Among the 138 recommendations of the Abuse in Care Royal Commission of Inquiry’s final report to parliament was a clear call: remove the legal time limits that prevent survivors of historic abuse from seeking justice in civil court.
Without that reform, survivors of historic abuse remain vulnerable to being turned away by the legal system – not because their experiences aren’t credible, but because the law still treats them as being out of time.
The royal commission heard from thousands of survivors of childhood abuse in the care of state and faith-based institutions between 1950 and 1999. What stood out was how often that harm was made worse by silence, disbelief and legal systems that failed to respond.
Limitation periods in abuse cases
Under New Zealand law, people generally have six years from the time a harm occurs to bring a civil claim. That limit is set out in the Limitation Act 2010 for events after 2011, and in the Limitation Act 1950 for events before that.
For survivors of historic abuse, particularly childhood abuse, that six-year window rarely reflects how trauma actually works. Survivors often take decades to feel sufficiently safe and supported to come forward and name what happened to them.
The 1950 law allowed limitation periods to be paused if a claimant was under a “disability” – a legal term meaning they were either a child or, in the language of the time, of “unsound mind”. In practice, this meant the six-year clock usually didn’t start for children until they reached adulthood.
The 2010 law clarified this by explicitly saying the limitation period for children begins at 18. It also introduced a new “incapacitated” exception, allowing the clock to pause for adults who are unable to make decisions or take legal action because of trauma or other conditions.
But in practice it’s a narrow doorway. Courts require survivors to prove not just trauma, but a high legal incapacity threshold.
This means that even when the abuse is acknowledged, and even when survivors have strong evidence, civil cases are often barred. The bar is not that the harm didn’t happen, but that it happened “too long ago”.
How civil time limits deny justice
In 2019, former Air Force servicewoman Mariya Taylor brought a civil claim against the sergeant who had sexually abused her in the 1980s while both were stationed at the Whenuapai base.
The court accepted the abuse had occurred. But because Taylor was not legally considered “disabled” by trauma, and the six-year window had closed, her case was struck out under the Limitation Act 1950. Adding insult to injury, she was ordered to pay costs to her abuser.
At 18, Taylor had entered a rigid military hierarchy where power and discipline made reporting abuse nearly impossible.
Her case shows how limitation periods can block even well-evidenced claims, and how institutional dynamics such as silence, shame and obedience often delay disclosure.
These same patterns were pivotal to the royal commission’s findings.
Survivors can now bring civil claims regardless of how long ago the abuse occurred. In landmark case in 2023, GLJ v. The Trustees of the Roman Catholic Church for the Diocese of Lismore, the High Court of Australia rejected a request to shut down proceedings even though the alleged abuser and other witnesses had died. The court said the case could still go ahead using available evidence.
The GLJ decision is important for New Zealand courts. It shows that while removing time bars doesn’t guarantee victory for survivors, it does give them the chance to be heard.
Delayed but not denied
Removing time limits for civil claims involving historic abuse, as the royal commission recommended, is now overdue.
A first step would be for the government to clearly commit to amending the Limitation Act 2010 to exclude claims of historic abuse – especially child sexual abuse – from the six-year deadline.
This would bring New Zealand into line with Australia and recognise what we now know about the delayed nature of disclosure, trauma and institutional silence. It would also honour the spirit of the royal commission’s work.
As courts and commissions have recognised, removing limitation periods doesn’t guarantee a win for survivors. But it does mean they’re at least allowed to try.
For years, survivors have been told they’ve spoken too late. Reforming limitation laws won’t undo the harm they suffered. But it will show their testimony matters, and that justice delayed does not have to mean justice denied.
Zoë Prebble does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Samara McPhedran, Principal Research Fellow, Violence Research and Prevention Program, Griffith University
Almost every day, it seems we read or hear reports another family is grieving the murder of a loved one in a street brawl, another business owner is hospitalised after trying to fend off armed robbers, or shoppers simply going about their business are confronted by knife-wielding thugs.
The way media and politicians talk, it seems as if we are in the middle of an unprecedented violent crime crisis.
But are we?
The short answer is: no.
Comparing today with the past
Although the numbers fluctuate from year to year, Australia is less violent today than in previous years.
It is difficult to make direct comparisons over decades, because the way crimes are defined and recorded changes (especially for assault).
Weapons and violence are rarely out of the media cycle in Australia, leading many to fear this country is becoming less safe for everyday people. Is that really the case, though? This is the first story in a four-part series.
For crimes like domestic violence, the statistics are extremely hard to compare over time but even so, prevalence appears to have declined (although only about half of all women who experience physical and/or sexual violence from their partners seek advice or support).
However, if we consider homicide and robbery (which have been categorised much the same way over time), the numbers have been falling for decades.
Interestingly, this seems to have nothing to do with the weapons themselves. For instance, armed robbery and unarmed robbery both rise and fall in about the same way, at about the same time. Homicide follows a similar pattern.
Relative to ten years ago, Australians now are less likely to say they have experienced physical or threatened face-to-face assault in the previous 12 months.
Places with greater socioeconomic disadvantage typically experience more violence. In Queensland, for instance, Mt Isa has higher violent crime rates than affluent areas of Brisbane.
Despite differences between places, there is generally less violence than there used to be.
Why is violence declining?
Nobody knows quite why violence is decreasing. This is not just happening in Australia butacross many developednations.
Suggestions include better social welfare, strong economies, improved education, low unemployment, women’s rights and stable governance. Also, new avenues have opened up that carry less risk than violent crime – such as cyberfraud instead of robbing a bank.
Evidence shows these types of reactions achieve little, but in an environment of endless “crisis” it is almost impossible to make good decisions. This is made even harder in circumstances where victims and activists push politicians to implement “feel-good” policies, regardless of how ultimately fruitless those will be.
Who are the people being violent?
One thing remains the same: violent crime is primarily committed by younger men (who are also likely to be victims).
Ethnicity/migration history data is not always recorded in crime statistics, but the information we do have suggests a more complex picture.
Factors such as exposure to warfare and civil strife can certainly play a role in people’s use of violence.
However, unemployment, poverty, poor education and involvement with drugs and/or gangs tend to play a much larger part.
Reactions versus reality
If society is less violent, why are public reactions to violence seemingly becoming more intense?
Incidents that would have received little attention a decade ago now dominate public debate and single incidents – no matter how rare or isolated – are enough to provoke sweeping legislative and policy changes.
This is also about psychology: the better things get, the more sensitive people tend to be to whatever ills remain and resilience can crumble when something bad does happen.
Pandering to this by rushing to make people feel safer – while politically irresistible – has unintended consequences. When another incident occurs, as it always does, people feel even more vulnerable because they were led to believe the problem had been “fixed”.
This creates a never-ending cycle of superficial responses while underlying issues are ignored.
We cannot legislate or politicise our way out of violence. The best responses are ones that identify and address actual root causes and look at the circumstances that surround violence – rather than fixating on the violence itself.
This means moving away from emotional reactions and taking a clear look at why violence occurs in the first place.
Until this happens, any further reductions in violence are more likely to be good luck than good management.
Samara McPhedran has received funding from various Australian and international government grant programs, including the Australian Research Council and Criminology Research Council, for a number of projects relating to violence. She has been appointed to various advisory panels and committees, including as a member of the Queensland Ministerial Advisory Panel on Weapons. She does not receive any financial remuneration or other reward for these activities. She is the Executive Director (Analysis, Policy and Strategy) of the Violence Prevention Institute Australia. She is not, and has never been, a member of any political party. The views expressed are those of the author alone.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lisa Martin, Adjunct Senior Research Fellow, School of Biomedical Sciences, Pathology and Laboratory Science, The University of Western Australia
It’s a cold, crisp evening and the air carries a chill that bites. As temperatures drop and houses get colder, we turn to trusted sources of warmth such as wood fires, heaters, hot water bottles and warm drinks.
But these winter comforts come with the risk of burns.
Staying warm in winter is important, but so is staying safe. So, a little caution can go a long way to prevent serious injury.
Let’s start with children
Young children are naturally curious, and in winter, their explorations often take them dangerously close to sources of heat. One common scenario involves toddlers reaching out to touch a glowing wood-fired heater.
These are attractive to curious children because they are bright, warm and often within reach. Tragically, these burns can cause significant injuries to small hands and fingers, often requiring long recovery times and specialist care.
Scalds from hot drinks are also very common in young children. These accidents tend to happen during everyday moments, such as when a parent is trying to juggle a hot drink with a sick, unsettled child on their lap.
Seasonal colds and viruses mean children often need more comfort and physical contact, increasing the likelihood of accidents. A hot drink, even one that has cooled slightly, can cause deep burns to a child’s skin if spilled.
In many parts of Australia at this time of year, bonfires, fire pits and campfires become common. Extinguishing a fire with sand may seem safe, but embers underneath can retain enough heat to burn skin hours later.
Children running in light shoes can be unaware of where a fire has been and step directly onto it, resulting in severe burns to their feet.
Hot water bottles can cause scald burns from spills when being filled, can leak or burst if cuddled or rolled on, or cause contact burns if placed directly on the skin. Always check the bottle for wear, use hot tap water instead of boiling water, and keep a layer between the bottle and the skin.
Wheat bags can also cause burns over winter, particularly when overheated or applied directly to skin without a cover. Rarely, wheat bags have caught fire, especially when overheated or re-heated repeatedly without allowing them to fully cool between use.
Older people can also be at risk
Elderly people face a unique set of risks in winter. For some, underlying health issues, such as diabetes or poor circulation, can reduce sensitivity to heat, making them unaware they have been burnt.
A classic example is burns to the lower legs caused by sitting too close to a bar heater for extended periods. These burns may go unnoticed until they become painful or infected.
In some cases, financial strain plays a role. Many older adults live on fixed incomes and may hesitate to heat their entire home to save on energy bills. Instead, they may rely on small portable heaters in closed rooms or heated blankets and hot water bottles. These workarounds are cost-effective, but can increase the risk of burns.
How can I stay safe?
Burns are preventable injuries. Here’s how to reduce the risk:
use a barrier around heaters to protect exploring hands
keep hot drinks out of reach when holding a child, and consider using mugs with lids for added safety
supervise young children closely around campfires, bonfires and fire pits, and extinguish with water not sand
ensure hot water bottles are in good condition. Never fill a hot water bottle with boiling water, use the hot tap, and do not use if there are signs of wear or damage. Don’t overheat wheat bags
regularly check your heater is safe and is working as it should. Sit at least a metre away.
When should I seek medical care?
If a burn happens, run the burn under cool running water for at least 20 minutes, while keeping the person warm. Don’t apply ice, creams or ointments, as they can cause more damage by trapping in the heat. Remove tight clothing or jewellery. Cover the burn with a loose, clean cloth or non-stick dressing.
looks leathery, or there are patches of brown, black or white
if the person has trouble breathing.
Lisa Martin receives funding from Perth Children’s Hospital Foundation, Perron Foundation, The Kids Research Institute, and is employed by The Fiona Wood Foundation.
Transparency is vital to our democratic system of government.
It promotes good government, spurring those in power into better practice. Even when what is revealed is pretty revolting, transparency means those transgressions are known, and accountability for them can follow.
Transparency is particularly important for people who otherwise do not have access to government, who are not “in the room” or “at the table”, whether that be directly or through lobbyists or other connections.
But recent data reveal government transparency in Australia is on the decline. Given the connection between transparency and a well-functioning democracy, this is deeply concerning.
The Albanese government’s compliance rate with Senate orders for documents is the lowest of any government since 2016, and the second-worst of any government since 1993. Disclosures under freedom of information laws have dropped dramatically over the past decade.
The problem isn’t a lack of solutions, but that governments appear perpetually unwilling to open up.
How should transparency work?
In Australia, there is a complex system of institutions and laws that provide government accountability and transparency.
Outside of the blunt instrument of electoral accountability through the ballot box, the parliament, and in particular the non-government-dominated Senate, plays a key role in providing accountability and transparency.
The transparency work of the Senate is supplemented by a number of regimes, chief among them freedom of information. Under freedom of information, members of the public can request specific information from government departments and agencies, and this is supported by a “freedom of information champion”, the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner.
To work properly, these schemes and regimes need the ongoing support, cooperation and buy-in (literally in the form of funding) from government. This has, at times, been less than forthcoming, which can hobble their operation in different ways.
There are also several reasons why a government might refuse to publicly disclose what it is doing. Former High Court Chief Justice Harry Gibbs said “government at a high level cannot function without some degree of secrecy”.
But limits and exceptions to transparency regimes are controversial. Does there need to be an exception at all? Does a particular document fall within the exception?
The government holds the upper hand in asserting whether a document falls within an exception, because they are the ones who know what the documents are. This gives rise to cynicism that these exceptions can be and are being abused.
Documents remaining buried
This cynicism may be warranted, as two recent reports by the Centre for Public Integrity show successive governments lack true commitment to transparency.
The first report was about Senate orders for the production of documents and how often the government complies with them.
One of the Senate’s most powerful tools in holding the executive to account is its ability to order the production of government documents.
But governments have a long history of avoiding compliance with Senate orders. They either outright refuse to respond, or offer broad claims of “public interest immunity” over sensitive documents, such as those relating to national security, Cabinet, federal relations or law enforcement.
While the Senate can sanction ministers who refuse to comply with its orders, such as through suspending them from the chamber, it has historically done little in response to government insouciance.
This means we don’t know whether the public interest immunity claims being made over the documents are valid, and there is currently no mechanism to find out.
The recent data show the government’s compliance rates with Senate orders to produce documents have fallen from 92% in 1993–96, to approximately 33% for the current parliament.
This is a low that only the Abbott/Turnbull government in the 44th parliament has the ignominious record of beating in the past 30-odd years.
It is coupled with the government increasingly claiming public interest immunity. Public interest immunity rejections as a proportion of non-compliance sat at 61% over the 46th Parliament, this rose to almost 68% over the Albanese government’s first term.
These averaged roughly one claim per week under Albanese, compared with about one claim every three weeks under by the Morrison government in the 46th parliament.
What about freedom of information?
The second report is on the operation of the Commonwealth’s freedom of information (FOI) regime.
The Albanese government’s performance on delivering transparency this way is a mixed bag.
First, the good news: the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner is better resourced, first-instance processing times have improved, and more of the reviews received by the OAIC are being finalised.
But the plaudits end there.
Whereas the proportion of requests granted in full stood at 59% in 2011–12, by 2023–24 it had fallen to just 25%.
Over the same period, outright refusals have ballooned from 12% to 23%.
The precipitous decline in the “refusal gap” (the difference between the proportion of requests granted in full and those refused) is alarming.
Moreover, it’s difficult to have confidence in the correctness of these refusals. In 2023–24, almost half of initial decisions were found to be flawed following internal review.
Processing timeframes are also cause for significant concern. Average processing time for Office of the Australian Information Commissioner reviews has blown out from 6 months in 2016-17, to 15.5 months in 2023-24.
Fixing the mess
Of course, numbers are not a full story. But they also cannot be denied, and these tell a damning story for government.
So how could they be addressed?
The Senate should adopt an independent legal arbiter to oversee claims for public interest immunity. This would discourage secrecy by providing an independent review mechanism for parliament to check the government’s immunity claims.
For this reform to work, the Senate must not shy away from flexing its enforcement muscles either. The government must know that lack of transparency has consequences.
In response to the freedom of information crisis, there’s a number of reforms that could improve transparency. These cover:
legislative changes such as clarifying that existing applications are not invalidated with a change in minister or portfolio title
greater resourcing to support information officer training and ongoing monitoring
and increasing parliamentary oversight of the regime.
Transparency is not an elite concern, but one of those who are otherwise not in the room. It is the peoples’ concern. Governments, however, have incentives to keep the status quo.
So even though Labor spoke a big transparency game in opposition, they have done little in government. We need to demand that they do.
The author would like to thank Catherine Williams, Executive Director of the Centre for Public Integrity, for her contributions to this article.
Gabrielle Appleby is a Director of the Centre for Public Integrity.
The announcement this week by UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer on the recognition of a Palestininian state has been welcomed by many who want to see a ceasefire in Gaza and lasting peace in the region.
In contrast to other recent statements on the status of Palestine, however, the UK has said it will recognise Palestine as a state in September
unless the Israeli government takes substantive steps to end the appalling situation in Gaza and commits to a long term sustainable peace, including through allowing the UN to restart without delay the supply of humanitarian support to the people of Gaza to end starvation, agreeing to a ceasefire, and making clear there will be no annexations in the West Bank.
Until this week, the UK’s position had been that recognition would only follow a negotiated two-state solution in Israel-Palestine. Other countries have now begun to shift from that position, too.
The latest UK statement was preceded by announcements from France on July 25 and Canada on July 31 that they too would recognise Palestine as a state in September.
But the UK position is different in one important way: it is conditional on Israel failing to comply with its international humanitarian obligations in Gaza and the West Bank.
In other words, recognition of Palestine as a state by the UK is being used as a stick to persuade Israel to agree to a ceasefire. Should Israel agree to those conditions, the UK will presumably not recognise Palestine as a state in September, but will revert to its original position on a two-state solution.
Conditional recognition subject to action by Israel – a third state – represents an unwelcome and arguably dangerous departure from international practice.
While recognition (or otherwise) of states is inherently political – as demonstrated by the unique status of Taiwan, for example – it is not and should not be made conditional on the action or inaction of third states.
How states are recognised
According to the Convention on the Rights and Duties of States, a state must have a permanent population, territory, an independent government, and the capacity to enter into relations with other states, as well as self-determination.
Palestine has arguably met all these criteria, with the possible exception of an independent government, given the level of Israeli intervention in the West Bank and the current situation in Gaza.
Although recognition by other states is arguably not a formal criterion of statehood, it is very difficult to function as a state without reasonably widespread recognition by other states.
Some 147 countries – two-thirds of UN members – now recognise the State of Palestine, including Spain, Ireland and Norway, which made announcements in 2024.
Those choosing not to formally recognise a Palestinian state are now in a small minority, including Australia and New Zealand. This is inevitably leading to calls in those countries to change position.
Australia is considering such a shift, subject to conditions similar to those set out by Canada – including the release of Israeli hostages, the demilitarisation of Hamas, and reform of the Palestinian Authority.
New Zealand is currently maintaining its longstanding position of recognising Palestine within the context of a two-state solution. On July 30, Foreign Minister Winston Peters and 13 of his counterparts issued a joint statement – the “New York Call” – demanding an immediate ceasefire in Gaza and reiterating “unwavering commitment to the vision of the two-State solution”.
The statement also asserted that “positive consideration” to recognise the state of Palestine is “an essential step towards the two-state solution”.
Better options are available
The UK’s position, however, introduces another dynamic. By using recognition of Palestine as a tool to punish Israel for its actual and alleged breaches of international law in Gaza, it is implicitly failing to respect Palestine’s right to self-determination.
If Palestine deserves statehood, it is on its own terms, not as a condition of Israel’s policies and actions.
But it is also setting a dangerous precedent. Countries could choose to recognise (or not recognise) states to pressure or punish them (or indeed other states) for breaches of international law. Such breaches may or may not be connected to the state actually seeking recognition.
This is important, because the post-colonial settlement of geographical boundaries remains deeply insecure in many regions. As well, low-lying island nations at risk of losing territory from sea-level rise may also find their status challenged, as territory has traditionally been a requirement of statehood.
The UK’s apparent conditional recognition of Palestine is only likely to increase this international instability around statehood.
While the UK’s announcement may be “clever politics” from a domestic perspective, and avoids outright US opposition internationally, it has conflated two separate issues.
The better option would be for the UK to recognise Palestine as a state, joining a growing number of countries that plan to do so in advance of the UN General Assembly meeting in September. It could make this subject to conditions, including the release of hostages and exclusion of Hamas from Palestinian governance.
And it should continue to press Israel to agree to a ceasefire in addition to the other demands set out in its announcement, and hold Israel accountable for its gross breaches of international law in Gaza. It can back up those demands with appropriate diplomatic and trade sanctions.
New Zealand, too, has a range of options available, and can help increase the pressure on Israel by using them.
Karen Scott does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
ER Report: Here is a summary of significant articles published on EveningReport.nz on August 1, 2025.
Why UK recognition of a Palestinian state should not be conditional on Israel’s actions Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Karen Scott, Professor in Law, University of Canterbury Getty Images The announcement this week by UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer on the recognition of a Palestininian state has been welcomed by many who want to see a ceasefire in Gaza and lasting peace in the region. In
Governments are becoming increasingly secretive. Here’s how they can be made to be more transparent Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gabrielle Appleby, Professor of Law, UNSW Law School, UNSW Sydney Transparency is vital to our democratic system of government. It promotes good government, spurring those in power into better practice. Even when what is revealed is pretty revolting, transparency means those transgressions are known, and accountability for
Wood fires, warm drinks, hot water bottles: 5 expert tips on how to avoid burns this winter Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lisa Martin, Adjunct Senior Research Fellow, School of Biomedical Sciences, Pathology and Laboratory Science, The University of Western Australia Alex P/Pexels It’s a cold, crisp evening and the air carries a chill that bites. As temperatures drop and houses get colder, we turn to trusted sources of
Is Australia becoming a more violent country? Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Samara McPhedran, Principal Research Fellow, Violence Research and Prevention Program, Griffith University Almost every day, it seems we read or hear reports another family is grieving the murder of a loved one in a street brawl, another business owner is hospitalised after trying to fend off armed
The royal commission recommended abolishing time limits on abuse cases – a year on, nothing has changed Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Zoë Prebble, Lecturer in Criminal Law, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington Getty Images Among the 138 recommendations of the Abuse in Care Royal Commission of Inquiry’s final report to parliament was a clear call: remove the legal time limits that prevent survivors of historic
Industrial-scale deepfake abuse caused a crisis in South Korean schools. Here’s how Australia can avoid the same fate Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Joel Scanlan, Senior Lecturer in Health Information Management, University of Tasmania South Korea’s deepfake crisis triggered a wave of protests in 2024. Anthony WALLACE / AFP Australian schools are seeing a growing number of incidents in which students have created deepfake sexualised imagery of their classmates. The
Colombia is producing more cocaine than ever – and more is reaching Australian shores Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Cesar Alvarez, Lecturer in Terrorism and Security Studies, Charles Sturt University Members of the Colombian anti-narcotics police test cocaine after a drug bust. RAUL ARBOLEDA/AFP via Getty Images Imagine an area larger than the Australian Capital Territory, nearly twice the size of London and four times that
How can I tell if I am lonely? What are some of the signs? Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Marlee Bower, Senior Research Fellow, Matilda Centre for Research in Mental Health and Substance Use, University of Sydney gremlin/Getty Images Without even realising it, your world sometimes gradually gets smaller: less walking, fewer days in the office, cancelling on friends. Watching plans disintegrate on the chat as
Rockabye baby: the ‘love songs’ of lonely leopard seals resemble human nursery rhymes Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lucinda Chambers, PhD Candidate in Marine Bioacoustics, UNSW Sydney CassandraSm/Shutterstock Late in the evening, the Antarctic sky flushes pink. The male leopard seal wakes and slips from the ice into the water. There, he’ll spend the night singing underwater amongst the floating ice floes. For the next
Shark tales, a sinking city and a breathless cop thriller: what to watch in August Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alexa Scarlata, Lecturer, Digital Communication, RMIT University As the cool nights continue, it’s the perfect time to cozy up with a new batch of captivating films and series. This month’s streaming highlights bring a little bit of everything, from gripping true crime, to thought-provoking political drama, and
A Hawaiian epic made in NZ: why Jason Momoa’s Chief of War wasn’t filmed in its star’s homeland Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Duncan Caillard, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, School of Communication Studies, Auckland University of Technology Jason Momoa’s historical epic Chief of War, launching August 1 on Apple TV+, is a triumph of Hawaiians telling their own stories – despite the fact their film and TV production industry now struggles
As protesters condemn Western media ‘complicity’, Gaza journalists struggle for survival Asia Pacific Report Protesters demonstrated outside several major US media outlets in Washington this week condemning their coverage of the genocide in Gaza, claiming they were to blame over misinformation and the worsening catastrophe. Banging pots and pans to spotlight the starvation crisis, they accused the media of “complicity in genocide”. Banners and placards proclaimed
The company tax regime is a roadblock to business investment. Here’s what needs to change Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alex Robson, Deputy Chair, Productivity Commission, and Adjunct Professor, Queensland University of Technology Erman Gunes/Shutterstock Productivity growth is a key driver of improvements in living standards. But in Australia over the last decade, output per hour worked grew by less than a quarter of its 60-year average.
Grattan on Friday: Aggrieved Liberals stamp their feet, testing Sussan Ley’s authority Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra As any leader of a political party knows, when you demote people they can become difficult, or worse. Among Opposition Leader Sussan Ley’s multiple problems are two very unhappy former frontbenchers. Sarah Henderson, who was opposition education spokeswoman last term,
Espionage cost Australia $12.5 billion in 2023-24, ASIO boss Mike Burgess says Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra Espionage cost Australia $12.5 billion in 2023-24, according to a study by ASIO and the Australian Institute of Criminology. The figure includes the direct costs of known espionage incidents, including state-sponsored theft of intellectual property, as well as the indirect
Labor well-placed to win three Bass seats in Tasmanian election, giving left a total of 20 of 35 MPs Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne Labor is well-placed to win three seats in the electorate of Bass at the Tasmanian election, although its party totals imply it deserves only two. This would
The Muslim world has been strong on rhetoric, short on action over Gaza and Afghanistan Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Amin Saikal, Emeritus Professor of Middle Eastern and Central Asian Studies, Australian National University; and Vice Chancellor’s Strategic Fellow, Australian National University When it comes to dealing with two of the biggest current crises in the Muslim world – the devastation of Gaza and the Taliban’s draconian
Kids need to floss too, even their baby teeth. But how do you actually get them to do it? Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dileep Sharma, Professor and Head of Discipline – Oral Health, University of Newcastle Jonathan Borba/Pexels A survey from the Australian Dental Association out this week shows about three in four children never floss their teeth, or have adults do it for them. Many of the survey respondents
Grief is the Thing with Feathers comes to the stage with a glorious intensity of purpose Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Huw Griffiths, Associate Professor of English Literature, University of Sydney Brett Boardman/Belvoir The idea of the titular Crow in Ted Hughes’ poems is wild, untameable and irreducible to words. In an early poem in the sequence, words come at Crow from all angles but he just ignores
Politics with Michelle Grattan: independent MP Allegra Spender on making tax fairer for younger Australians Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra With parliament now finished its first fortnight’s session, attention will soon be on the government’s August 19-21 economic reform roundtable, bringing together business, unions, experts and community representatives to pursue consensus on ways to lift Australia’s flagging productivity. Independent member
The Roman baths at Sabratha, Libya, were damaged in the earthquake and tsunami of 365 ADReza / Getty Images
The Greek poet Crinagoras of Mytilene (1st century BC–1st century AD) once addressed a little poem to an earthquake. He asked the quake not to destroy his house:
Earthquake, most dread of all shocks … spare my new-built house, for I do not know of any terror equal to the quivering of the earth.
Like us, ancient people had many things to say about natural disasters. So, what information did they leave behind for us, and what can we learn from them?
The story of Nicomedia
One of the most vivid ancient accounts of an earthquake is found in the writings of the Roman historian Ammianus Marcellinus (c. 330–395 AD).
On August 24 358 AD, there was a huge earthquake at Nicomedia, a city in Asia Minor.
A terrific earthquake completely overturned the city and its suburbs … since most of the houses were carried down the slopes of the hill, they fell one upon another, while everything resounded with the vast roar of their destruction.
The human effect was devastating.
The palace of the emperor Diocletian at Nicomedia was damaged in the quake of 358 AD. G. Berggren / Getty Images
Most people were “killed at one blow”, says Ammianus. Others, he tells us, were “imprisoned unhurt within slanting house roofs, to be consumed by the agony of starvation”.
Hidden in the rubble “with fractured skulls or amputated arms or legs”, injured survivors “hovered between life and death”, but most could not be recovered, “despite their pleas and protestations” resounding from beneath the rubble, according to Ammianus.
Famous natural disasters in the ancient world
A number of natural disasters involving earthquakes and tsunamis were especially famous in ancient Greek and Roman times.
In 464 BC, in Sparta, there was a huge earthquake. People at the time said it was greater than any earthquake that had ever occurred beforehand.
According to the Greek writer Plutarch (c. 46–119 AD), the earthquake “tore the land of the Lacedaemonians into many chasms”, collapsed the peaks of the surrounding mountains, and “demolished the entire city with the exception of five houses”.
In 373–372 BC, the Greek coastal cities of Helice and Buris were destroyed by tsunamis. They were permanently submerged beneath the waves.
An anonymous Greek poet evocatively wrote that the walls of these cities, which had once been thriving with many people, were now silent under the waves, “clad with thick sea-moss”.
But arguably the most famous ancient tsunami occurred on July 21 365 AD on the northern coast of Africa, at that time controlled by the Romans.
Again according to Ammianus, early in the morning there was a huge earthquake. Then, not long after, the water retreated from the shore:
the sea with its rolling waves was driven back and withdrew from the land, so that in the abyss of the deep thus revealed people saw many kinds of sea-creatures stuck fast in the slime … and vast mountains and deep valleys, which nature had hidden in the unplumbed depths.
Then, suddenly, the sea returned with a vengeance. As Ammianus tells us, it smashed over the land destroying everything in its path:
The great mass of waters killed many thousands of people by drowning … the lifeless bodies of shipwrecked persons lay floating on their backs or on their faces … great ships, driven by the mad blasts, landed on the tops of buildings, and some were driven almost two miles inland.
Earthquakes were famous for their sound. The Roman scholar Pliny the Elder (23–79 AD) explained that earthquakes have a “terrible sound” – like “the bellowing of cattle or the shouts of human beings or the clash of weapons struck together”.
Ancient ideas about what causes earthquakes and tsunamis
Like today, ancient people wanted to know what caused these phenomena. There were various different theories.
Some people thought Poseidon, god of the sea, earthquakes and horses, was responsible.
As the Greek writer Plutarch (c. 46–119 AD) comments, “men sacrifice to Poseidon when they wish to put a stop to earthquakes”.
An ancient statue of Poseidon, god of the sea and earthquakes, from the island of Milos. Sepia Times / Getty Images
However, other people looked beyond divine explanations.
One interesting theory held by the philosopher Anaximenes (6th century BC) was that the earth itself was the cause of earthquakes.
According to Anaximenes, huge parts of the earth beneath the ground can move, collapse, detach or tear away, thus causing shaking.
“Huge waves”, said Anaximenes, are “produced by the weight [of falling earth] crashing down into the [waters] from above”.
Ancient people knew nothing of tectonic plates and continental drift. These were discovered much later, mainly through the pioneering work of Alfred Wegener (1880–1930).
Preparing for natural disasters
Ancient Greeks and Romans had little way of predicting or preparing for earthquakes and tsunamis.
Pherecydes of Samos (6th century BC) was said to have predicted an earthquake “from the appearance of some water drawn from a well”, according to the Roman statesman Cicero (106–43 BC).
For the most part, though, ancient people had to live at the mercy of these occurrences.
As the anonymous author of a treatise titled On the Cosmos once wrote, natural disasters are part of life on earth:
Violent earthquakes before now have torn up many parts of the earth; monstrous storms of rain have burst out and overwhelmed it; incursions and withdrawals of the waves have often made seas of dry land and dry land of seas…
While our understanding of these events (and our ability to prepare for them, and recover afterward) has improved immeasurably since ancient times, earthquakes and tsunamis are things we will always have to deal with.
Konstantine Panegyres does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
New Caledonia’s oldest pro-independence party, the Union Calédonienne (UC), has officially rejected a political agreement on the Pacific territory’s political future signed in Paris last month.
The text, bearing the signatures of all of New Caledonia’s political parties represented in the local Congress — a total of 18 leaders, both pro-France and pro-independence — is described as a “project” for an agreement that would shape politics.
Since it was signed in the city of Bougival, west of Paris, on July 12, after 10 days of intense negotiations, it has been dubbed a “bet on trust” and has been described by French Minister for Overseas Manuel Valls as a commitment from all signing parties to report to their respective bases and explain its contents.
The Bougival document involves a series of measures and recognition by France of New Caledonia as a “State” which could become empowered with its own international relations and foreign affairs, provided they do not contradict France’s key interests.
It also envisages dual citizenship — French and New Caledonian — provided future New Caledonian citizens are French nationals in the first place.
It also describes a future devolution of stronger powers for each of the three provinces (North, South and Loyalty Islands), especially in terms of tax collection.
Since it was published, the document, bearing a commitment to defend the text “as is”, was hailed as “innovative” and “historic”.
New Caledonia’s leaders have started to hold regular meetings — sometimes daily — and sessions with their respective supporters and militants, mostly to explain the contents of what they have signed.
The meetings were held by most pro-France parties and within the pro-independence camp, the two main moderate parties, UPM (Union Progressiste en Mélanésie) and PALIKA (Kanak Liberation Party).
Over the past two weeks, all of these parties have strived to defend the agreement, which is sometimes described as a Memorandum of Agreement or a roadmap for future changes in New Caledonia.
Most of the leaders who have inked the text have also held lengthy interviews with local media.
Parties who have unreservedly pledged their support to and signed the Bougival document are:
Pro-France side: Les Loyalistes, Rassemblement-LR, Wallisian-based Eveil Océanien and Calédonie Ensemble
Pro-independence: UNI-FLNKS (which comprises UPM and PALIKA).
But one of the main components of the pro-independence movement, the FLNKS (Kanak and Socialist National Liberation Front) — as its main pillar — the Union Calédonienne, has held a series of meetings indicating their resentment at their negotiators for having signed the contested document.
UC held its executive committee on July 21, its steering committee on July 26, and FLNKS convened its political bureau on July 23.
A ‘lure of sovereignty’ All of these meetings concluded with an increasingly clear rejection of the Bougival document.
Speaking at a news conference in Nouméa yesterday, UC leaders made it clear that they “formally reject” the agreement because they regard it as a “lure of sovereignty” and does not guarantee either real sovereignty or political balance.
FLNKS chief negotiator Emmanuel Tjibaou, who is also UC’s chair, told local reporters he understood his signature on the document meant a commitment to return to New Caledonia, explain the text and obtain the approval of the political base.
“I didn’t have a mandate to sign a political agreement, my mandate was to register the talks and bring them back to our people so that a decision can be made . . . it didn’t mean an acceptance on our part,” he said, mentioning it was a “temporary” document subject to further discussions.
Tjibaou said some amendments his delegation had put on the table in Bougival “went missing” in the final text.
Union Calédonienne chair and chief FLNKS negotiator Emmanuel Tjibaou . .. some amendments that his delegation had put on the table in Bougival “went missing” in the final text. Image: RNZ Pacific
‘Bougival, it’s over’ “As far as we’re concerned, Bougival, it’s over”, UC vice-president Mickaël Forrest said.
He said it was now time to move onto a “post-Bougival phase”.
Meanwhile, the FLNKS also consulted its own “constitutionalists” to obtain legal advice and interpretation of the document.
In a release about yesterday’s media conference, UC stated that the Bougival text could not be regarded as a balance between two “visions” for Kanaky New Caledonia, but rather a way of “maintaining New Caledonia as French”.
The text, UC said, had led the political dialogue into a “new impasse” and it left several questions unanswered.
“With the denomination of a ‘State’, a fundamental law (a de facto Constitution), the capacity to self-organise, and international recognition, this document is perceived as a project for an agreement to integrate (New Caledonia) into France under the guise of a decolonisation”.
“The FLNKS has never accepted a status of autonomy within France, but an external decolonisation by means of accession to full sovereignty [which] grants us the right to choose our inter-dependencies,” the media release stated.
The pro-independence party also criticised plans to enlarge the list of people entitled to vote at New Caledonia’s local elections — the very issue that triggered deadly and destructive riots in May 2024.
It is also critical of a proposed mechanism that would require a vote at the Congress with a minimum majority of 64 percent (two thirds) before any future powers can be requested for transfer from France to New Caledonia.
Assuming that current population trends and a fresh system of representation at the Congress will allow more representatives from the Southern province (about three quarters of New Caledonia’s population), UC said “in other words, it would be the non-independence [camp] who will have the power to authorise us — or not — to ask for our sovereignty”.
They party confirmed that it had “formally rejected the Bougival project of agreement as it stands” following a decision made by its steering committee on July 26 “since the fundamentals of our struggle and the principles of decolonisation are not there”.
Negotiators no longer mandated The decision also means that every member of its negotiating team who signed the document on July 12 is now de facto demoted and no longer mandated by the party until a new negotiating team is appointed, if required.
“Union Calédonienne remains mobilised to arrive at a political agreement that takes into account the achievement of a trajectory towards full sovereignty”.
On Tuesday, FLNKS president Christian Téin, as an invited guest of Corsica’s “Nazione” pro-independence movement, told French media he declared himself “individually against” the Bougival document, adding this was “far from being akin to full sovereignty”.
Téin said that during the days that led to the signing of the document in Bougival “the pressure” exerted on negotiators was “terrible”.
He said the result was that due to “excessive force” applied by “France’s representatives”, the final text’s content “looks like it is the French State and right-wing people who will decide the (indigenous) Kanak people’s future”.
Facing crime-related charges, Téin is awaiting his trial, but was released from jail, under the condition that he does not return to New Caledonia.
The leader of a CCAT (field action coordinating cell) created by Union Calédonienne late in 2023 to protest against a proposed French Constitutional amendment to alter voters’ rules of eligibility at local elections, was jailed for one year in mainland France. However, he was elected president of FLNKS in absentia in late August 2024.
CCAT, meanwhile, was admitted as one of the new components of FLNKS.
In a de facto split, the two main moderate pillars of FLNKS, UPM and PALIKA, at the same time, distanced themselves from the pro-independence UC-dominated platform, opening a rift within the pro-independence umbrella.
The FLNKS is scheduled to hold an extraordinary meeting on August 9 (it was initially scheduled to be held on August 2), to “highlight the prospects of the pursuit of dialogue through a repositioning of the pro-independence movement’s political orientations”.
French Minister for Overseas Manuel Valls (centre) shows signatures on the last page of New Caledonia’s new Bougival agreement earlier this month . . . “If tomorrow there was to be no agreement, it would mean the future, hope, would be put into question” Image: FB/RNZ Pacific
Valls: ‘I’m not giving up’ Reacting to the latest UC statements, Valls told French media he called on UC to have “a great sense of responsibility”.
“If tomorrow there was to be no agreement, it would mean the future, hope, would be put into question. Investment, including for the nickel mining industry, would no longer be possible.”
“I’m not giving up. Union Calédonienne has chosen to reject, as it stands, the Bougival accord project. I take note of this, but I profoundly regret this position.
“An institutional void would be a disaster for [New Caledonia]. It would be a prolonged uncertainty, the risk of further instability, the return of violence,” he said.
“But my door is not closed and I remain available for dialogue at all times. Impasse is not an option.”
Valls said the Bougival document was “‘neither someone’s victory on another one, nor an imposed text: it was built day after day with partners around the table following months of long discussions.”
In a recent letter specifically sent to Union Calédonienne, the French former Prime Minister suggested the creation of an editorial committee to start drafting future-shaping documents for New Caledonia, such as its “fundamental law”, akin to a Constitution for New Caledonia.
Valls also stressed France’s financial assistance to New Caledonia, which last year totalled around 3 billion euros because of the costs associated to the May 2024 riots.
The riots caused 14 dead, hundreds of injured and an estimated financial cost of more than 2 billion euros (NZ$5.8 billion) in damage.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
The world’s oceans are being rapidly transformed as climate change intensifies. Corals are bleaching, sea levels are rising, and seawater is becoming more acidic – making life difficult for shellfish and reef-building corals. All this and more is unfolding on our watch, with profound consequences for marine ecosystems and the people who depend on them.
In response, scientists, governments and industries are trying to intervene.
People all over the world are experimenting with new ways to capture and store more carbon dioxide, or make up for damage already done.
Ocean-based climate actions include breeding more heat-tolerant corals, restoring mangroves, and farming seaweed. Such interventions offer hope, but they’re also inherently risky. Some may be ineffective, inequitable or even harmful.
The pace of innovation is now outstripping the capacity to responsibly regulate, monitor and evaluate these interventions. This means current and future generations may not be getting value for money, or worse – the chance to avoid irreversible change may be slipping away.
In our new research, published in Science, we reviewed the latest evidence on known and perceived risks of new ocean-based climate interventions. We then gathered emerging ideas on how to reduce those risks.
We found the risks aren’t being widely considered, and the benefits are unclear. But there are emerging assessment tools and planning frameworks we can build on, to plan ocean-based climate actions that meet humanity’s climate goals.
The promise and peril of marine climate interventions
Marine climate interventions vary in scope and ambition. Examples can be found all over the world. These include:
Each has its own set of benefits, costs and risks. For example, making the ocean more alkaline may help to squeeze in more carbon from the atmosphere, but it’s difficult to verify how much carbon has been removed. This makes it hard to justify the costs and the potential damage to ecosystems, such as effects on local fish populations.
Seaweed farming at scale would occupy thousands if not millions of square kilometres of oceans, displacing fishing, shipping and conservation. Harvesting 1 billion tonnes of seaweed carbon would require farming more than 1 million square km of the Pacific Ocean, and would deliver just 10% of the annual atmospheric carbon dioxide removal required to limit global warming to 1.5°C.
It’s doubtful whether seaweed farming would actually remove carbon from the atmosphere. But seaweed farming can – if well-planned – produce a range of other climate-related benefits.
Moreover, interventions often overlap in space and time, creating cumulative impacts and unintended consequences. In some cases, the projects may displace other users, undermine Indigenous rights, or erode public trust in climate science and policy. Without careful understanding and planning, these efforts could exacerbate the very problems they aim to solve.
Governance gaps and ethical dilemmas
One of the most pressing challenges is the lack of regulation and oversight suited to the scale and complexity of marine climate interventions.
Ethical dilemmas abound. Who decides what constitutes a “healthy” ocean? Who bears responsibility if an intervention causes harm? And how do we ensure benefits — such as improved livelihoods or climate resilience — are equitably distributed?
Currently, scientists, funding bodies and non-government organisations do the bulk of the decision-making. There is limited input from governments, local communities and Indigenous Peoples. This imbalance risks perpetuating historical injustices and undermining the legitimacy of many ocean-based climate actions.
Ocean Alkalinity Enhancement has been proposed for St Ives in Cornwall. diego_torres, pixabug, FAL
Toward responsible marine transformation
We identified opportunities for scientists, policymakers, and funding bodies to work together more effectively on more comprehensive assessments of interventions.
Guidelines and insights are emerging from experimental-scale research into capturing and storing “blue” carbon in ocean and coastal ecosystems. Similarly, a non-profit organisation in the United States has developed a code of conduct for marine carbon dioxide removal. However these guidelines are yet to be integrated into broader governance frameworks.
Awareness of the urgent need to ensure intervention is done responsibly is also growing. Many high-level policy documents now recognise the importance of transitioning to more sustainable, equitable, and adaptive states. For example, the Samoa Climate Change Policy 2020 recognises the need to adapt coastal economies and communities to warming oceans, while also working to reduce carbon emissions.
We can use the ocean in our fight against climate change (United Nations)
Proceed with caution
The ocean is central to our climate future. It absorbs heat, stores carbon, and sustains life. But it is also vulnerable — and increasingly, a site of experimentation. If we are to harness the promise of ocean-based climate action, we must do so with care, humility, and foresight.
Responsible governance is not a barrier to innovation — it is its foundation. By embedding ethical, inclusive, and evidence-based principles into our marine climate strategies, we can chart a course toward a more resilient and equitable ocean future.
Emily M. Ogier receives salary support from the Australia Research Council. She receives funding from The Nature Conservancy, the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation and the Blue economy Centre for Research Excellence. She is affiliated with the Centre for Marine Socioecology.
Gretta Pecl receives funding from the Australian Research Council, Department of Agriculture Water and the Environment, Department of Primary Industries NSW, Department of Premier and Cabinet (Tasmania), the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation, The Ian Potter Foundation and has received travel funding support from the Australian government for participation in the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change process. She is affiliated with the Biodiversity Council and the Centre for Marine Socioecology.
Tiffany Morrison receives funding from the Australian Research Council Laureate and Discovery Programmes, WorldFish-CGIAR ( (formerly the Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research), and The Nature Conservancy Science for Nature and People Partnership.
A former New Caledonia Congress president says there are “not enough” benefits for Kanaks in a new “draft” agreement he signed alongside pro and anti-independence stakeholders in France last month.
Roch Wamytan said that, after 10 days of deadlock discussions in Paris, he failed to secure the pro-independence mandate.
He told RNZ Pacific that he refused to sign a “final agreement”.
Instead, he said, he opted for a “draft” agreement, which is what he signed. It has been hailed as “historic” by all parties involved.
While France maintains its “neutrality”, Wamytan said that at the negotiating table it was two (France and New Caledonia’s pro-France bloc) against one (pro-Kanaky).
A main point of tension was the electoral law changes, which sparked last year’s civil unrest.
“We call on France to respect the provisions of international law, which remains our main protective shield until the process of decolonisation and emancipation is completed. Hence, our incessant interventions during negotiations on this subject [electoral law changes],” Wamytan told RNZ Pacific.
He said it was difficult to understand whether France wanted to decolonise New Caledonia or not.
Concrete measures “We have a lot of concrete measures in this proposed agreement, but the main question is a political question. Where are you [France] going with this? Independence or integration with France?”
The document, signed in the city of Bougival, involves a series of measures and recognition by France of New Caledonia as a “State” as well as dual citizenship — French and New Caledonian — provided future New Caledonian citizens are French nationals in the first place.
But this week, New Caledonia’s oldest pro-independence party, the Union Calédonienne (UC), officially rejected the political agreement signed in Paris.
However, Sonia Backès, the leader of the Caledonian Republicans Party and the president of the Provincial Assembly of Southern Province, says the agreement signed in France is “final”.
“Roch Wamytan and the pro-independence delegation signed an agreement in Bougival. Since their return to New Caledonia, their political supports have been fiercely critical of the agreement,” her office said via a statement.
“As a result, radical pro-independence leaders like Roch Wamytan have chosen to renege on their commitment and withdraw their signature. This agreement is final; there is no other viable political balance outside of it.”
So why did Wamytan sign? When asked why he signed the draft agreement when he did not agree with it, he said: “After the 10 days they obliged us to sign something.”
“We told them that we [didn’t have] the mandate of our parties to sign an agreement, but only a ‘project’ or ‘draft’.
“It was important for us to return with a paper and to show, to explain, to present, to debate, for the debate of our political party. This is the stage where we are at now, but for the moment, we do not agree with that.
“We [tried] to explain to [France and pro-France bloc] that we have a problem [with electoral law change being included].
“This is our problem. So we signed only for one reason . . . that we have to return back home and to explain where we are now, after 10 days of negotiation. [Did we] achieve the objectives, the mandate given by our political parties?”
He said one thing he wanted to make clear was that what he had signed was not definitive and was now up for negotiation.
An FLNKS (Kanak and Socialist National Liberation Front) Congress meeting is set down for this weekend with the Union Calédonienne Congress meeting held a weekend prior.
Wamytan said that it was now up to the FLNKS members to have their say and decide where to next.
“They will decide if we accept this draft agreement or we reject,” he said.
“We have two options: we accept with certain conditions, for example, on the question of the right to vote on the electoral rule. Or for the question of the trajectory from here to independence, through a referendum or the framework proposed by President Macron.”
“This is an important element to discuss with France, but after this round of discussions.”
He expected further meetings with France after community consultations.
Communication problem Wamytan admitted that the pro-independence negotiators did not communicate clearly about the agreement to their supporters.
He said after signing the document, President Macron and the pro-France signatories were quick to communicate to the media and their supporters — and the messages filtered to his supporters resulting in anger and frustrations.
He said the anger has mostly been around the signing itself, with people mistaking the draft proposal as final.
“The political, pro-Kanaky party were very, very, very angry against us. We did not communicate and this I think is our problem.”
Bribery allegations Wamytan has also dismissed unconfirmed reports that negotiators were bribed to sign a historic deal in Paris.
He said he was aware of people “chucking accusations of bribery” around, but said they were false.
“It has never been in the minds of Kanak independence leaders doing such practices,” he said.
“After the signature of the Matignon Accord 37 years ago, with [FLNKS leader Jean-Marie Tjibaou] and with us after the signature of Nouméa accord in 1998, we heard about the same allegation and some rumours like this.”
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
But, speaking to RNZ Midday Report, Clark said New Zealand needed to come on board.
“We are watching a catastrophe unfold in Gaza. We’re watching starvation. We’re watching famine conditions for many. Many are using the word genocide,” she said.
“If New Zealand can’t act in these circumstances, when can it act?”
Elders call for recognition “The Elders, a group of world leaders of which Clark is a part, last month issued a call for countries to recognise the state of Palestine, calling it the “beginning, not the end of a political pathway towards lasting peace”.
Clark said the government seemed to be trying avoid the ire of the United States by waiting until the peace process was well underway or nearing its end.
“That is no longer tenable,” she said.
“New Zealand really is lagging behind.”
Even before the recent commitments from France, Canada and the UK, 147 of the UN’s 193 member states had recognised the Palestinian state.
Clark said the hope was that the series of recognitions from major Western states would first shift the US position and then Israel’s.
“When the US moves, Israel eventually jumps because it owes so much to the United States for the support, financial, military and otherwise,” she said.
“At some point, Israel has to smell the coffee.”
Surprised over Peters Clark said she was “a little surprised” that Foreign Minister Winston Peters had not been more forward-leaning given he historically had strongly advocated New Zealand’s even-handed position.
On Wednesday, New Zealand signed a joint statement with 14 other countries expressing a willingness to recognise the State of Palestine as a necessary step towards a two-state solution.
However, later speaking in Parliament, Peters said that was conditional on first seeing progress from Palestine, including representative governance, commitment to non-violence, and security guarantees for Israel.
“If we are to recognise the state of Palestine, New Zealand wants to know that what we are recognising is a legitimate, representative, viable, political entity,” Peters told MPs.
Peters also agreed with a contribution from ACT’s Simon Court that recognising the state of Palestine could be viewed as “a reward [to Hamas] for acts of terrorism” if it was done before Hamas had returned hostages or laid down arms.
Luxon earlier told RNZ New Zealand had long supported the eventual recognition of Palestinian statehood, but that the immediate focus should be on getting aid into Gaza rather than “fragmenting and talking about all sorts of other things that are distractions”.
“We need to put the pressure on Israel to get humanitarian assistance unfettered, at scale, at volume, into Gaza,” he told RNZ.
“You can talk about a whole bunch of other things, but for right now, the world needs to focus.”
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
The sisters running Auckland’s first authentic Polynesian show for tourists say it’s not just for visitors, but also to help uplift Pacific people.
Louisa Tipene Opetaia and Ama Mosese’s Glorious Tours was pooled as one of 10 new “Treasures of Tāmaki Makaurau”: a go-to guide by Tātaki Auckland Unlimited (TAU) for local Māori tourism.
Their tour tells the story of how Auckland became the biggest Polynesian city in the world, and often starts with a drop in at a Pacific or Māori-owned cafe, a guided hīkoi up the Māngere mountain, hangi lunch, a haka show at the museum, then end with a kava-drinking experience.
The tour, which has been running for a year, aims to give visitors an Auckland experience through local eyes, with Māori-led journeys and dining events.
Opetaia said before they started their tour, tourists were travelling to Rotorua for a Pacific cultural experience.
The only other regular Polynesian show for tourists in Auckland was at Auckland Museum, where there was a daily haka show.
“We have rich culture gold in south Auckland,” she said.
“All tourists fly here, in our backyard and we wanted to offer them something right here.”
The sisters, who are of Māori and Samoan heritage, call themselves “cultural connectors”.
‘The space was lacking’ “We’ve been working for these other companies for some time, some of them not even New Zealand-owned. And we felt we were the face of these companies but behind the scenes it wasn’t a local or Māori or indigenous business.
“We decided to step into this space that we saw was lacking, and offer authentic indigenous cultural experiences here in Tāmaki Makaurau — the biggest Polynesian city in the world.”
Glorious Tours is based out of Naumi Hotel, near the Auckland Airport in Māngere.
“We tailor it to what they want, so if they like shopping we take them to places where they can buy authentic Pacific goods, or we take them to our local gallery in Māngere.
This month, the sisters will launch a Polynesian dinner and dance show in Māngere, featuring local schools.
“It’s not just for the tourists, it’s for our own people. Our kaupapa is to uplift our local people, especially our rangatahi.”
TAU director of Māori outcomes Helen Te Hira said Treasures of Tāmaki Makaurau plays a vital role in ensuring Māori culture, businesses and leadership are central to the way Tāmaki Makaurau is experienced by visitors.
“Every business on this platform brings something unique — a sense of purpose, cultural depth and creative excellence.”
LDR is local body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air. Asia Pacific Report is a partner.
A former senior UN aid official has condemned the bloodshed at the notorious US and Israel-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation’s aid food depots, describing the distribition system as having turned into a “catastrophe”.
The number of aid seekers killed continues to climb daily beyond 1000.
Martin Griffiths, director of Mediation Group International and the former Under Secretary General of the UN Humanitarian Affairs Office, said: “I think when many of us saw the first plans of the GHF to launch this operation in Gaza, we were immediately appalled by the way they were proposing to manage it.”
“It was clearly militarised. They’d have their own security contractors,” he told Al Jazeera.
“They’d have [Israeli military] camps placed right beside them. We know now that they are, in fact, under instructions by [the Israeli military].
“All of this is a crime. All of this is a deep betrayal of humanitarian values.
“But what I at least did not sufficiently anticipate was the killing and was the absolutely critical result of this operation, this sole humanitarian operation allowed by Israel in Gaza,” Griffiths added.
“The 1000 killed are an incredible statistic. I had no idea it would go that high and it’s going on daily. It’s not stopping.
“I think it’s a catastrophe more than a disappointment,” he said. “I think it’s a great sin. I think it’s a great crime.”
Humanitarian aid advocate Martin Griffiths . . . We know now that [GHF] are, in fact, under instructions by [the Israeli military]. All of this is a crime.” Image: Wikipedia
Commenting about US envoy Steve Witkoff and US ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee’s planned visit to GHF-run aid distribution sites in Gaza, he said this was “likely to be choreographed”.
However, he acknowledged it was still an “important form of witness”.
“I’m glad that they’re going,” Griffiths said.
“Maybe they will see things that are unexpected. I can’t imagine because we’ve seen so much. But I don’t see it leading to a major change.
“If I was one of the two million Gazans starving to death, this is a day I would like to go to an aid distribution point,” Griffiths added.
“There’s slightly less risk probably than any other day.”
Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Stuart J. Murray, Professor of Rhetoric and Ethics | Professeur titulaire en rhétorique et éthique, Carleton University
Why do images of Donald Trump as a galactic emperor or Luigi Mangione as a Catholic saint resonate so deeply with some people? Memes don’t just entertain — they shape how we identify with power, grievance and justice in the digital age.
A meme is a decontextualized video or image — often captioned — that circulates an idea, behaviour or style, primarily through social media. As they spread, memes are adapted, remixed and transformed, helping to solidify the communities around them.
Trump, the meme pope
Days after Pope Francis’s death in April 2025, Trump posted an AI-generated image of himself in papal regalia on Truth Social. The White House’s official X account then shared it, amplifying its reach.
Trump quickly dismissed it as a joke, but the image lingered.
Two days later, another emerged: Trump as galactic emperor, blending Star Wars aesthetics with the visual rhetoric of Warhammer 40,000, a popular dystopian sci-fi franchise featuring authoritarian rulers, imperial armies and endless war.
Trump memes like these once circulated semi-ironically in social media subcultures like Reddit and 4chan under the banner “God Emperor Trump.”
But what might previously have seemed like absurdist cosplay now carries the symbolic weight of executive power, blending religious and imperial imagery to project Trump as a mythical figure, not just a politician.
Fact-checking can’t stop them. We know they are factually untrue, but they feel true and consolidate a shared sentiment among Trump’s base.
The meme is not a joke — it’s an in-joke only the in-group understands.
And that’s the point.
A meme is an accelerant, delivering compressed emotional payloads, short-circuiting debate and reinforcing people’s political identifications. Propelled by algorithms and designed to go viral, memes solicit immediate responses — outrage, loyalty, disgust, amusement.
Memes don’t ask what’s true or what’s just.
Instead, they curate — and encode — emotional alignment, replacing liberalism’s democratic ideal of reasoned public discourse with viral attachment: grievance recoded as identity.
Elon Musk and weaponizing empathy
On Feb. 20, 2025, days after Trump appointed Elon Musk to head his new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), the Tesla founder appeared at the Conservative Political Action Conference, an annual gathering of conservative activists and officials from across the U.S.
At the conference, Musk brandished a chainsaw, declaring: “I have become the meme!.” An image of him holding the chainsaw later actually became a meme.
The image projects libertarian efficiency and masculine bravado, but it more than just mocks bureaucracy — it glorifies cutting ties to domestic, global and humanitarian responsibilities.
Far from being merely a meme, it advances a policy of neglect that intentionally lets others die.
Experts estimate that DOGE’s purge of USAID could result in 14 million preventable deaths over the next five years, disproportionately affecting marginalized populations whose historical exploitation helped generate the wealth now wielded as power.
Individuals vs. the collective
But we are not meant to feel empathy. In early 2025, Musk called empathy “the fundamental weakness of western civilization,” claiming it is “weaponized by the left.”
Yet Musk doesn’t reject empathy entirely — only empathy for individuals, which he said risks “civilizational suicide.”
Instead, Musk believes we must have empathy for “civilization as a whole.” Such rhetoric — sacrificing individuals for the collective — recalls a chilling Nazi-era slogan: Du bist nichts, dein Volk ist alles (“You are nothing, your people are everything”). Musk has also drawn criticism for making public Nazi salutes and ethno-nationalist statements advocating for white people.
If Trump and Musk memes stage fantasies of absolute power, Mangione memes reply with fantasies of redemptive rupture.
Accused of killing UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, Mangione has been lionized in memes that champion vulnerability and social justice, opposing the billionaire class — figures like Trump and Musk — who put profits over people.
These memes appear to oppose the MAGA meme machine, encoding class struggle as quiet defiance and anti-authoritarianism. Unlike Musk’s chainsaw-wielding bravado, which seems to mask a fragile ego, Mangione memes project a humble, rebellious heartthrob.
Yet, like Trump and Musk, Mangione has become a brand. His face adorns T-shirts and “St. Luigi” prayer candles, capitalizing on the popular meme that emerged soon after his arrest. This commodification mirrors right-wing meme economies, even if the message differs.
They don’t just reflect feeling — they organize it, channelling it into cultural, political and literal currency, including a Luigi crypto coin ($LUIGI) and a musical.
These memes share MAGA meme tactics: relentless repetition and emotional saturation. Instead of encouraging thoughtful debate, they rally communities around shared grievances, acts of defiance and collective faith.
Feeling our way through the feed
From MAGA to Mangione, meme-mythologies often function as rationalizations of violence — whether framed as righteous, purifying or revolutionary. But what unites Trump’s papal cosplay, Musk’s chainsaw and Mangione’s martyrdom isn’t their message but their form.
Whether cloaked in MAGA nostalgia or social justice sentiments, memes that appear to resist power often reproduce the structures that made that power so intoxicating in the first place.
We’ve seen how official White House and Department of Homeland Security social media memes have become increasingly cruel, sinister, polarizing and even radicalizing.
Meanwhile, some liberals on the left continue to promote what is known as the “marketplace of ideas” — the belief that truth will prevail if all ideas are allowed to circulate freely. But reason doesn’t always triumph over power. And memes aren’t just ideas: they’re technologies that bypass deliberation to shape our feelings, identities and ways of communicating.
Musk’s “I have become the meme” therefore reveals a paradox: he claims to master the meme, but no one can control its circulation or uptake. Trump and Mangione, too, are less individuals than avatars — produced by a digital culture that pre-shapes our perceptions of them.
The violence, however, is very real. If one violent act doesn’t justify counter-violence, it nonetheless structures and occasions it. Each side claims it is just.
Memes don’t ask: can we intentionally let others die and still be just? Answering this question is nearly impossible in a meme world. The answer will be a meme. And it will be a joke.
Stuart J. Murray receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
The response of Canada’s legacy news media to the Israeli government’s military action in Gaza for more than 640 days points to a problem within major Canadian news organizations, according to a new Canadian book, When Genocide Wasn’t News.
In the book, journalists — some writing under pseudonyms — say their newsrooms have been severely hampered by a culture of fear and an adherence to a notion of objectivity that no longer serves the public.
As Carleton University journalism professor Duncan McCue argues, an unexamined adherence to objectivity can perpetuate colonial points of view. University of British Columbia journalism professors Candis Callison and Mary Lynn Young, authors of a book about journalism’s racial reckoning in Canada, also make this argument.
Accusations of antisemitism
Accusations of bias can have an outsized impact on reporting and be used to silence journalists.
Not only do journalists say they are facing threats, they also face a context in which governments, such as the province of Ontario, are adhering to definitions of antisemitism that equate it to criticism of Israel.
Reporters who focused on stories about human rights, questioned the tactics and budgets of the military industrial complex or challenged the mistreatment of socialist activists as being unpatriotic were accused of having a liberal, left-wing, even communist, slant.
This is another unprecedented set of events that should be reported on for Canadian audiences.
How will Canadian newsrooms do better? One idea could be that newsrooms join forces to fend off accusations of bias and antisemitism. They could start with reclaiming objectivity as a practice of information-gathering and moving away from objectivity as an ideal of dispassionate reporting.
Every inhabitant of Gaza remains in imminent peril today, and the media have a responsibility to inform us about it.
Gabriela Perdomo does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
In yet another twist in his unpredictable decision making, US president Donald Trump has dramatically shortened his original 50-day ultimatum to Vladimir Putin to call a ceasefire in Ukraine to a mere ten days. It’s an unmistakable sign of Trump’s frustration with the Russian leader who he now appears to view as the main obstacle to ending the war.
Progress has been similarly limited on another of Trump’s flagship foreign policy projects: ending the war in Gaza. As a humanitarian catastrophe engulfs the territory, Trump and some of his Maga base are finally challenging Israel’s denials that, after almost two years of war, many Gazans now face a real risk of starvation.
In neither case have his efforts to mediate and bring an end to the violence borne any fruit. But not all of Trump’s efforts to stop violence in conflicts elsewhere in the world have been similarly futile. The administration brokered a ceasefire between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), which the two countries’ foreign ministers signed in Washington on June 27.
The US president has also claimed to be behind the ceasefire between India and Pakistan in May after the two sides had engaged in several days of fierce combat following a terror attack in Indian-administered Kashmir by a Pakistan-backed rebel group. And, drawing a clear parallel between this conflict and the border clashes between Cambodia and Thailand in July, Trump announced he had pushed both countries’ leaders to negotiate a ceasefire.
Three factors can explain Trump’s mixed record of peacemaking to date. First, the US president is more likely to succeed in stopping the fighting where he has leverage and is willing to use it to force foreign leaders to bend to his will. For example, Trump was very clear that there would be no trade negotiations with Thailand or Cambodia “until such time as the fighting STOPS”.
The crucial difference, so far, with the situation in the war against Ukraine is that Trump has, and has used, similar leverage only with the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky. This led to a US-Ukraine agreement on a 30-day ceasefire proposal just two weeks after the now-notorious row between Trump and Zelensky in the Oval Office.
The mere threat of sanctions against Russia, by contrast, has done little to persuade Putin to accept whatever deal might Trump offer him. Trump’s threats – which he has never followed through on – did not work in January or May. The Kremlin’s initial reactions to the latest ultimatum from the White House do not indicate a change in Putin’s attitude.
A second factor that may explain why Trump has had peacemaking success in some cases but not others is the level of complexity of US interests involved. When it comes to US relations with Russia and Israel, there is a lot more at stake for Trump.
The US president still appears keen to strike a grand bargain with Russia and China under which Washington, Beijing and Moscow would agree to recognise, and not interfere in, their respective spheres of influence. This could explains his hesitation so far to follow through on his threats to Putin.
Similarly, US interests in the Middle East – whether it’s over Iran’s nuclear programme or relations with America’s Gulf allies – have put strains on the alliance with Israel. Trump also needs to weigh carefully the impact of any move against, or in support of, Israel on his domestic support base.
In the deal Trump brokered between Rwanda and the DRC, the issues at stake were much simpler: access for US investors to the mineral riches of the eastern DRC. Just days into his second term, Trump acknowledged that the conflict was a “very serious problem”. Congo’s president, Felix Tshisekedi, responded by offering the US access to minerals in exchange for pushing Rwanda to a deal to end the invasion and stop supporting proxy forces in the DRC.
This leads to the third factor that has enabled Trump’s peace-making success so far: simpler solutions are easier to achieve. Thailand and Cambodia and India and Pakistan can go back to the situation before their recent fighting. That does not resolve any of the underlying issues in their conflicts, but returns their relations to some form of non-violent stability.
It is ultimately also in the interests of the conflict parties. They have had a chance to make their violent statements and reinforce what they will and won’t tolerate from the other side. The required investment by an external mediator to end battles that have achieved what the warring sides want anyway – to avoid further escalation – is consequently quite limited.
Complex conflicts
Getting to any kind of stability in Ukraine or the Middle East by contrast requires prolonged engagement and attention to detail. These conflicts are at a stage in which a return to how things were before is not in the interests of the parties or their external backers. Nudging warring parties along on the path to agreement under such conditions requires a well-designed process, which is absent in Ukraine and failing in Gaza.
Thanks to funding and personnel cuts, the US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, is now required to perform multiple roles. Trump relies on personal envoys with at best limited foreign policy expertise, while insisting he makes all the decisions. This ultimately suggests that the White House simply may not have the bandwidth for the level of engagement that would be necessary to get to a deal in Ukraine and the Middle East.
This is a self-inflicted opportunity lost, not only for the United States but also for the long-suffering people of Ukraine and the Middle East.
Stefan Wolff is a past recipient of grant funding from the Natural Environment Research Council of the UK, the United States Institute of Peace, the Economic and Social Research Council of the UK, the British Academy, the NATO Science for Peace Programme, the EU Framework Programmes 6 and 7 and Horizon 2020, as well as the EU’s Jean Monnet Programme. He is a Trustee and Honorary Treasurer of the Political Studies Association of the UK and a Senior Research Fellow at the Foreign Policy Centre in London.
Protesters demonstrated outside several major US media outlets in Washington this week condemning their coverage of the genocide in Gaza, claiming they were to blame over misinformation and the worsening catastrophe.
Banging pots and pans to spotlight the starvation crisis, they accused the media of “complicity in genocide”.
Banners and placards proclaimed “Stop media complicity in genocide” and “US media manufactures consent for Israel’s crimes”, as the protesters demonstrated outside media offices that included NBC News and Fox News.
But the irony was that while the protests appeared to have been ignored or overlooked by national media in the US – and certainly in New Zealand, they were strongly reported by at least one global news agency, Turkey’s Anadolu Agensi.
The protests echoed a series of statements by various news media organisations, such as Agence France-Presse concerned about the safety of their journalists from both under fire and the risk of starvation, and media freedom advocacy groups.
The Doha-based global television news network Al Jazeera, that has been producing arguably the best and most honest news coverage of Gaza and the occupied West Bank – which earned it being banned last year by both Israel and the Palestinian Authority from reporting inside their territory — called for global action to protect Gaza’s journalists.
It said in a statement that Isael’s forced starvation of the besieged enclave that threatened Gaza’s entire population, including those “risking their lives to shed light on Israel’s atrocities”.
Death toll passes 60,000 On Tuesday this week, the world noted a grim milestone in Gaza, with the Health Ministry announcing that the death toll had surpassed 60,000 (this does not include the tens of thousands of people buried under the rubble and missing, presumed dead).
Put in perspective, that is one in every 36 people in Gaza killed, and more than 90 people on average slaughtered every day.
Also, 1157 people have been killed near the notorious Israel and US-backed Gaza “Humanitarian” Foundation food depots condemned as “death traps”, while 154 people have died from starvation, 89 of them children with the numbers rising.
Israel’s genocide – ‘Everyone in Gaza is starving’ Video: Al Jazeera
An episode of the weekly media watch programme, The Listening Post, took up the theme as well, criticising the failure of many high profile Western news services from adequately reporting the horror of Israel’s devastating and cruel policies.
“When trying to stave off starvation becomes part of the job. What it means to be a Palestinian journalist in Gaza. The stories they are determined to tell, the incredible risks they are prepared to take,” said host Richard Gizbert when introducing the programme. He wasted no time firing a few caustic shots.
Metropolitan police on watch for the pro-Palestinian protesters outside Fox News offices in Washington DC this week. Image: AA screenshot APR
“What is unfolding in Gaza now has the appearance of a final solution, orchestrated by Israel and the United States, Israel’s other ally: The transformation of parts of the Gaza strip into starvation and concentration camps, a place where famine has been turned into a weapon of war,” he said.
“Reporting on the reality of this genocide can amount to a death sentence. Palestinian journalists can easily identify with the suffering they are documenting since they too are going hungry.
“They have been targeted because for [Israeli Prime Minister] Benjamin Netanyahu, like other genocidal leaders before him, starving a population is much easier to do when no one is watching.
An Al Jazeera reporter ducks for cover as bombs hit a building behind her in a live broadcast from Gaza . . . featured in The Listening Post’s starvation report. Image: AA screenshot APR
Perpetrator ‘left out’ “Across Western mainstream media, news outlets have been unable to ignore this story of mass starvation in Gaza. But in report after report, they have made a habit of leaving out a key detail – naming the perpetrators of the famine, Israel.
“The missing actors, the sanitised language, the use of the passive grammatical voice, it is all part of the playbook for far too many international news outlets and that is exactly what the few Palestinian journalists still standing are out to tell the world.”
Gizbert explained that “journalists in Gaza already have the world’s toughest assignment”: “Job one for almost 22 months now has been survival; job two, telling heartbreaking stories; documenting a genocide while under fire.”
Hossam Shabat reports on his colleague Anas al-Sharif’s experience at Al Shifa hospital and the starvation of babies in Gaza. Image: Instagram/@hossam_shbat
Like, for example, Al Jazeera Arabic’s Anas al-Sharif who was reporting live from outside Al Shifa medical complex when a woman behind him collapsed at the hospital’s gate.
Al-Sharif, who had reported on the genocide of his own people for more than 650 days without rest or complaint, through Israeli occupation airstrikes, drone attacks, and countless “scenes resembling hell”, suddenly could not take it anymore.
He broke down: “People are falling to the ground from the severity of hunger,” al-Sharif said through his tears. “They need one sip of water. They need one loaf of bread.”
Al-Sharif has also been threatened by the Israeli military, accusing him of being a “Hamas militant”, an accusation strongly denied by Al Jazeera, denouncing what it called Tel Aviv’s “campaign of incitement” against its reporters in the Gaza Strip.
Discredited for bias Many Western mainstream media – including BBC, CNN, Sky, ITN, and Australia’s public broadcaster ABC — have been repeatedly discredited for their “pro-Israel bias” by scores of journalists who have acted as whistleblowers about the actions of their own news organisations.
According to a Declassified UK report, for example, the journalists working for a range of outlets from across the political spectrum have “painted a consistent picture of the obstacles faced by reporters who want to humanise Palestinians or scrutinise Israeli government narratives”. The US media is also under attack and has been putting up a lame defence.
Last week, more than 100 aid groups warned of “mass starvation” throughout Gaza — predictably denied by Israeli government in the face of overwhelming evidence — with their staff severely impacted by shortages and serious implications for journalists already being threatened with targeting by the Israeli military.
Israel faces growing global pressure over the enclave’s dire humanitarian crisis, where more than two million people have endured 22 months of war. UN Security Council member France has led a group of countries announcing that they plan to recognise the Palestinian state at the UN in September, with United Kingdom, Canada, Malta and Finland among those following with the total number now almost 150 of the 193 UN member states.
A statement with 111 signatories, including Doctors Without Borders (MSF), Save the Children and Oxfam, warned that “our colleagues and those we serve are wasting away”. The groups called for an immediate negotiated ceasefire, the opening of all land crossings and the free flow of aid through UN-led mechanisms.
Al Jazeera’s Nour Odeh reported from Amman that the Israeli government had accused the UK of supporting the establishment of a “jihadi” state and of derailing efforts to reach a ceasefire.
“But really,” she said, “the Israeli media, for example, is describing this as a political tsunami, a realisation of how significant the tide is, and how improbable it is to turn it back to countries withholding recognition because Israel said it doesn’t want it.”
Calling for sanctions She also noted how 31 high-profile Israelis, including the former speaker of the Knesset, a former attorney general, and several recipients of Israel’s highest cultural award, were calling on world governments to impose crippling sanctions on Israel to stop the starvation of Palestinians in Gaza and their expulsion
“This was taboo just a few days ago and has never really been done before, certainly not at this level of prominence of the signatories,” Odeh added.
“Israel is starving Gazan journalists into silence,” says the CPJ. Image: CPJ screenshot APR
The New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) added its voice to the appeal by aid agencies to call for an end to Israel’s starvation of journalists and other civilians in Gaza, backing the plea for states to “save lives before there are none left to save.”
In a statement on its website, the CPJ accused Israel of “starving journalists into silence”.
“Israel is starving Gazan journalists into silence. They are not just reporters, they are frontline witnesses, abandoned as international media were pulled out and denied entry,” said CPJ regional director Sara Qudah.
“The world must act now: protect them, feed them, and allow them to recover while other journalists step in to help report. Our response to their courageous 650 plus-days of war reporting cannot simply be to let them starve to death.”
As Israel partially eased its 11-week total blockade of Gaza that began in May, CPJ published the testimony of six journalists who described how “starvation, dizziness, brain fog, and sickness” had threatened their ability to report.
Among highlights cited by the CPJ: • On June 20, Al Jazeera correspondent Anas Al Sharif — the journalist cited earlier in this article — posted online: “I am drowning in hunger, trembling in exhaustion, and resisting the fainting that follows me every moment . . . Gaza is dying. And we die with it.” • Sally Thabet, correspondent for Al-Kofiya satellite channel, told CPJ that she fainted consciousness after doing a live broadcast on July 20 because she had not eaten all day. She regained consciousness in Al-Shifa hospital, where doctors gave her an intravenous drip for rehydration and nutrition. In an online video, she described how she and her three daughters were starving. • Another Palestinian journalist, Shuruq As’ad said Thabet had been the third journalist to collapse on air from starvation that week, and posted a photograph of Thabet with the drip in her hand. • During a live broadcast on July 20, Al-Araby TV correspondent Saleh Al-Natour said: “We have no choice but to write and speak; otherwise, we will all die.”
Little of this horrendous state of affairs has made it onto the pages of newspapers, websites of the television screens in the New Zealand mainstream media which seems to have a pro-Israel slant and rarely interviews Palestinian journalists or analysts for balance.
“Stop media complicity in genocide” says the protest banner in Washington DC. Image: AA screenshot APR
When historians and the public think about the end of domestic slavery in west Africa, they often imagine colonial governors issuing decrees and missionaries working to end local traffic in enslaved people.
Two of my recent publications tell another part of the story. I am a historian of west Africa, and over the past five years, I have been researching anti-slavery ideas and networks in the region as part of a wider research project.
My research reveals that colonial administrations continued to allow domestic slavery in practice and that African activists fought this.
In one study I focused on Francis P. Fearon, a trader based in Accra, the Ghanaian capital. He exposed pro-slavery within the colonial government through numerous letters written in the 1890s (when the colony was known as the Gold Coast).
In another study I examined the Lagos Auxiliary, a coalition of lawyers, journalists and clergy in Nigeria. Their campaigning secured the repeal of Nigeria’s notorious Native House Rule Ordinance in 1914. That ordinance had been enacted by the colonial government to maintain local slavery in the Niger Delta region.
Considered together, the two studies demonstrate how local campaigners used letters, print culture, imperial pressure points and personal networks to oppose practices that had kept thousands of Africans in bondage.
The methods Fearon and the Lagos Auxiliary pioneered still matter because they show how marginalised communities can compel power‑holders to close the gap between laws and lived reality. They remind us that well‑documented local testimony, amplified trans-nationally, can still overturn official narratives, compel policy change, and keep institutions honest.
Colonial ‘abolition’ that wasn’t
West Africa was a major source of enslaved people during the transatlantic slave trade. The transatlantic trade was suppressed in the early 19th century, but this did not bring an end to domestic slavery.
Accordingly, when the Gold Coast was formally annexed as a British colony in 1874, the imperial government declared slave dealing illegal. And slave-dealing was criminalised across southern Nigeria in 1901. On paper these measures promised freedom, but in practice loopholes empowered slave-holders, chiefs and colonial officials who continued to demand coerced labour.
On the Gold Coast, the 1874 abolition law was never enforced. The British governor informed slave-owners that they might retain enslaved persons provided those individuals did not complain. By 1890, child slavery had become widespread in towns such as Accra. According to the local campaigners, it was even sanctioned by the colonial governor. This led to some Africans uniting to establish a network to oppose it.
The Niger Delta region of Nigeria had a similar experience. The colonial administration enacted the Native House Rule Ordinance to counteract the effects of the Slave-Dealing Proclamation of 1901 which criminalised slave dealing with a penalty of seven years’ imprisonment for offenders. The Native House Rule Ordinance required every African to belong to a “House” under a designated head. It went on to criminalise any person who attempted to leave their “House”. In the Niger Delta kingdoms such as Bonny, Kalabari and Okrika, the word “House” never referred to a single dwelling. Rather, it denoted a self-perpetuating, named corporation of relatives, dependants and slaves under a chief, which owned property and spoke with one voice. By the 1900s, “Houses” had become the primary units through which slave ownership was organised.
Therefore, the Native House Rule Ordinance compelled enslaved people in Houses to remain with their masters. The masters were empowered to use colonial authority to discipline them. District commissioners executed arrest warrants against runaways. In exchange, the House heads and local chiefs supplied the colonial administration with unpaid labour for public works.
African campaigners in Accra and Lagos organised to challenge what they perceived as the British colonial state’s support for slavery.
Fearon: an undercover abolitionist in Accra
Francis Fearon was an educated African, active in the Accra scene during the second half of the 19th century. He was highly literate and part of elite circles. He was closely associated with the journalist Edmund Bannerman. He regularly wrote to local newspapers, often expressing concerns about racism against Black people and moral decay.
On 24 June 1890, Fearon sent a 63-page letter, with ten appendices, to the Aborigines’ Protection Society in London. That dossier would form the basis of several further communications. He alleged that child trafficking continued.
As evidence, he transcribed the confidential court register of Accra and claimed that Governor W. B. Griffith had instructed convicted slave-owners to recover their “property”.
Fearon’s tactics were audacious. He remained anonymous, relied on court clerks for documents, and supplied the Aborigines’ Protection Society with evidence. He pleaded with the society to investigate the colonial administration in the Gold Coast.
Although the society publicised the scandal, subsequent narratives quietly effaced the African source.
Lagos elites organise – and name the problem
Like Fearon, Nigerian campaigners also wrote to the Anti-Slavery and Aborigines’ Protection Society. They denounced the colonial government in Nigeria for promoting slavery, but they did not remain anonymous.
By this time, the Native House Rule Ordinance had prompted some enslaved people to flee the districts in which it was enforced. They sought refuge in Lagos. Through these arrivals, Lagosian elites learned of the ordinance. They unleashed a vigorous campaign against the colonial state.
The principal figures in this movement included Christopher Sapara Williams, a barrister, and James Bright Davies, editor of The Nigerian Times. Others included politician Herbert Macaulay, Herbert Pearse, a prominent merchant, Bishop James Johnson and the Reverend Mojola Agbebi. Unlike Fearon’s lone-wolf strategy, they mounted a coordinated assault on the colonial administration. They drafted petitions, briefed sympathetic European organisations, and inundated local newspapers with commentary.
Their arguments blended humanitarian indignation with constitutional acumen. They insisted that the ordinance contravened both British liberal ideals and African custom.
After years of pressure the law was amended and then quietly repealed in 1914.
Why these stories matter now
Contemporary scholarship on abolition is gradually shifting from asking “what Britain did for Africa” to examining the role Africans played in ending slavery.
Many African abolitionists who fought and lost their lives in the struggle against slavery have long gone unacknowledged. This is beginning to change.
The two articles discussed here highlight the creativity of Africans who, decades before radio or civil-rights NGOs, used transatlantic information circuits. They exposed colonial governments that continued to rely on forced-labour economies long after slavery was supposed to have ended.
They remind us that grassroots documentation can overturn official narratives. Evidence-based advocacy, coalition-building, and the strategic use of global media remain potent instruments.
Research for these articles was funded by the European Research Council under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (Grant Agreement No. 885418).
If you were to walk through the corridors of some of the world’s leading cricket schools, you might hear the crack of leather on willow long before the bell for the end of the day rings.
Across the cricketing world, elite schools have served as key feeder systems to national teams for decades. They provide young players with superior training facilities, high-level coaching and competitive playing opportunities.
This tradition has served as cricket’s most dependable talent pipeline. But is it a strength or a symptom of exclusion?
My recent study examined the school backgrounds of 1,080 elite men’s cricketers across eight countries over a 30-year period. It uncovered telling patterns.
Top elite cricket countries such as South Africa, England and Australia continue to draw heavily from private education systems. In these nations, cricket success seems almost tied to one’s school uniform.
I argue that if cricket boards want to promote equity and competitiveness, they will need to broaden the talent search by investing in grassroots cricket infrastructure in under-resourced areas.
For cricket to be a sport that anyone with talent can succeed in, there will need to be more school leagues and entry-level tournaments as well as targeted investment in community-based hubs and non-elite school zones.
Findings
South Africa is a case in point. My previous study in 2020 outlined that more than half of its national players at One-Day International (ODI) World Cups came from boys-only schools (mostly private).
These schools are often well-resourced, with turf wickets, expert coaches and an embedded culture of competition. Unsurprisingly, the same schools tend to produce a high number of national team batters, as they offer longer game formats and better playing surfaces. Cricket’s colonial origins have influenced the structure and culture of school cricket being tied to a form of privilege.
In Australia and England, the story is not very different. Despite their efforts to diversify player sourcing, private schools still dominate. Even in cricketing nations that celebrate working-class grit, such as Australia, private school players continue to shape elite squads.
The statistics say as much; for example: about 44% of Australian Ashes test series players since 2010 attended private schools, and for England, the figure is 45%. That’s not grassroots, it could be regarded as gated turf…
Yet not all countries follow this route. The West Indies, Pakistan and Sri Lanka reflect very different models. Club cricket, informal play and community academies provide their players with opportunities to rise. These countries have lower reliance on private schools. Some of their finest players emerged from modest public schooling or neighbourhood cricketing networks.
India provides an interesting hybrid. Although elite schools such as St. Xavier’s and Modern School contribute players, most national stars emerge from public institutions or small-town academies. The explosion of the Indian Premier League since 2008 has also democratised access, pulling in talent from previously overlooked and underdeveloped cities.
In these regions, scouting is based on potential, not privilege.
So why does this matter?
At first glance, elite schools producing elite cricketers might appear logical. These institutions have the resources to nurture talent. But scratch beneath the surface and troubling questions appear.
Are national teams truly reflecting their countries? Or are they simply echo chambers of social advantage?
In South Africa, almost every Black African cricketer to represent the country has come through a private school (often on scholarship). That suggests that talent without access remains potentially invisible. It also places unfair pressure on the few who make it through, as if they carry the hopes of entire communities.
I found that in England, some county systems have started integrating players from state schools, but progress is slow. In New Zealand, where cricket is less centralised around private institutions, regional hubs and public schools have had more success in spreading opportunities. However, even there, Māori and Pasifika players remain underrepresented in elite squads.
Four steps that can be taken
1. One solution lies in recognising that schools don’t have a monopoly on talent. Cricket boards must increase investment in grassroots infrastructure, particularly in under-resourced areas. Setting up community hubs, supporting school-club partnerships and more regional competitions could discover hidden talent.
2. Another step is to improve the visibility and reach of scouting networks. Too often, selection favours players from known institutions. By diversifying trial formats and leveraging technology (such as video submissions or performance-tracking apps), selectors can widen their net. It’s already happening in India, where IPL scouts visit the most unlikely of places.
3. Coaching is another stumbling block. In many countries, high-level coaches are clustered in elite schools. National boards should consider optimising salaries as well as rotating certified coaches into public schools and regional academies. They should also ensure coaches are developed to be equipped to work with diverse learners and conditions.
4. Technology offers other exciting possibilities too. Virtual simulations, motion tracking and AI-assisted video reviews are now common in high-performance centres. Making simplified versions available to lower-income schools could level the playing field. Imagine a township bowler in South Africa learning to analyse their technique using only a smartphone and a free app?
Fairness in sport
The conversation about schools and cricket is not just about numbers or stats. It is about fairness. Sport should be the great leveller, not another mechanism of exclusion. If cricket is to thrive, it needs to look beyond scoreboards and trophies. It must ask who gets to play and who never gets seen?
A batter from a village school in India, a wicket-keeper from a government school in Sri Lanka or a fast bowler in a South African township; each deserves the chance to be part of the national story. Cricket boards, policymakers and educators must work together to make that possible.
The game will only grow when it welcomes players from all walks of life. That requires more than scholarships. It requires a reset of how we think about talent. Because the next cricket superstar may not wear a crest on their blazer. They may wear resilience on their sleeve.
Habib Noorbhai does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Maha Rafi Atal, Adam Smith Senior Lecturer in Political Economy, School of Social and Political Sciences, University of Glasgow
The trade deal between the US and the European Union, squeezed in days before the re-introduction of Donald Trump’s “liberation day” tariffs, is reflective of the new politics of global trade. Faced with the threat of 30% baseline tariffs from Washington, as well as additional levies on specific sectors, the EU has secured a partial reprieve of a flat 15% tariff on all goods.
Was this the best the bloc could have achieved? In the time available, it may well have been. The 15% rate is higher than the UK secured earlier this year, but it’s significantly below the level applied to China and Mexico, and on par with Japan.
The EU has also managed a “zero-for-zero” tariffs deal on some hi-tech goods, notably semiconductors vital for products like phones and laptops. This is something the UK did not push for or secure in its own framework agreed with the US president.
What’s more, EU leaders have argued that agreeing to the deal has security benefits in protecting dwindling US support for European defence. The urgency of Europe’s security concerns in Ukraine made these talks different from trade negotiations in the first Trump administration, when Europe could afford to be more aggressive.
The biggest winners in this deal are Europe’s carmakers. The US has collapsed various sector-specific duties on goods like aircraft, cars and automotive parts into the 15% ceiling. This effectively reduces tariffs on EU-made cars (from 27.5%).
American automakers, meanwhile, rely heavily on parts from Mexico and China – still subject to higher tariffs at the time of writing. This makes EU vehicles more competitive for US consumers than “American” cars that rely on overseas parts.
Most importantly however, like the UK deal before it, the new EU agreement is a statement of understanding between the White House and the European Commission, rather than a formal treaty. A treaty would be subject to parliamentary ratification on both sides.
But the semi-formal nature of this agreement allows both Trump and European leaders to portray the deal as a “win” by playing fast and loose with what’s actually in it.
For example, the Trump administration will celebrate an EU commitment to buy US$250 billion (£189 billion) in US energy imports annually. Yet the concession holds no legal weight in the EU. The European Commission, which negotiated with Trump, does not buy any energy nor does it manage the power grid inside its 27 member states.
The commission can encourage, but cannot compel, those states to buy American. (Indeed, it might want to do so anyway, since it helps it to pivot away from Russian gas). But ultimately, member states and businesses decide where their energy supply comes from, and they are not direct parties to the deal. Only a formal treaty ratified by the European parliament would compel them.
No guarantees from Trump
The informal nature of this agreement also allows EU member states to protest against what they see as capitulation to Trump’s demands without real consequence. After all, there is not yet a treaty text they would be required to vote on or implement.
The Trump administration similarly imposed its sweeping tariff threats in early spring without a vote from Congress, and has been making ad hoc changes to the rates in the same way.
On the one hand, this means European countries may not ultimately be required to implement some of the deal’s less savoury elements such as the energy purchases or lowering the bloc’s own tariffs on US goods.
On the other hand, this means the Trump administration – notorious for abrupt changes of turn – can also renege at any time. In reality, there is little the EU can do about this. The question of leverage looms large. Trump’s longstanding antipathy towards the EU – seeing it less as an ally and more as a rival – meant that Brussels was never negotiating from a position of strength.
The fact that the EU avoided the worst-case scenario, protected key sectors and secured other sector-specific advantages suggests a deal shaped not by triumph, but by containment of Trump. Since the deal was announced, the picture emerging from many European leaders has been one of gloom. True, the EU didn’t win – but it survived. And that, for now, is probably enough.
Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox.Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.
Maha Rafi Atal does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jonathan Este, Senior International Affairs Editor, Associate Editor, The Conversation
This article was first published in The Conversation UK’s World Affairs Briefing email newsletter. Sign up to receive weekly analysis of the latest developments in international relations, direct to your inbox.
It feels as if things are moving at completely different speeds in Gaza and in the outside world. From the embattled Gaza Strip the narrative is depressingly familiar. Dozens more Palestinian civilians have been killed in the past 24 hours as they try to get hold of scarce supplies of food.
Aid agencies report that despite air drops of supplies and “humanitarian pauses” in the fighting, the amount of food getting through to the starving people of Gaza remains pitifully insufficient.
Two more children are reported to have died of starvation, bringing the total number of hunger-related deaths to 159, according to Palestinian sources quoted by al-Jazeera.
US envoy Steve Witkoff arrived in Jerusalem for more talks as the US president Donald Trump posted his latest bout of social media diplomacy on his TruthSocial site, a message which appears pretty faithful to the Netanyahu government’s position: “The fastest way to end the Humanitarian Crises in Gaza is for Hamas to SURRENDER AND RELEASE THE HOSTAGES!!”
Both sides continue to reject the other side’s demands, bringing ceasefire negotiations to an effective standstill.
In the outside world, meanwhile, events seem to be gathering pace. A “high-level conference” at the United Nations in New York brought together representatives of 17 states, the European Union and the Arab League, resulting in “a comprehensive and actionable framework for the implementation of the two-state solution and the achievement of peace and security for all”.
Sign up to receive our weekly World Affairs Briefing newsletter from The Conversation UK. Every Thursday we’ll bring you expert analysis of the big stories in international relations.
What first catches the eye about this proposal, which was signed by Saudi Arabia,
Qatar, Egypt and Jordan, is that it links a peace deal with the disarming and disbanding of Hamas. It also condemns the militant group’s savage attack on southern Israel on October 23 2023, which was the catalyst for the latest and arguably most grievous chapter of this eight-decade conflict. It’s the first time the Arab League has taken either of these positions.
The New York declaration, as it has been dubbed, envisages the complete withdrawal of Israeli security forces from Gaza and an end to the displacement of Palestinians. Government will be the responsibility of the Palestinian Authority (PA), and a conference to be scheduled in Egypt will design a plan for the reconstruction of Gaza, much of which has been destroyed in the 20-month assault by the Israel Defense Forces.
It is, writes Scott Lucas, a “bold initiative” which, “in theory could end the Israeli mass killing in Gaza, remove Hamas from power and begin the implementation of a process for a state of Palestine. The question is whether it has any chance of success.”
Lucas, an expert in US and Middle East politics at the Clinton Institute of University College Dublin, is not particularly sanguine about the short-term prospects for a ceasefire and the alleviation of the desperate conditions for the people of Gaza. But what it represents more than anything else, is “yet another marker of Israel’s increasing isolation”.
He points to recent announcements that France, the UK (subject to conditions) and Canada will recognise the state of Palestine at the UN general assembly in September. The prospect of normalisation between Israel and Arab states, at the top of the agenda a few short years ago, is now very unlikely. And in the US, which remains Israel’s staunchest ally, a Gallup poll recently found that public opinion is turning against Israel and its prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu.
But how important are the declarations by France, the UK and Canada of intent to potentially recognise Palestinian statehood, asks Malak Benslama-Dabdoub. As expert in international law at Royal Holloway University of London, who has focused on the question of Palestinian statelessness, Benslama-Dabdoub thinks that the French and British pledges bear closer examination.
The French declaration was made on July 24 on Twitter by the president, Emmanuel Macron. Macron envisages a “demilitarised” state, something Benslama-Dabdoub sees as a serious problem, as it effectively denies the fundamental right of states to self-determination and would rob a future Palestinian state of the necessary right to self-defence.
The declaration by the UK prime minister that Britain may also recognise Palestinian statehood in September is framed as a threat rather than a pledge. Unless Israel agrees to a ceasefire, allows the UN to recommence humanitarian efforts and engages in a long-term sustainable peace process, the UK will go ahead with recognising Palestine at the UN.
You have to consider that the UK government’s statement said that the position has always been that “Palestinian statehood is the inalienable right of the Palestinian people”. So to frame this as a threat rather than a demand is arguably to deny that “inalienable right”.
Paul Rogers also sees serious problems with the pledges to recognise Palestinian statehood. Demands for Hamas to disarm and play no further role in Palestinian government he sees as a non-starter as is the thought of a demilitarised Palestine. “Neither plan has the slightest chance of getting off the ground.”
Rogers, who has researched and written on the Middle East for more than 30 years, also thinks that without the full backing of the US there is very little chance that a peace plan could succeed.
Rogers finds it hard to believe that Washington will change tack on the Palestinian question, “unless the US president somehow gets the idea that his own reputation is being damaged”. There’s always a chance of this. News from the Gaza Strip is relentlessly horrifying and the aforementioned polls suggest many voters are reassessing their views of the conflict. But Trump is heavily indebted for his re-election to the far-right Christian Zionist movement, who wield a great deal of power with the White House.
The other thing that might influence the conflict is if enough of the IDF’s top brass recognise the futility of waging what has always been an unwinnable conflict. This, writes Rogers, is whispered about in Israel’s military circles and one eminent retired general, Itzhak Brik, has come out and said: “Hamas has defeated us.”
These, writes Rogers, are currently the only routes to an end to the conflict.
We mentioned earlier that the Canadian prime minister, Mark Carney, has also pledged to recognise the state of Palestine in September. This was immediately greeted by Trump with the threat that he does so it will derail a trade deal with the US. Whether this will cut any ice with Carney, who had to make concessions to get the trade deal done in the first place, remains to be seen.
But there’s a broader point here, writes Stefan Wolff. As Wolff reports, this week the foreign ministers of the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda got together in Washington to sign a ceasefire deal, brokered by the US. Trump also claims to have successfully ended a conflict between India and Pakistan at the end of May and hostilities between Thailand and Cambodia earlier this month.
Meanwhile his efforts to secure peace deals, or even a lasting ceasefire, in Gaza or Ukraine have been unsuccessful.
Wolff considers why some countries respond to Trump’s diplomatic efforts while others don’t. There are a number of reasons, principally the US president’s ability to apply leverage through trade deals or sanctions and the differing complexity of the conflicts.
He also points to the depleted resources of the US state department, Trump’s use of personal envoys with little foreign affairs experience and the US president’s insistence on making all the important decisions himself. He concludes: “The White House simply may not have the bandwidth for the level of engagement that would be necessary to get to a deal in Ukraine and the Middle East.”
One US government department whose resources haven’t been depleted under Donald Trump is the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, known as Ice. Part of the Department of Homeland Security, Ice has been responsible for identifying and detaining non-citizens and undocumented migrants.
Their agents carry guns, wear masks and typically operate in plain clothes, although they often wear military kit. The agency received massive funding via Trump’s One Bzig Beautiful Bill Act earlier this month, which will allow the agency to recruit hundreds, if not thousands, of new agents. The number of arrests is increasing steadily, as is the disquiet their operations are prompting in many American cities, where opposition protests are also growing.
Dafydd Townley, an expert in US politics at the University of Portsmouth, explains how Ice operates and where it sits in Donald Trump’s plan to deport millions of illegal migrants from the US.
Simple things like avoiding chemical pesticides and leaving leaves where they fall can help make your garden a more welcoming environment for wildlife and support biodiversity. (Jeffrey Hamilton/Unsplash)
Biodiversity is essential to mitigating and adapting to climate change, enhancing the resilience of ecosystems and safeguarding the ecological functions that all living beings depend on for survival.
Cultivating a garden for biodiversity is not an all-in or nothing task. In fact, there is a wide range of simple actions anyone can take to regenerate and conserve biodiversity right at home.
We are currently organizing a biodiversity public literacy campaign at the National Environmental Treasure, a people’s trust fund devoted to funding Canadian environmental organizations.
Educational, ecologically informed signage can help interpret the garden for visitors. These signs serve as a practical tool to share gardening practices and highlight the garden’s environmental benefits with the community. (Nina Marie Lister)
Together, we’ve created a series of free, fact-based guides to help people learn how to cultivate biodiversity and support for wildlife habitat in private gardens.
This series currently includes four comprehensive booklets, each focusing on key aspects of biodiversity gardening:
While there are plenty of great garden practices out there, these are five easy and impactful ways to boost biodiversity and cultivate a garden safe for urban wildlife, taken directly from our booklets.
Use alternatives to pesticides
Pesticides in your garden can harm beneficial insects and can be detrimental to the environment, wildlife and human health. Instead of using chemical-based pesticides, try natural alternatives like biopesticides, horticultural oils and insecticidal soaps that can be just as effective.
Likewise, attracting predatory insects and wildlife into your garden who will actively feed on the harmful pest is also an effective starting point as this is a process of pest-control that occurs naturally in healthy ecosystems.
There are also DIY pesticides, such as sea salt spray, water-vinegar mixtures and coffee grounds.
A rewilded habitat meadow featuring a selection of native wildflowers and habitat logs left to enrich the soil, support pollinators and offer seating for visitors. (Nina Marie Lister)
Leave the leaves
Decomposing plant litter, like fallen dead leaves, tree bark, needles and twigs, is an important component of maintaining soil health, nutrient cycling and biodiversity.
By choosing to leave the leaves in your garden, you will support the variety of species who overwinter in them, from bees and caterpillars, to butterflies, spiders and more.
Prioritize pollinator-attractive plants
In addition to pollination, insects are beneficial for a variety of other reasons including for pest control, seed dispersal and decomposition.
The best way to attract insects largely depends on which insect you are trying to attract. But as a general rule, it is always a good practice to source plants locally and prioritize native species.
Next best to native plants are benign ornamentals and non-natives. Cultivating a diverse range of flowers, especially native plants and herbs, promotes a resilient ecosystem. It also helps natives out-compete invasive species and to reverse the downward trends of mass species decline.
Birds contribute to healthy ecosystems: they pollinate plants, disperse seeds and prey on insects. Unfortunately, North American bird populations are experiencing a rapid decline due to habitat loss, degradation and other global pressures.
Organic gardening without pesticides or herbicides, keeping cats indoors, removing potential entanglement hazards and using bird-collision prevention markers on reflective surfaces can not only attract birds, but also ensure their safety as well.
Birds contribute to healthy ecosystems: they pollinate plants, disperse seeds and prey on insects. (Unsplash/Richard Bell)
These disputes over the scope and application of bylaws have brought attention to various legal contradictions and outcomes that negatively impact progress on biodiversity recovery, all the while undermining and negating related environmental objectives on private land.
By advocating and encouraging your municipal leaders to adopt science-based biodiversity-supportive bylaws, you help to establish the legal frameworks and political agendas that directly impact long-term ecological health and promote sustainable development and the regeneration of biodiversity.
Ann Dale receives funding from the CRC Secretariat, the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the Hewlett Foundation.
Sabrina Careri does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Summer is popularly imagined as bringing joy to all young people. Yet it is not an equal break or of the same quality for all students.
Learning loss is the decline in academic skills and knowledge that can occur when students are not engaged in structured learning, especially during extended breaks like summer.
Black families face challenges in accessing culturally relevant and affirming summer opportunities. As work by education researcher Obianuju Juliet Bushi and others has documented, for many Black families, the question isn’t just “what will my child do this summer?” It’s “where can my child go to be safe, affirmed and supported?”
As the manager of research with the charitable, Black-led non-profit organization Youth Association for Academics, Athletics and Character Education (YAAACE) in the Jane Finch area of Toronto, I share insights about how culturally responsive community programs can address opportunity gaps, and how parents in Black families can support their kids’ successful transition back to school.
This article draws on insights from conversations I have had with various YAAACE program participants, parents and educators, as well as leadership, including Devon Jones, Nene, and Dave Mitchell.
The opportunity gap refers to the unequal access to resources, supports and learning experiences that affect students’ ability to succeed, often based on race, income and geography.
While these experiences shape the mental health and academic outcomes of students, schools often lack culturally relevant supports or trauma-informed responses.
Summer programs are one important part of countering anti-Black racism in schools. These can support student transitions by mitigating learning loss and helping to close the opportunity gap.
Programs that centre Africentricity and Black excellence led by staff with lived experiences provide culturally responsive and emotionally supportive environments that affirm Black identities.
This builds confidence in Black students and ensures students return to school in the fall better prepared to thrive academically, socially, emotionally and culturally.
YAAACE’s seven-week Summer Institute offers a model that affirms identity, cultivates belonging and accelerates achievement. Each summer, approximately 300 students from grades 3 through 12 attend the institute, which blends literacy and numeracy instruction with culturally responsive learning, arts-based programming, robotics, mentorship and athletics.
Students are taught by Ontario certified teachers and supported by Black staff and practitioners trained in trauma-informed care. For families who can’t afford camp fees, the program is free or subsidized.
YAAACE’s Inspire Academy Mathematics Program provides early access to high school math courses. Grade 8 graduates earn a high school math credit through an intensive summer course led by a team of teachers and teacher assistants in a supportive, inclusive environment. In cases where students are behind provincial standards, they receive additional supports with low staff-to-student ratios.
Summer is a crucial time to support children’s learning and well-being, especially for Black families navigating systems that often overlook their strengths.
Below are three practical ways to support your child during the summer break and when school starts in September.
Create routines that balance learning and Black joy: Set daily routines that include reading, writing or problem solving but just as much make space for rest, play, creativity and movement rooted in Black joy. Learning should be holistic and joyful. It’s important as parents, guardians and community leaders that we not only talk about this but more importantly model it.
‘Refresh, Revive, Thrive: Black Joy in Education’ with Andrew B. Campbell, assistant professor at the University of Toronto.
Stay engaged and be an advocate: Get to know your child’s teachers and school administrators, review school policies to be familiar with how to navigate them (for example, getting accommodations for your child’s needs) and request culturally affirming resources. Don’t hesitate to raise concerns, as your advocacy helps create more supportive learning environments and shows your child that their success is worth fighting for.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Duncan Caillard, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, School of Communication Studies, Auckland University of Technology
Jason Momoa’s historical epic Chief of War, launching August 1 on Apple TV+, is a triumph of Hawaiians telling their own stories – despite the fact their film and TV production industry now struggles to be viable.
The series stars Momoa (Aquaman, Game of Thrones) as Kaʻaina, an ali’i (chief) who fights for – and later rises against – King Kamehameha I during the bloody reunification of Hawaii.
Already receiving advance praise, the nine-episode first season co-stars New Zealand actors Temeura Morrison, Cliff Curtis and Luciane Buchanan, alongside Hawaiian actors Kaina Makua, Brandon Finn and Moses Goods.
A passion project for Momoa, the Hawaiian star co-created the series with writer Thomas Pa’a Sibbett after years in development. With a reported budget of US$340 million, it is one of the most expensive television series ever produced.
It is also a milestone in Kānaka Maoli (Native Hawaiian) representation onscreen. Controversially, however, the production only spent a month in Hawaiʻi, and was mostly shot in New Zealand with non-Hawaiian crews.
Momoa has even expressed an interest in New Zealand citizenship, but the choice of location is more a reflection of the troubled state of the film industry in Hawaiʻi. On the other hand, it is a measure of the success of the New Zealand screen industry, with potential lessons for other countries in the Pacific.
Ea o Moʻolelo – story sovereignty
Set at the turn of the 19th century, Chief of War tells the moʻolelo (story, history) of King Kamehameha I’s conquest of the archipelago.
Hawaiʻi was historically governed by aliʻi nui (high chiefs), and each island was ruled independently. Motivated by the threat of European colonisation and empowered by Western weaponry, Kamehameha established the Hawaiian Kingdom, culminating in full unification in 1810.
The series is an important example of what authors Dean Hamer and Kumu Hinaleimoana Wong-Kalu have called “Ea o Moʻolelo”, or story sovereignty, which emphasises Indigenous peoples’ right to control their own narrative by respecting the “the inalienable right of a story to its own unique contents, style and purpose”.
Chief of War is also the biggest Hawaiian television series ever produced. Although Hawaiʻi remains a popular setting onscreen, these productions have rarely involved Hawaiians in key decision-making roles.
Sea of troubles
The series hits screens at a time of major disruption in Hollywood, with streaming services upending established business models.
“Linear” network television faces declining viewership and advertising revenue. Movie studios struggle to draw audiences to theatres. The consequences for workers in the the industry have been severe, as the 2023 writers strike showed.
Those changes have had a catastrophic impact on the Hawaiʻi film industry, too.
Long a popular location – Hawaii Five-O (1968-1980, 2010-2020), Magnum P.I. (1980-1988, 2018-2024) and Lost (2004-2010) were all shot on location in Hawaiʻi – it is an expensive place to film.
Actors, crew and production equipment often have to be flown in from the continental United States, and producers compete with tourism for costly accommodation.
Kaina Makua as King Kamehameha and New Zealand actor Luciane Buchanan as Ka’ahumanu in Chief of War. Apple TV+
An industry in transition
These are not uncommon problems in distant locations, and many governments try to attract screen productions through tax incentives and rebates on portions of the production costs.
New Zealand, for example, offers a 20-25% rebate for international productions and 40% for local productions. Hawaiʻi offers a 22-27% rebate.
But this is less than other US states offer, such as Georgia (30%), Louisiana (40%) and New Mexico (40%). Hawaiʻi also has an annual cap of US$50 million on rebates.
To make things even harder, Hawaiʻi offers only limited support for Indigenous filmmakers. Governments in Australia and New Zealand provide targeted funding and support for Aboriginal, Torres Strait Islander and Māori filmmakers.
By contrast, the Hawaiʻi Film Commission doesn’t provide direct grants to local filmmakers or producers (Indigenous or otherwise). Small amounts of government funding have been administered through the Public Broadcasting Service, but this is now in jeopardy after US President Donald Trump recently cut federal funding.
The Hawaiʻi screen industry faces a perfect storm. For the first time since 2004, film and TV production has ground to a halt. Many workers now doubt the long-term sustainability of their careers.
Lessons from Aotearoa NZ
While there are lessons Hawaiʻi legislators and industry leaders could learn from New Zealand’s example, there should also be a measure of caution.
The Hawaiʻi tax credit system is out of date. But despite industry lobbying, legislation to update it failed to reach the floor of the legislature earlier this year. New tax settings would help make local production viable again.
Secondly, decades of investment in Māori cinema have seen it become diverse, engaging and creatively accomplished. Hawaiʻi could benefit from greater direct investment in Hawaiian storytelling, respecting its cultural value even if it doesn’t turn a commercial profit.
On the other hand, New Zealand has a favourable currency exchange rate with the US which can’t be replicated in Hawaiʻi. And New Zealand film production workers have seen their rights to unionise watered down compared to their American peers.
But if Hawaiʻi can get its settings right, a possible second season of Chief of War may yet be filmed there, which could mark a genuine rejuvenation of its own film industry.
Duncan Caillard does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
As the cool nights continue, it’s the perfect time to cozy up with a new batch of captivating films and series.
This month’s streaming highlights bring a little bit of everything, from gripping true crime, to thought-provoking political drama, and a nostalgic music documentary on the life and times of piano man Billy Joel.
So grab a blanket (and maybe a snack or two). Your next binge-watch awaits.
One Night in Idaho: The College Murders
Prime Video
I remember seeing the gruesome 2022 murder of four college students in Moscow, Idaho, splashed all over the news in Australia. The world seemed momentarily gripped by the brutality of the killings, which happened in off-campus housing, while two other roommates slept downstairs.
The ensuing investigation was given significantly less attention, though. So when Prime Video dropped this four-episode limited series, well, that was my weekend sorted.
The docuseries features exclusive interviews with the friends and families of the victims, so it doesn’t feel gratuitous. It respectfully recounts the tragedy and explores its continued impact, while honouring the victims. It also builds the kind of tension and disquiet that is so beloved in the true crime genre, but not in a way that makes you feel gross watching it.
Notably, legal proceedings for the case were still underway when One Night in Idaho was released. And the series made it clear there was more to the story which couldn’t be shared with, or by, the producers.
However, the trial has since concluded, with more information now available for anyone wanting to dive deeper into the case. This makes the series an absorbing watch.
– Alexa Scarlata
The Night of the Hunter
Various platforms
In 1955, director Charles Laughton crafted The Night of the Hunter: one of the darkest, strangest fairy tales ever to come out of Hollywood.
Shortly before Ben Harper is hanged for robbing a bank and killing two men, he hides the $10,000 loot in the toy doll of his young daughter Pearl. Only Pearl and her brother John know the secret – until the deranged serial killer-priest Harry Powell hears about the money and sets out to recover it.
Harry marries Willa, Harper’s widow, and then, after killing her, pursues John and Pearl relentlessly across West Virginia.
Robert Mitchum’s depiction of pure evil is one of cinema’s most vivid creations, with LOVE and HATE tattooed on the fingers of each hand.
The film did not align with the mainstream tastes of the era. Audiences and reviewers didn’t know what to make of this abnormal mix of fairy tale logic, nightmarish imagery and biblical allegory.
Successive generations of critics and filmmakers have caught on to its brilliance. Critic Roger Ebert said it was “one of the greatest of all American films”. In 2008, French film magazine Cahiers du cinémavoted it as the second-best film of all time, behind only Citizen Kane (1941).
The Night of the Hunter remains unsettlingly modern, 70 years on.
The highest point in Denmark, Mollehoj, is 171 metres above sea level, so it is plausible to imagine the whole country being overrun by water due to rising sea levels, leading to mass evacuation. This is the basic premise of the Danish series Families Like Ours.
The cleverness of this premise is that it turns comfortable middle-class Danes into refugees, facing hostility, poverty and violence as they seek to resettle. Given Denmark’s hard line on refugees, this makes the series politically powerful, equally so for us in Australia.
The central figure is a young woman, Laura (Amaryllis August), who creates disaster for her family through what she believes is an act of huge empathy. The same is true of Henrik (Magnus Millang), who shoots an innocent man in what he believes is an act of self-defence.
Families Like Ours is not a comfortable series to watch, but it manages to raise central issues of our time, without ever seeming didactic or preachy. It succeeds in combining the personal and the political in a six-part show that is powerful – and leaves enough loose ends for a potential second season.
– Dennis Altman
The Man from Hong Kong
Various platforms
A cinematic firecracker of a film exploded onto international screens 50 years ago, blending martial arts mayhem, Bond-esque set pieces, casual racism – and a distinctly Australian swagger.
From its audacious visual style; to its complex, life-threatening stunts; to its pioneering status as an international co-production, Brian Trenchard-Smith’s The Man from Hong Kong has solidified its place as a cult classic.
A Sydney-based crime lord’s activities come under the scrutiny of a determined Hong Kong detective, Inspector Fang Sing Leng. A fiery East-meets-West martial arts showdown explodes across the Australian landscape, pushing both sides to their limits.
The movie is a playful pastiche that confidently combines martial arts action, police procedurals, spy thrillers, and Westerns, all filtered through a distinctly Australian “crash-zoom” lens.
The film was an influence to Quentin Tarantino and paved the way for films such as Mad Max (1979), particularly in what Trenchard-Smith and his partner in film, stunt legend Grant Page, might call its “cunning stunts”.
The elaborate car chases and explosive stunt setups in The Man from Hong Kong served as prototypes for iconic sequences that would inspire the Mad Max films, among others, a testament to a bygone era of practical effects and thrill seeking audacity.
The Man from Hong Kong remains an exhilarating piece of pure cinema, despite its relatively small budget. It’s an exemplar (and occasional cautionary tale) for filmmakers in terms of international co-production, its cunning stunts, and genre blending.
Based on the book series by Jussi Adler-Olsen, Dept Q is a gripping television adaptation for fans of Nordic noir and British crime drama.
In Edinburgh, Scotland, Detective Chief Inspector Carl Morck (Matthew Goode) has returned to work after a shooting which left him physically and psychologically wounded, his colleague partially paralysed, and another colleague dead.
With the dregs of a budget assigned to cold cases, and a team of misfit officers, Morck sets out to solve the four-year-old case of missing Crown prosecutor, Merritt Lingard (Chloe Pirrie).
We follow Merritt’s story across various stages of her life. We see her as a teenager in the lead-up to a devastating crime that left her brother with a traumatic brain injury, as well as later in life, when she loses a major case involving a wealthy man on trial for his wife’s death.
Shortly after the devastating verdict, Merritt went missing on a ferry ride to her childhood home, on the fictionalised island of Mhòr. Returning to the present, we see she has been held captive inside a hyperbaric chamber for the past four years.
The pressure under which Merritt is kept makes Morck’s investigation high stakes from the start, while the movement between past and present highlights the impacts of past traumatic events on both characters.
Dept Q is a fast-paced, breathless thriller which will leave viewers craving its rumoured second season.
– Jessica Gildersleeve
Billy Joel: And So It Goes
HBO Max
Produced by Tom Hanks, this two-part documentary about singer/songwriter Billy Joel covers more than five decades of music. Created very much from Joel’s perspective, who is also the main narrator, the archival content is fascinating, and the music difficult to deny.
Discussion of Joel’s early suicide attempts are a shocking and terrible reminder of how different things might have been. From here, the role of the women in his life – his wives, daughters, and mother (“his champion”) – becomes vital. Beyond the headlines (particularly with his second wife Christie Brinkley), are partners who were muses, business supporters and emotional support pillars – some of whom gave Joel ultimatums when the time came to battle his alcohol addiction.
Brinkley, as well as Joel’s first wife, Elizabeth Weber, are particularly moving interviewees. They would wait at home, or stand nervously backstage as Joel “went to work” to earn, repair and rebuild against the odds. No spoilers, but let’s just say Joel ended up in trouble more than once.
On the other hand, the men in Joel’s life are often distant: Jewish grandparents who escaped Nazi Germany; a father who left when Joel was small; a half-brother discovered later in life. These losses are never really healed.
Billy Joel: And So It Goes is a five-hour epic, a story of survival and ultimately, of peace. It is, of course, also a reminder of an incredible catalogue of music – joyful, ordinary and wonderful – and the extraordinary life behind it.
– Liz Giuffre
If you or someone you know needs help, contact Lifeline on 13 11 14
Gardening Australia, season 36
ABC iView
Since it first aired in 1990, Gardening Australia has offered tips and inspiration from every state and territory on a weekly basis. A perennial favourite, the show seems to possess perpetual appeal for world-weary viewers open to slowing down by growing plants.
The no-nonsense host Peter Cundall helmed the series until 2008 (Cundall died in 2021 at the age of 94). The honour of “King of Compost” now rests with the gregarious Costa Georgiadis, and a wider cast of presenters that has expanded to be more diverse and engaging. One stalwart from the start, Jane Edmanson, is still flourishing in season 36: her episode 4 segment titled “Fronds with Benefits” certainly caught my eye.
Topics covered this season range from small-space innovation and passion projects, to Indigenous knowledge and bush foods, through to permaculture and climate change. Episodes 6 and 20 – specials on native plants and NAIDOC Week, respectively – are both worth a watch.
While the series can distance renters, and might not be edgy enough for younger audiences, it has managed to stake out ground in the digital realm – with a blooming online presence for budding green thumbs.
One of the longest-running Australian shows still on air, it doesn’t look as though Gardening Australia will be pulling up roots anytime soon.
– Phoebe Hart
The Buccaneers, season two
Apple TV
Loosen your corsets, The Buccaneers is back for a second season of feminist sisterhood and fabulous gowns.
Adapted from Edith Wharton’s unfinished final novel, the series follows a group of outspoken young American women navigating the marriage market in 1870s Victorian England. Gleefully anachronistic with feisty girl power speeches and a contemporary pop music soundtrack, The Buccaneers is equal parts Bridgerton and Gossip Girl (complete with a character played by Leighton Meester).
Season two picks up where the first left off, with Jinny (Imogen Waterhouse) and Guy (Matthew Broome) fleeing the country to escape Jinny’s violent husband Lord James Seadown (Barney Fishwick).
Meanwhile, sister Nan (Kristine Froseth) is busy back home leveraging her position as Duchess of Tintagel to help facilitate Jinny’s return – a campaign that includes wearing a showstopping red gown to a black and white ball. In keeping with the series’ M.O., this might be narrative nonsense, but it looks exquisite.
While trysts and love triangles continue to provide escapist entertainment, Jinny’s abusive marriage dominates later episodes. If season one sought to expose the isolation and entrapment Jinny endured in her marriage, season two foregrounds her resistance in the face of it, intent on highlighting how perpetrators of violence manipulate legal and medical systems to tighten the noose around victims’ necks.
Season two’s veering between frothy excess and melodrama arguably results in some tonal patchiness. Nonetheless, it should be commended for its careful treatment of the corrosive impacts and dangers of coercive control. This – more than the downloadable soundtrack and dazzling costumes – makes it good viewing.
– Rachel Williamson
Dangerous Animals
Prime Video
Dangerous Animals is perhaps the most original and entertaining shark horror film we have seen since Jaws – incorporating traditional elements of the shark thriller genre, while challenging them at the same time.
The film starts with the primal fear of being eaten alive by monstrous sharks, with gruesome shock-thrill scenes of tourists being torn apart in a blood red ocean.
But later, the narrative reminds us it is the boat captain, not the great white, who is the real sadistic killer. Predictably, we see a young bikini-clad woman who gets horribly dismembered (just like the first unforgettable victim in Jaws).
However, it is also a fearless bikini-clad woman, Zephyr (Hassie Harrison) who turns the tables on the boat captain, outwits him, rescues her boyfriend and even makes friends with the shark.
Dangerous Animals includes some interesting subtext and commentary, such as when it compares women to fish – creatures hunted for sport – and when it highlights the inherent cruelty of fishing, and the hook that impales the prey.
The film delivers sophisticated special effects and gruesome eco-horror entertainment. It is a fun, self-aware and postmodern watch that will leave you thinking.
The Australian influence is delightfully evident in the irreverent humour. And for anyone who has been to the Gold Coast, there is much pleasure in seeing the film play out across its iconic locations.
This film will trigger your childhood fear of Jaws – but with a twist.
– Susan Hopkins
Shark Whisperer
Netflix
In Shark Whisperer, the great white shark gets an image makeover – from Jaws villain to misunderstood friend and admirer.
However the star of the documentary is not so much the shark, but the model and marine conservationist Ocean Ramsey (yes, that’s her real name).
The film centres on Ramsey’s self-growth journey, with the shark co-starring as a quasi-spiritual medium for finding meaning and purpose (not to mention celebrity status).
Whisperer and the Ocean Ramsey website tap into the collective fascination with dangerous sharks fuelled by popular culture. Many online images show Ramsey in a bikini or touching sharks – she’s small, and vulnerable in the face of great whites. As with forms of celebrity humanitarianism, what I have dubbed “sexy conservationism” leaves itself open to criticism about its methods – even if its intentions are good.
Globally at least 80 million sharks are killed every year. Thanks in part to the hashtag activism of Ocean Ramsey and her millions of fans and followers, Hawaii was the first state in the United States to outlaw shark fishing.
So, Ramsey may be right to argue her ends justify the means.
The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Late in the evening, the Antarctic sky flushes pink. The male leopard seal wakes and slips from the ice into the water. There, he’ll spend the night singing underwater amongst the floating ice floes.
For the next two months he sings every night. He will sing so loudly, the ice around him vibrates. Each song is a sequence of trills and hoots, performed in a particular pattern.
In a world first, we analysed leopard seal songs and found the predictability of their patterns was remarkably similar to the nursery rhymes humans sing.
We think this is a deliberate strategy. While leopard seals are solitary animals, the males need their call to carry clearly across vast stretches of icy ocean, to woo a mate.
Solitary leopard seals want their call to carry. Ozge Elif Kizil/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images
Leopard seals are especially vocal during breeding season, which lasts from late October to early January. A female leopard seal sings for a few hours on the days she is in heat. But the males are the real showstoppers.
Each night, the males perform underwater solos for up to 13 hours. They dive into the sea, singing underwater for about two minutes before returning to the water’s surface to breathe and rest. This demanding routine continues for weeks.
Within a leopard seal population, the sounds themselves don’t vary much in pitch or duration. But the order and pattern in which the sounds are produced varies considerably between individuals.
Our research examined these individual songs. We compared them to that of other vocal animals, and to human music.
Listening to songs from the sea
The data used in the study was collected by one author of this article, Tracey Rogers, in the 1990s.
Rogers rode her quad bike across the Antarctic ice to the edge of the sea and marked 26 individual male seals with dye as they slept. Then she returned to record their songs at night.
The new research involved analysing these recordings, to better understand their structure and patterns. We did this by measuring the “entropy” of their sequences. Entropy measures how predictable or random a sequence is.
What stood out was the similarity between the predictability of human nursery rhymes and leopard seal calls. Nursery rhymes are simple, repetitive and easy to remember — and that’s what we heard in the leopard seal songs.
The range of “entropy” was similar to the 39 nursery rhymes from the Golden Song Book, a collection of words and sheet music for classic children’s songs, which was first published in 1945. It includes classics such:
Twinkle, Twinkle, Little Star
Frère Jacques
Ring Around a Rosy
Baa, Baa, Black Sheep
Humpty Dumpty
Three Blind Mice
Rockabye Baby.
For humans, the predictable structure of a nursery rhyme melody helps make it simple enough for a child to learn. For a leopard seal, this predictability may enable the individual to learn its song and keep singing it over multiple days. This consistency is important, because changes in pitch or frequency can create miscommunication.
Like sperm whales, leopard seals may also use song to set themselves apart from others and signal their fitness to reproduce. The greater structure in the songs helps ensure listeners accurately receive the message and identify who is singing.
Male leopard seals produce high-pitched cricket-like trills.
An evolving song?
Leopard seals sound very different to humans. But our research shows the complexity and structure of their songs is remarkably similar to our own nursery rhymes.
Communication through song is a very common animal behaviour. However, structure and predictability in mammal song has only been studied in a handful of species. We know very little about what drives it.
Understanding animal communication is important. It can improve conservation efforts and animal welfare, and provide important information about animal cognition and evolution.
Technology has advanced rapidly since our recordings were made in the 1990s. In future, we hope to revisit Antarctica to record and study further, to better understand if new call types have emerged, and if patterns of leopard seal song evolve from generation to generation.
Tracey Rogers receives funding from ARC.
Lucinda Chambers does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Marlee Bower, Senior Research Fellow, Matilda Centre for Research in Mental Health and Substance Use, University of Sydney
Without even realising it, your world sometimes gradually gets smaller: less walking, fewer days in the office, cancelling on friends. Watching plans disintegrate on the chat as friends struggle to settle on a date or place for a catch-up.
You might start to feel a bit flat or disconnected. Subtle changes in habit and mood take hold. Could you be … lonely?
It’s not a label many of us identify with easily, especially if you know you’ve got friends, or are in a happy relationship.
But loneliness can happen to us all from time to time – and identifying it is the first step to fixing it.
So, what is loneliness?
Loneliness is the distress we feel when our relationships don’t meet our needs – in quality or quantity.
It’s not the same as being objectively alone (otherwise known as “social isolation”).
You can feel deeply lonely even while surrounded by friends, or totally content on your own.
Loneliness is subjective; many people don’t realise they’re lonely until the feeling becomes persistent.
What are some of the signs to look for?
You may feel a physicalcoldness, emptiness or hollowness (I’ve heard it described as feeling like you are missing an organ). Some research shows social pain is experienced similarly in the brain to physical pain.
In the past, being separated from your tribe meant danger and risk from predators, so our brains developed a way to push us back towards connection.
The pain of loneliness is designed to keep us connected and safe.
Why is it often hard to recognise loneliness?
Sadly, there’s still a lot of stigma around admitting loneliness, especially for men.
Many people resist identifying as lonely, or feel this marks them as a “loser”.
But this silence can make the problem worse.
When no one talks about it, it becomes harder to break the cycle of loneliness, and the stigma remains.
While passing loneliness is normal, chronic or persistent loneliness can hurt our health.
Research shows chronic loneliness is associated with:
depression
anxiety
weakened immunity
heart disease
earlier death.
Loneliness can also become self-reinforcing. When loneliness feels normal, it can start to shape how you see the world: you expect rejection, withdraw more and the cycle deepens.
The earlier you notice you’re lonely, the easier it is to break.
But I’m in a relationship, have loads of friends and a rewarding job
Yes, but you can still be lonely.
Most of us need different kinds of relationships to thrive. It’s not about how many people you know, but whether you feel connected and have a meaningful role in these relationships.
You may feel lonely even with strong friendships if you are lacking deeper connection, shared identity or a sense of community.
This doesn’t mean you’re ungrateful, or a bad friend.
It just means you need more or different kinds of connection.
OK, I’ve realised I am lonely. Now what?
Start by asking yourself: what kind of connection am I missing?
Is it one-to-one friendships? A partner? Casual social interactions? A shared purpose or community?
Then reflect on what’s helped you feel more connected in the past. For some, it’s joining a choir, a book club or a sports group. For others, it may be volunteering or just saying “yes” to small social moments, like chatting with your local barista or learning the name of the local butcher.
If you’re still struggling, a psychologist can help with tailored strategies for building connection.
The structural causes of loneliness
It’s also important to remember loneliness is often not because of personal failings or overall mental health.
We are also learning more about how climate change can disrupt social connection and worsen loneliness due to, for example, higher temperatures or bushfires.
Loneliness is normal, common, human and completely solvable.
Start by noticing it in yourself and reach out if you can.
Let’s start talking about it more, so others can feel less alone too.
Marlee Bower receives funding from the Henry Halloran Urban and Regional Research Initiative, the BHP Foundation, AHURI and NHMRC. She is affiliated with the University of Sydney Matilda Centre for Research in Mental Health and Substance Use and Australia’s Mental Health Think Tank.
Imagine an area larger than the Australian Capital Territory, nearly twice the size of London and four times that of New York City covered in coca plantations.
Colombia produces an estimated 2,664 metric tonnes of cocaine annually. That is enough to fill 20 Boeing 747 cargo planes per year.
Not even during the darkest days of Pablo Escobar’s infamous empire did Colombia cultivate as much coca or produce as much cocaine as it does today.
In the past year alone, coca crops expanded by 10% and production capacity soared more than 50%.
So how did it come to this?
A worrying mix
Colombia did not arrive at this point overnight, nor by chance. A complex mix of radical and failed policy shifts, scientific innovation and global demand, among other factors, has shaped this trajectory.
For example, in 2015, Colombia’s Constitutional Court suspended aerial fumigation and banned the use of glyphosate. Despite the herbicide’s effectiveness in killing coca plants, the court cited concerns over its health risks and environmental impact.
Aerial spraying had allowed the government to reduce the risk that manual eradication brigades were exposed to over large areas.
In 2016, then-president Juan Manuel Santos introduced a scheme to substitute coca with non-illicit plants. Incentives were offered to farmers. However, it ended up encouraging many peasants who had never grown coca before to begin cultivating it, simply to qualify for the new subsidies.
It is no surprise that during Santos’ second term (2014–18), Colombia’s coca crops nearly doubled, from 96,000 hectares to more than 170,000.
More recently, in 2022, President Gustavo Petro announced his Paz Total (Total Peace) policy. This was designed to bring trafficking organisations – including Colombia’s second largest narco-terrorist group, the National Liberation Army (ELN) – to the negotiation table.
What happens in Colombia matters to Australia because criminal innovation is fuelling greater cocaine volumes and higher purity. This means more is flowing towards Australian shores.
Colombia’s coca production is being reshaped by enhanced cultivation techniques, more secure and autonomous smuggling methods, and an increasingly fragmented criminal landscape.
Production is now more efficient and profitable than ever. Growers are planting improved coca leaf varieties and achieve more harvest cycles per year with higher alkaloid yields per kilo.
Some networks are also transitioning from manned to unmanned operations.
Also, the growing presence and operational influence of Mexican cartels in Colombia has amplified the scope and scale of alliances between transnational organised crime groups across Europe, Asia and Oceania. International police investigations are even more complex.
Despite record-high seizure numbers and total volumes intercepted, Australia is still among the most attractive destination markets for drug trafficking organisations because of the high price users pay for the drugs.
Unless something radically changes in Colombia, Australia continues to face growing risks from maritime trafficking routes. There is also an increased threat of being used as a transit and money laundering hub in the global drug economy.
Some possible solutions
Even if conditions in Colombia were to change swiftly and drastically, supply-focused strategies alone are insufficient to mitigate the risks facing Australia.
After all, Colombia cannot simply fumigate its way out of this cocaine crisis, just as Australia cannot arrest its way out of it.
However, continued collaboration between the Australian Federal Police and the National Police of Colombia remains essential to keep drugs at bay.
The appointment of Colombia’s first police attaché to Australia will be a welcome and meaningful step forward. (While not yet formally announced, the Colombian embassy in Australia has informed me and several other experts the country is appointing the attaché.)
Both countries must deepen this relationship and collectively engage meaningfully and frequently to help solve the problem.
Cesar Alvarez does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
In 2024, the problem of deepfakes became a crisis in South Korea: more than 500 schools and universities were targeted in a coordinated wave of deepfake sexual abuse.
AI-generated sexualised images of students — mostly girls — were circulated in encrypted Telegram groups. The perpetrators were often classmates of the victims.
A new report from global child-protection group ECPAT with funding from the UK-based Churchill Fellowship takes a close look at what happened in Korea, so other countries can understand and avoid similar crises. Here’s what Australia can learn.
A glimpse into our future?
The events in South Korea were not just about deepfake technology. They were about how the technology was used.
Perpetrators created groups on the Telegram messaging platform to identify mutual acquaintances in local schools or universities. They then formed “Humiliation Rooms” to gather victims’ photos and personal information so they could create deepfake sexual images.
Rooms for more than 500 schools and universities have been identified, often with thousands of members. The rooms were filled with deepfake imagery, created from photos on social media and the school yearbook.
Bots within the app allowed users to generate AI nudes in seconds. One such bot had more than 220,000 subscribers. The bot gave users two deepfake images for free, with additional images available for the equivalent of one Australian dollar.
Telegram screenshots show an automated deepfake bot that charges users to produce images. Telegram
This wasn’t the dark web. It was happening on a mainstream platform, used by millions.
And it wasn’t just adult predators. More than 80% of those arrested were teenagers. Many were described as “normal boys” by their teachers — students who had never shown signs of violent behaviour before.
The abuse was gamified. Users earned rewards for inviting friends, sharing images, and escalating the harm. It was social, yet anonymous.
Could this happen in Australia?
We have already seen smaller, less organised deepfake incidents in Australian schools. However, the huge scale and ease of use of the Korean abuse system should be cause for alarm.
The Australian Centre to Counter Child Exploitation recorded 58,503 reports of pictures and videos of online child abuse in the 2023–24 financial year. This is an average of 160 reports per day (4,875 reports a month), a 45% increase from the previous year.
This increase is likely to continue. In response to these risks, the Australian government, through the eSafety Commissioner, is applying the existing Basic Online Safety Expectations to generative AI services. This creates a clear expectation these services must work proactively to prevent the creation of harmful deepfake content.
Internationally, the European Union’s AI Act has set a precedent for regulating high-risk AI applications, including those that affect children. In the United States, the proposed Take It Down Act aims to criminalise the publication of non-consensual intimate images, including AI-generated deepfakes.
These are a start, but a lot more work remains to be done to provide a safe online environment for young people. The Korean experience shows how easily things can escalate when these tools are used at scale, especially in peer-to-peer abuse among adolescents.
5 lessons from Korea
The South Korean crisis holds several lessons for Australia.
1. Prevention must start early. Korea’s crisis involved children as young as 12 (and even younger in some primary schools targeted). We need comprehensive digital ethics and consent education in primary schools, not just in high schools.
2. Law enforcement needs AI tools of their own to keep up. Just as offenders are using AI to scale up abuse, police must be equipped with AI to detect and investigate it. This may include facial recognition, content detection, and automated triage systems, all governed by strict privacy protocols.
3. Platforms must also be held accountable. Telegram only began cooperating with South Korean authorities after immense public pressure. Australia must enforce safety-by-design principles and ensure encrypted platforms are not safe havens for abuse.
4. Support services must be scaled up. Korea’s crisis caused trauma for entire communities. Victims often had to continuing going to school with perpetrators in the same classrooms. Australia must invest in trauma-informed support systems that can respond to both individual and collective harm.
5. We must listen to victims and survivors. Policy must be shaped by those who have experienced digital abuse. Their insights are crucial to designing effective and compassionate responses.
Joel Scanlan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne
Labor is well-placed to win three seats in the electorate of Bass at the Tasmanian election, although its party totals imply it deserves only two. This would give left-leaning MPs a total of 20 of 35 seats. Interstate, New South Wales Labor has surged to a large lead in a Resolve poll.
The postal receipt deadline for the July 19 Tasmanian state election passed at 10am Tuesday. Final statewide vote shares
were 39.9% Liberals (up 3.2% since the March 2024 election), 25.9% Labor (down 3.2%), 14.4% Greens (up 0.5%), 2.9% Shooters, Fishers and Farmers (up 0.6%), 1.6% Nationals (new) and 15.3% independents (up 5.7%).
Tasmania uses the proportional Hare-Clark system to elect its lower house. There are five electorates corresponding to Tasmania’s five federal seats, and each electorate returns seven members, for a total of 35 lower house MPs.
Under this system, a quota for election is one-eighth of the vote or 12.5%, but half of this (6.2%) is usually enough to give a reasonable chance of election. There’s no above the line section like for the federal Senate. Instead, people vote for candidates not parties, with at least seven preferences required for a formal vote.
Robson rotation means that candidates for each party are randomised across ballot papers for that electorate, so that on some ballot papers a candidate will appear at the top of their party’s ticket and on others at the bottom.
This means parties can’t control the ordering of their candidates. Independents can be listed in single-candidate columns.
Leakage occurs when party candidates with more than one quota are elected and their surplus distributed, or when minor candidates are excluded and their preferences distributed. In the federal Senate, the large majority of votes are cast above the line, and these votes cannot leak from the party that received a first preference vote.
The consequence of leakage is that parties will lose votes from their totals during the distribution of preferences when their own candidates are elected or excluded. Single-candidate tickets can’t lose votes, and will only gain as other candidates are excluded.
Unlike other states and federally, the Tasmanian distribution of preferences is done manually. Before the distributions, analyst Kevin Bonham had called 14 of the 35 seats for the Liberals, ten for Labor, five for the Greens and four for left-leaning independents, leaving two undecided (the final seats in Bass and Lyons).
Labor well-placed to win three seats in Bass
Final primary votes in Bass gave the Liberals 3.34 quotas, Labor 2.20, the Greens 1.32, the Shooters 0.32 and independent George Razay 0.27. The Shooters and Razay had single-candidate tickets that can’t leak votes.
After three days of preference distributions, vote shares in Bass are 3.30 quotas for the Liberals, 2.25 for Labor, 1.31 for the Greens, 0.40 for the Shooters and 0.37 for Razay.
On quota fractions, the final seat in Bass looks as if it should go to the Shooters or Razay. However, with one Labor candidate already elected, the two leading Labor candidates (Jess Greene and Geoff Lyons) each have about 0.37 quotas with two Labor candidates still to be excluded.
If the remaining Labor votes divide roughly evenly between Greene and Lyons, they would each have about 0.62 quotas. Greens preferences will then favour Labor whether their final opponent is the Shooters or the Liberals. So Labor is well-placed to win three seats in Bass despite their party total implying they only deserve two.
If Labor wins the final Bass seat, Labor, the Greens and left-leaning independents would have a total of 20 of the 35 seats, making any Labor attempt to form government easier.
In Lyons, final primary votes gave the Liberals 3.36 quotas, Labor 2.27, the Greens 1.08, the Shooters 0.53 and the Nationals 0.33. The Shooters had a single-candidate ticket.
The Liberals now have 3.36 quotas, Labor 2.44, the Greens one, the Shooters 0.68 and the Nationals 0.34. Neither Labor nor the Liberals have any chance of pulling off an even split across candidates, so the Shooters will win the final Lyons seat.
NSW Resolve poll: Labor surges to large lead
A New South Wales state Resolve poll for The Sydney Morning Herald, conducted July 13–18 from a sample of 1,054, gave Labor 38% of the primary vote (up five since April), the Coalition 32% (down four), the Greens 13% (up two), independents 8% (down six) and others 10% (up four).
Resolve does not usually give a two-party estimate for its state polls, but The Poll Bludger estimated a Labor lead by 57–43. Despite the strong voting intentions for Labor, Labor incumbent Chris Minns’ lead over Liberal Mark Speakman as preferred premier narrowed from 40–15 to 35–16. This indicates that Labor’s surge is due to the federal election result.
Resolve polls taken well before an election have overstated the independent vote as they give independent as an option in all seats, when many seats don’t have viable independents. The six-point drop for independents in this poll suggests a different method is now being used.
By 32–25, respondents expected their personal outlook in the next year to get better rather than worse, but by 25–21 they expected the NSW state outlook to get worse.
Additional questions from federal Resolve poll
I previously covered a national Resolve poll for Nine newspapers that gave Labor a 56–44 lead. On reforms, 36% thought the government should take the opportunity from its landslide re-election to undertake reforms, while 32% thought it should restrict itself to policies put forward at the election.
By 47–20, respondents opposed raising the GST rate even if it would reduce other taxes. By 31–26, they supported reducing or ditching negative gearing concessions. By 36–27, they supported reducing or ditching capital gains tax concessions on properties.
By 57–18, respondents thought the opposition should work with the government to negotiate changes, rather than just oppose major reforms.
By 53–18, respondents thought Donald Trump’s election as United States president last November a bad outcome for Australia (68–11 bad in April, after Trump’s “liberation day” tariffs).
By 46–22, they thought Australia becoming more independent from the US on foreign policy and national security would be good. By 38–26, voters blamed Trump more than Albanese for the lack of a meeting.
Adrian Beaumont does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
