 2019 edition of the Academy’s journal, Humanities Australia.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra
As the Morrison government thrashes around trying to stave off defeat or just save the furniture, it reminds one historian of the ill-fated McMahon administration.
The run up to the Coalition’s 1972 ousting is detailed in a just-released life of Billy McMahon, titled Tiberius with a Telephone. McMahon, often rated at or near the bottom in rankings of modern Australian PMs, has been long overdue for a biography – now he has a 776-page tome.
Author Patrick Mullins, of the University of Canberra, says the “similarities between now and then are too conspicuous to ignore”. These include a history of leadership instability, party disunity, depleted Liberal finances, confused, reactive and inconsistent policy directions, a credible opposition and a feeling for change in the electorate.
Admittedly, as Mullins says, there are differences. Morrison has a benign economic environment, support in important sections of the media, and a much better image than the widely-ridiculed McMahon.
But the fundamental point is that those were desperate days for the Coalition and so are these. “McMahon was in survival mode,” says Mullins, and the same could be said of Morrison.
Mullins’ observation of the McMahon government – “For every achievement and move towards new policy there was another fight, another muddle, another problem that should never have been cause for concern” – resonates when assessing the present one.
A government on the ropes acts impulsively, looking to the moment, compromising sound policy-making and broader, longer-term interests.
So it has been with Morrison’s suggestion Australia would consider moving its embassy to Jerusalem, a proposal born out of political expediency that’s brought him grief this week.
The Indonesian displeasure was felt as soon as the announcement was made before the Wentworth byelection. Subsequently, things have just got worse.
The free trade agreement with Indonesia, which Australia originally hoped would be signed this week when Morrison was in Singapore for the start of the summit season, has become hostage to the embassy decision.
Earlier the government tried to fudge the signing delay by a faux nonchalance about timing. Nobody was fooled. Now in public and private comments, Indonesia has made its position clear in the past few days, to Morrison’s embarrassment.
Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad also piled on, saying he’d pointed out to Morrison that “adding to the cause for terrorism is not going to be helpful”.
Rather than having an easy ride on his international round, the embassy issue has put Morrison on the back foot.
There was no immediate way out. The government still has to declare what it will do. Morrison says a “process” is underway – presumably bureaucrats’ advice is being sought and examined, after they were initially bypassed. There’s to be a decision before Christmas.
This can’t end happily. Morrison is caught between, on the one hand, the right of the Liberal party and the Jewish lobby, and on the other, the strongly-held view of our biggest neighbour in particular.
And the angst has been all for nothing – Wentworth was lost.
The Jerusalem question isn’t the government’s only looming no-win decision. It has yet to provide a response to the religious freedom report, a time bomb left by Malcolm Turnbull, who set the inquiry up to placate the right.
In the meantime negotiations with Labor remain unfinished over legislation announced by Morrison (pre-Wentworth) to prevent discrimination against gay students.
The still-suppressed report has brought little but controversy for the government, and backfired on the right, even before we have a policy from it.
Yet this week we have a new inquiry that reflects ideology more than need, with Education Minister Dan Tehan’s announcement of a review of freedom of speech in universities.
The right has been agitated about the unwelcome receptions some conservative speakers have received from demonstrators on campuses.
Adding to the right’s broader anger with universities was the conservative Ramsay Centre’s failure to persuade the prestigious Australian National University to accept funding for a proposed course on western civilisation, which came with conditions the ANU felt would compromise its academic autonomy.
The freedom-of-speech inquiry seems little more than another manifestation of the culture wars, symptomatic of the anti-intellectual stance of some of the Liberal hardliners, who see tertiary institutions as seeding grounds for the left.
Tehan said the inquiry, undertaken by former chief justice Robert French, would “outline realistic and practical options that could be considered to better promote and protect freedom of expression and freedom of intellectual inquiry”.
It will “review existing material regarding free speech, including codes of conduct, enterprise agreements, policy statements and strategic plans”. French is to report in four months, so before a May election.
Catriona Jackson, chief executive of Universities Australia, says vice-chancellors “are questioning of the rationale for the review” – they “do not see there is an issue to address. Every day on university campuses across the country there is vigorous debate across a wide range of issues,” she says.
This inquiry could end up producing fresh pinch points for the government, like the freedom of religion one has. At the least, it seems an odd priority – the issue wouldn’t engage too many ordinary voters.
That’s in contrast to energy policy, undisputed core business for government and public. But this remains ad hoc and fraught, as the government goes about strong-arming companies on price and searching for opportunities to support new investment in so-called “fair dinkum” power.
The highly interventionist approach is problematic on two fronts: it is contrary to Liberal philosophy, and it’s unlikely to be effective.
The Grattan Institute’s Tony Wood says: “In the absence of a stable climate policy and good management of the electricity market we seem to be left with nothing more than threats, which are easy to make but hard to implement, and subsidies, which may be popular but make no sense from a policy perspective”.
A politically-inspired thought-bubble with serious fallout, an unnecessary bow to the right, a core policy that’s unfit for purpose. Taken together the embassy issue, the free speech review, and the energy shemozzle point to a survival strategy that’s not cutting it. Just as McMahon’s didn’t.
Chinese President Xi Jinping left Beijing today for state visits to Papua New Guinea, Brunei and the Philippines – and the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) leaders summit in Port Moresby.
During Xi’s stay in Papua New Guinea, he will also meet with leaders from the Pacific countries that have established diplomatic ties with China amid growing political rivalries over the region, reports Xinhua news agency.
Xi was invited to pay the visits by Governor-General of Papua New Guinea Bob Dadae and APEC host Prime Minister Peter O’Neill, Brunei’s Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah, and Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte.
He said too much money had been spent on a Port Moresby-centred APEC, but now was the time to deliver the policies that could tap into all of the potential benefits of APEC and distribute them throughout the country.
The cost of the two-day APEC for PNG is reportedly more than 200 million kina (about NZ$90 million).
‘Opportunity squandered’ “This opportunity has been squandered. Instead, the 2019 Budget has dished up anti-APEC policies such as new taxes on trade and protectionist language,” Ling-Stuckey said.
“We have demonstrated that we are not being honest in our budget policy with misleading facts and hidden figures.
“This is a big-spending and fiscally irresponsible budget that abandons our new fiscal anchors. This is a disappointing day for the children of PNG, and the O’Neill/Abel government should be ashamed.
“The alternative government is a supporter of APEC. However, we have not been supportive of the expensive way that it has been implemented with numerous questions about contracts that should be referred to auditors.
“Unfortunately, items such as the Maseratis and Bentleys have unnecessarily damaged our international reputation.
As PNG prepared for its first APEC summit, it also expected to have 10,000 delegates to arrive for this meeting, reports EMTV News.
More then 1000 APEC officers are deployed in various parts of the city to ensure the safety of the visitors.
More than 100 foreign nationals arrived on Monday and the number was expected to increase rapidly over the next few days.
APEC Haus … Port Moresby’s custom-designed convention centre especially built for the Asia-Pacific economic leaders’ summit. Image: PNG Govt
Former National Party chief whip and current independent MP, Jami-Lee Ross.
Bryce Edwards’ Political Roundup: Have the rules of the game changed in media and politics?
[caption id="attachment_13635" align="alignleft" width="150"] Dr Bryce Edwards.[/caption]
Is it really time to “move on” from the Jami-Lee Ross mega-scandal? Certainly, that’s what National leader Simon Bridges has been saying over the last week. There are others outside of the National Party who also have an interest in “moving on”. Some in the media have been sympathetic to Bridges’ plea to stop focusing on the saga. Last week The Press newspaper published an editorial expressing horror at how the scandal had consumed us all: “this is cheap entertainment, delivered in bite-sized, episodic morsels. But now we are potentially actors, not just observers, in a slow-motion train wreck” – see: Turn away from the train wreck.
[caption id="attachment_18102" align="aligncenter" width="960"] Former National Party MP, and current independent Member of Parliament, Jami-Lee Ross.[/caption]
The newspaper suggests the scandal has become a tragedy, and Bridges’ call should be heeded, for the good of everyone: “it may be good advice for the rest of us to consider. How far down do we want to go in following one man’s descent? Ross and whoever is behind him have had the stage, they’ve had their 15 minutes of infamy. Now it’s exit stage right. And not just for Ross’ sake.”
This is not a view shared by all media. The Southland Times proclaimed bluntly in the weekend that ‘Moving on’ is not acceptable.
The hard-hitting editorial states: “There’s nothing worse than politicians who are hypocrites, and right now the National Party falls right into that category. If you ever wanted to read about a cop-out, here’s a cracker one for you. The National Party, it seems, is ‘moving on’. Well, surely the public deserves more than the glib response that came from its chief press secretary on Friday.”
Stuff journalist Martin van Beynen raises concerns that both journalists and the public likely have about how the media should continue to cover the story, asking: How do we handle a mentally unwell MP?
Here’s his main point: “Journalists are now in an invidious position. Let’s assume Ross, looking poised and comfortable, calls a press conference to announce more revelations about his former friends in the National Party. Do we ignore him because of his underlying illness and advise him to seek help or do we treat him as a flawed individual, assume his mental illness in under control, and report what he has to say, based on its merits? According to some of the pundits, journalists apparently have to be politically correct social workers as well as reporting events and their background.”
What should journalists and politicians leave out of the public sphere?
We have learnt a lot more about politics and politicians from the scandal. And now there is the question about whether we have learnt too much. This is something politicians and journalists have always had to grapple with – having to decide what to make public, and what to leave hidden.
Early on in the scandal, Danyl Mclauchlan wrote an excellent summary and discussion of what the whole episode meant, in which he pushed the point that it was very significant, because “So much of what happens in politics never makes it into the media” – see: The uniquely damaging betrayals of Jami-Lee Ross.
Many people argue, Mclauchlan says, that “Politics should be about policy and values”, when in fact “for professional politicians ‘values’ are mostly just a form of marketing”. Therefore a focus on policy and values can just be a disingenuous way of avoiding the reality of what politics is really about. That’s why the particulars of this scandal are important: “We’re learning a lot about some of the people who run our country, or who aspire to, because we’re – briefly – seeing them as they really are, not as they want to be seen.”
I also discussed some of this in an opinion piece, explaining how politicians generally have an informal pact of silence, which journalists also abide by, when it comes to certain topics – especially the “no go zones” of allegations of sexual improprieties and political finance corruption – but on occasions such as this there is a breakdown of those norms and conventions – see: The dangerously escalating political scandal wars between Simon Bridges and Jami-Lee Ross.
It can be both democratically useful and dangerous when these conventions breakdown, allowing the public to see much more of what goes on behind the scenes, including in politicians’ private lives. This was discussed further by RNZ’s Jeremy Rose, who suggested that if such a code of silence does exist, “then there is a real crisis of democracy” – see: Politics, sex and the media.
Is the delineation between the public and private lives of politicians breaking down?
The above article also quotes me from an appearance on TVNZ’s Q+A, about the media’s traditional boundaries between public and private lives: “We used to have a very strong delineation between reporting on politics and personal lives of politicians. The media did not go there, the politicians didn’t go there. They didn’t really used to bring up what’s going on beneath the bed sheets but of course now that Jami-Lee Ross has been in this situation, they sort of have to in a sense.”
In response, Rose asks: “So are we seeing an erosion of that convention?” And he points to various examples from his own employer as evidence that perhaps this is the case: “on Wednesday RNZ Morning Report presenter Susie Ferguson ended her interview with National Party leader Simon Bridges with this question: ‘Have you done anything that wouldn’t pass Paula Bennett’s test of ‘behaviour acceptable of a married MP?’ Simon Bridges’ replied ‘No’. And the interview ended. It was an unfair question.”
Also at RNZ, Colin Peacock continues to ask questions about how much journalists should be reporting on the details of the scandal – see: Meltdowns, blow-ups and blowback as MP goes rogue, in which he argues newsrooms will have to work out what is in the public interest as the scandal continues.
Peacock’s audio Mediawatch item from Sunday, JLR’s greatest hits keep coming, deals further with different opinions on what should be covered.
It includes a vivid statement from Newshub’s Duncan Garner who argues that both Ross and Bridges deserved scrutiny from the media and public: “It’s unbecoming, isn’t it, of the national’s representatives? And both men look simply ridiculous. But that’s what happens with the dance of the desperates turns to rolling around in the mud – fighting for their careers in the gutter, where the truth struggles to exist… I’ve never seen so much dirty, filthy laundry, and tawdry secrets dragged into the public arena before. This is most certainly unprecedented. It’s not some unseemly struggle over the direction of the party or the policies, it’s about twisted ambition, promises, dirty digging, and careers going nowhere fast.”
Allegations by and about Jami-Lee Ross have changed the game
Certainly, Jami-Lee Ross believes that conventions over keeping private lives out of politics and the media have been destroyed. After the Newsroom story was published with allegations from four women about their experiences with Ross, he hit back, saying: “A scab has been picked on the parliamentary personal issues. It has long been a case where personal matters are kept private, but the rules of the game have changed” – see: National MP Jami-Lee Ross admits to affairs with two women, vows to stay in Parliament.
Furthermore, he said: “There’s a lot of bed-hopping that goes on down in that Parliament. There’s a lot of behaviour that a lot of people would want kept secret and has been kept secret until now. But the way in which we now play politics is that we lift the bed-sheets.”
In an interview with the Herald’s Kirsty Johnston, Ross warned that, with the breakdown of conventions, more would now come out: “Half the Beehive were having inappropriate relationships, he said, but until now, that aspect of political life had been off limits… But those rules have changed in Parliament now. Things that were previously never discussed are now being discussed” – see: Volatile but not abusive: National MP Jami-Lee Ross speaks out about affair with fellow MP.
The charge of hypocrisy is now clearly one that Ross feels entitled to use in outing other MPs: “If the standard is that behaviour is no longer such that someone could continue as an MP then I’d suggest … that one out of three maybe one out of two MPs would have to question their behaviour as well.”
Stuff political editor Tracy Watkins also argues that an important line in politics and media has been crossed, and a return might now be impossible: “The bombshell Newsroom story that two women alleged they’d had had toxic sexual relationships with Ross pushed the nuclear button on their release. Ross accuses National of feeding Newsroom the story, alleging that one of the sources was an MP and two of them work for the party. The story certainly sent shock waves through Parliament. Labour MPs were just as rocked as their National counterparts. There was a feeling that a line in New Zealand politics had finally been crossed. And a fear that there may be no going back. Parliament is never short of gossip about affairs between MPs, between MPs and their staffers – and, yes, journalists as well. The parties all have dirt files. But they rarely use it. It’s called the nuclear option for a reason. All that has changed” – see: The Jami-Lee Ross saga – dirty, ugly, nasty politics with no end in sight.
Undoubtedly there will be many who see this breakdown of convention as a welcome development. For example, conservative blogger Ewen McQueen says: “MPs and journalists alike much prefer the code of silence that keeps the rest of us in the dark. We are told the reason for the secrecy is to protect MPs’ families. It is a reason that appears noble but which is merely self-serving” – see: Time to break Wellington’s code of silence.
So, are the media playing the role of “morality police” when they don’t report on the behaviour of politicians? McQueen seems to think so, arguing the public should be the judge: “The code of silence also insults the public of New Zealand who have a right to know the true character of the people they are being asked to vote for… The Wellington establishment arrogantly assumes we have no need to know and such matters are not relevant to public life. This is a lie.”
Finally, for the best discussion on questions of the delineation between public and private lives of politicians, see Tim Watkin’s blog post, Don’t give me culture – the question of character. He argues that the Jami-Lee Ross controversies raise the question, “how much does character and integrity matter?” Watkin suggests “Maybe we just want the right to know what our leaders are really like and for it to be up to us whether or not we want to vote for them – flaws and all.”]]>
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hannah Waddington, Lecturer in Educational Psychology, Victoria University of Wellington
Research suggests children can be reliably diagnosed with autism before the age of two. It also shows that many of the behavioural symptoms of autism are present before the age of one.
These behaviours include decreased interest in social interaction, delayed development of speech and intentional communication, a lack of age-appropriate sound development, and unusual visual fixations.
Preliminary results of a study in the Wellington region indicate most children are diagnosed when they are around three years old. However, there is arguably little point of providing early diagnosis if it does not lead to evidence-based early intervention.
The Early Start Denver Model (ESDM) is a promising therapy for very young children (between one and five years) with, or at risk for, autism. ESDM uses play and games to build positive relationships in which the children are encouraged to boost language, social and cognitive skills.
Where ESDM differs most from traditional intervention is that behavioural teaching techniques are embedded within this play. This includes providing clear cues for a behaviour, and rewarding that behaviour. Parents, therapists and teachers can use ESDM techniques within the children’s play and daily routines to help them reach developmentally appropriate milestones.
For example, a child who does not yet talk, may be learning to reach for preferred items. A child who has a lot of language may be learning to answer questions like “what is your name?”.
Initial research conducted in the United States, where the model was developed, suggests that ESDM is particularly effective when implemented for more than 15 hours a week by trained therapists in the home environment.
Improved cognition in early childhood
The model was adopted in Australia where the government funds autism specific early childhood centres. Research conducted in these centres indicates that children receiving ESDM intervention from trained therapists show greater improvements in understanding and cognitive skills than children who were not receiving treatment.
In New Zealand there is no government funding for such therapy. As a result, the cost of providing this intensive level of early intervention is beyond the budget of most families. There is also a lack of trained professionals with the technical expertise to implement such therapies.
For these reasons, we are working with the Autism Intervention Trust and Autism New Zealand to develop a New Zealand-specific low-intensity approach to delivering ESDM. The team is using the research of what is effective overseas and is applying it within a New Zealand context.
Mainstream schooling
New Zealand takes an inclusive approach to education. The main goal of the research programme therefore is for children with autism and their families to receive support earlier so that they can get a better start in their development and go on to mainstream schools.
One project involves training kindergarten teachers in ESDM. Inclusion of ESDM strategies in kindergartens is the biggest unknown because there is little teacher training in New Zealand around how to best support children with autism in mainstream settings.
A second project involves providing parent coaching and then adding on a small amount of one-on-one therapy. This will provide some preliminary evidence as to whether adding a minimal amount of one-on-one therapy is any more beneficial that just coaching parents.
Each project involves examining specific measures of communication, imitation (a key early learning skill children with autism typically struggle with) and social engagement with others.
Other countries with little government funding and support for children with autism and their families have taken a similar approach to providing ESDM therapy at a lower intensity. The research suggests that just a few hours of therapy can lead to positive outcomes.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra
The Senate this week passed a motion calling for the government to establish a federal anti-corruption commission. The government is more likely to beef up existing institutions but Justice Party senator Derryn Hinch, who has been a strong advocate for a national ICAC, says “that would be wrong.” “We have to have an independent national body to look into us [politicians] and to public servants and to various agencies,” he told The Conversation.
Hinch – who is long odds in his battle to hold his seat at the election – is running candidates in the Victorian state election. He hopes to get “one or two” of his team elected to the upper house.
In Victoria he predicts a Labor win, although he doesn’t “think they deserve to.” Federally, he says “I would be one of the few people in this building who still thinks the Libs are in with a chance”.
The final results in the Fiji general election announced by the Fiji Elections Office (FEO) in Suva today. Source: FEO
The newly built APEC Haus in Papua New Guinea’s capital Port Moresby which is hosting the 2018 APEC leaders summit this weekend. Image: Johnny Blades/RNZ Pacific
Final Fiji election progress results as at 5am today. Source: FEO
All smiles … caretaker Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama in lead in final progress results in the Fiji election today. Image: Sri Krishnamurthi/PMC
Chinese President Xi Jinping arrives at Port Moresby’s Jacksons International Airport last night for a state visit and the APEC summit. Image: Loop PNG
The party vote after 527 polling stations had been counted. Source: FEO
The politicians vote are 527 polling stations had been counted. Source: FEO
After 636 polling stations had been completed. Source: FEO
APEC Haus … Port Moresby’s custom-designed convention centre especially built for the Asia-Pacific economic leaders’ summit. Image: PNG Govt
