NewzIntel.com

Category: Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Global: Teachers in South African schools may be slow to report rape of girls: study shows why

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Ayobami Precious Adekola, Postdoctoral Researcher, University of South Africa

    2A Images via Getty Images

    In South Africa, the age of consent for sex is 16 years old. Engaging in sexual activity with someone under the age of 16 is considered statutory rape, even if the minor consents as defined under the law that applies to adults.

    In December 2021, South Africa’s Department of Basic Education introduced a policy aimed at reducing the country’s high rates of teenage pregnancy and sexual exploitation. It requires educators to report cases where older sexual partners impregnate learners under 16 years of age.

    We are researchers in sexual and reproductive health who have been working on a decade-long community engagement project focused on improving HIV prevention and related challenges among learners. The project is in the Vhembe district of Limpopo province, South Africa, bordering Zimbabwe. Sexual health practices among young people here remain a pressing concern, due to high rates of unprotected sex, sexually transmitted infections, HIV and unplanned pregnancies.

    As part of the project, we conducted a study of the statutory rape reporting policy for schools. It showed a disconnect between the policy’s intent and implementation. We found that some rural teachers were unaware of the policy, were not sure what they were supposed to do, or faced cultural, social and systemic barriers that left them feeling powerless to act.

    The result is that the child protection law is failing the learners it was designed to safeguard.

    Because teachers are often some of the first adults to become aware of statutory rape cases, it’s crucial to equip them to deal with disclosures appropriately, navigate reporting protocols confidently, and engage support systems effectively and help prevent future sexual abuse of learners.

    Lack of awareness of policy

    Our research was conducted at eight public primary and high schools in the Soutpansberg North school circuit of Limpopo. All the schools are in rural, under-resourced and poor communities. There is a high number of HIV infections and unplanned teenage pregnancies in the schools where the study was conducted. The true incidence rate of rape is different because it’s not always reported.

    We engaged 19 educators (16 of them female) through group discussions.

    Teachers expressed confusion and frustration over the lack of formal communication and training on the statutory rape reporting policy. Some were unaware that such a policy existed. One admitted:

    Honestly, I wasn’t even aware that we had a policy on statutory rape. It’s not something we’ve ever discussed in our school.

    Another teacher said:

    I know there’s a policy, but I’m unsure where to find it or exactly what it says. As educators, we need to be informed about policies, but it feels like no one communicates them effectively to us.

    Cultural and socioeconomic barriers

    Beyond a lack of awareness, the discussions suggested that socio-cultural norms hinder the implementation of the statutory rape policy in rural areas.

    The study highlighted that intergenerational relationships are normalised in some rural communities. In these cases, families may depend financially on the older male partner, making them reluctant to report such relationships as criminal offences.



    Read more:
    Rape culture in South African schools: where it comes from and how to change it

    In some cases, families tacitly support relationships between young girls and older men in exchange for financial support, making such arrangements difficult to challenge.

    A participant shared:

    It’s difficult because some parents tolerate these relationships as normal and support their kids to sleep with older men, who in turn provide for the family.

    Teachers encounter immense social pressure when faced with statutory rape cases. In tight-knit rural communities, reporting a case could mean accusing a neighbour, relative, or local authority figure. This creates a moral dilemma for educators who want to protect learners but fear community backlash.

    As one participant put it:

    If I report it, they might turn against us.

    These socio-cultural dynamics create a culture of silence that protects perpetrators rather than victims.

    What’s missing

    The study also found that a lack of training on statutory rape policies is a barrier to effective implementation. Teachers reported feeling unprepared to handle the legal and emotional complexities of reporting statutory rape cases.

    There’s been no training at all. We hear about the policy, but they don’t teach us how to implement it or what steps to take if something happens.

    Another teacher added:

    There is no formal memo from the circuit office and from our school governing body meetings; it was never introduced as an agenda item.

    The absence of confidential reporting mechanisms further complicates the situation. Teachers fear that reporting cases could lead to retaliation from the community or even threats to their safety. The lack of a standardised anonymous reporting system leaves teachers feeling vulnerable and unsupported.

    Teachers indicated that fear of community backlash led them to prioritise managing learner pregnancies over investigating potential rape cases. Some said it was the parents’ responsibility to report rape.



    Read more:
    South Africa’s stance on teenage pregnancy needs a radical review: what it would look like

    Proposed solutions

    We recommend a few ways to improve reporting of statutory rape:

    Mandatory training for educators: The education department should ensure that all teachers understand their legal obligations and know how to navigate reporting procedures.

    Confidential reporting systems: Establishing secure and anonymous reporting channels.

    Community awareness campaigns: Programmes to help shift harmful cultural norms and make it easier to report statutory rape. Campaigns should emphasise the importance of protecting minors and the legal consequences of statutory rape.

    Interdisciplinary support networks: Schools should collaborate with social workers, legal professionals, and mental health experts to provide educators with the support and resources needed to handle statutory rape cases.

    Bridging the gap between South Africa’s statutory rape policy and what actually happens in rural areas is a social justice imperative that affects the most vulnerable members of society.

    Azwihangwisi Helen Mavhandu-Mudzusi receives funding from the South African Medical Research Council for this study.

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

    – ref. Teachers in South African schools may be slow to report rape of girls: study shows why – https://theconversation.com/teachers-in-south-african-schools-may-be-slow-to-report-rape-of-girls-study-shows-why-253992

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Who do Africans trust most? Surveys show it’s not the state (more likely the army)

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Koffi Améssou Adaba, Enseignant et chercheur en sociologie politique, Université de Lomé

    A recent Afrobarometer study has shown declining trust in
    public institutions over the past decade among African citizens. Study findings call into question the credibility and legitimacy of state institutions like the presidency, parliament and security forces, including the police. The study also shows that many Africans still believe in traditional and religious figures, raising concerns about the effectiveness of governments. It also highlights the disconnect between state officials and the public. The Conversation Africa asked Koffi Améssou Adaba, a political sociologist and one of the authors of the Afrobarometer study, to unpack this loss of trust and its implications.

    What are the main findings of the study?

    The study, conducted by Afrobarometer in 39 countries, reveals a general decline in trust in public institutions in Africa over the past decade.

    The study assessed trust levels in 11 types of institutions and leaders. These are religious leaders, the president, opposition parties, ruling parties, the military, parliament, local councils, national electoral commissions, the police, courts, and traditional leaders.

    Conducted through face-to-face interviews in the language chosen by the respondent, Afrobarometer surveys enable national results to be obtained with margins of error of +/-2 to +/-3 percentage points at a 95% confidence level. This analysis of 39 countries is based on 53,444 interviews.

    Surveys have been conducted since 1999. Since 2012, we have observed that trust in most institutions has decreased. Only three institutions still have majority support as reflected by the percentage of respondents who said they trusted those entities. These are religious leaders (66%), the army (61%), and traditional leaders (56%). In contrast, political institutions aren’t earning much public trust. The presidency, parliament, police and courts all have trust levels below 50%.

    This trend differs across regions. East and west Africa report higher levels of trust than central, southern and north Africa.

    At the national level, Tanzania, Niger and Burkina Faso have the highest trust levels. In contrast, Gabon, Eswatini and São Tomé and Príncipe are among the most distrustful countries.

    Since 2011, trust in parliament has dropped by 19 percentage points. The ruling party’s trust level has fallen by 16 points, followed by the presidency (-12) and the courts (-10). Despite the overall decline, some countries – like Tanzania, Togo and Mali – are seeing increased trust in certain institutions.

    What do these trends tell us?

    Institutional trust is vital for political stability and effective governance, regardless of whether a regime is democratic or authoritarian. Even authoritarian governments seek some level of popular support to strengthen their power. When citizens perceive institutions as responsible, transparent and effective, they are more likely to trust and support them. This trust leads people to expect good results when dealing with the state.

    The perception of efficiency, transparency and integrity is fundamental to building this trust. The observed decline in trust could undermine the legitimacy of governments and might hinder development, particularly in developing countries.

    Informal institutions (religious and traditional leaders) and the army enjoy stronger support than official institutions. Trust in religious leaders varies widely – from 34% in Tunisia to at least nine out of ten citizens in countries like Tanzania (94%), Senegal (92%), Nigeria (90%) and Ethiopia (90%).

    This pattern raises important questions about the role of these informal institutions in governance.

    Are there any red flags that need to be addressed?

    Major public institutions like the presidency, parliament, justice system and police should inspire confidence. They are expected to inspire trust because of their direct interactions with citizens. However, the low confidence in these institutions raises doubts about their effectiveness and strengthens the influence of informal institutions.

    The study also highlights a surprising trend: despite widespread rejection of coups d’état, many Africans continue to trust the military. This trust may help explain the acceptance of recent military-led transitions in several countries.

    One reason for this trust could be limited interaction with the military. Unlike the police, who are more present in daily life, the army is less exposed to criticism and tensions. As a result, it enjoys a more favourable image than other institutions.

    How can confidence in institutions be restored?

    Here are some steps to consider:

    • Strengthen transparency and fairness: Improve the performance of institutions and fight corruption to restore public confidence.

    • Engage informal institutions: Include religious and traditional leaders in governance processes, such as mediation and transitional justice efforts.

    • Pursue institutional reforms: Define the role of traditional leaders in public affairs to prevent political interference and enhance their contributions to governance.

    • Improve public services: Citizens’ perceptions are shaped by their direct interactions with institutions. For example, fair and effective policing can boost public trust.

    Citizens trust institutions based on their ability to deliver results. To address the erosion of trust, leaders must promote inclusive governance.

    Trust is fundamental to good governance and democracy. Strengthening it should be a top priority for African governments.

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

    – ref. Who do Africans trust most? Surveys show it’s not the state (more likely the army) – https://theconversation.com/who-do-africans-trust-most-surveys-show-its-not-the-state-more-likely-the-army-252902

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Winning hearts and power: how Mali’s military regime gained popular support

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Morten Bøås, Research Professor, Norwegian Institute of International Affairs

    Mali’s interim president, Colonel d’Armée Assimi Goïta, who came to power in a coup on 18 August 2020, enjoys remarkably strong public support. Survey data from pan-African research network Afrobarometer and the Mali-Métre survey, run by Germany’s Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung since 2012, indicate high levels of satisfaction with junta rule. In the 2024 Mali-Métre, nine out of ten respondents considered the country to be moving in the right direction.

    Yet economic conditions are worsening for Malians. In a recent analysis the World Bank pointed out that the junta was finding it difficult to deliver services amid sluggish growth, high inflation and extreme poverty.

    That Malians still seem to be very satisfied with their leader needs some explanation.

    In a recent paper, we draw on our extensive fieldwork experience in Mali. We argue that Goïta has crafted a new social contract based on a strongman narrative, portraying himself as Mali’s defender. The regime has used dissatisfaction with international interventions to frame Goïta as an “exceptional man” in “exceptional times”, in ways that resonate with Malian myths and traditions.

    We show how the regime’s new social contract is based not on public services but on the idea of Goïta as Mali’s defender and liberator. In this way, the regime has established a social bond with the population that places dignity above all.

    A new social bond

    In 2012, Mali experienced a severe crisis triggered by a separatist rebellion in the northern regions of the country. Jihadist insurgent groups took over the rebellion, leading to a military coup. International interventions followed. The regional grouping Ecowas, the UN and France made efforts to restore security, stability and peace.

    But the deployment of 5,000 French troops and 15,000 UN peacekeepers failed to prevent a deterioration in security.

    At the same time, Mali’s democratic institutions failed to restore territorial control and address corruption and poverty, despite regular elections being held.

    Mass protests calling for the resignation of President Ibrahim Boubacar Keïta paved the way for the 2020 military takeover.

    These failures offered the junta a rich repertoire to draw on for its own legitimacy. With Goïta came a new narrative, not about liberal state-building and development, but about restoring Malian sovereignty and dignity.

    These ideas are conveyed through speeches at forums like the UN general assembly and public addresses shared through the media, along with an organised network of online influencers.

    Public debates about fighting the forces of neocolonialism and reclaiming sovereignty predate the junta. The regime has harnessed these sentiments. It contrasts decades of indignity, weakness, and dependence on France with a glorified vision of Mali’s ancient past.

    Popular protest movements such as Yerewolo Debout sur le Remparts have long done the same.

    Now, so the narrative goes, Goïta has emerged as a hero capable of leading his people towards a new age in which Mali is treated with respect.

    This framing has rekindled the legacy of Thomas Sankara, the late military leader of Burkina Faso (1983–1987). Often dubbed Africa’s Che Guevara, Sankara was a charismatic revolutionary known for his passionate speeches, bold stance against corruption, and efforts to challenge former colonial powers. He was assassinated in a coup in 1987, but his legacy continues to inspire young Africans.

    Regime figures, particularly foreign minister Abdoulaye Diop, often refer to legends and historical narratives as part of this myth-making:

    According to recent survey data from the Mali-Mètre, 70% of Malians identified combating insecurity as their highest priority. This indicates how many Malians feel they face a threat similar to the one that existed when the Malinke people pleaded with Sunjata to be their saviour.

    Thus, in an environment of chaos, war, confusion and despair, a hunter-warrior hero is needed. This agent can not only save society, but re-set it in an orderly and just manner, bringing dignity to his people if they undergo the necessary sacrifices.

    This story requires a villain. Finding culprits in Mali was not difficult. All it required was harnessing of social frustrations already directed against France and other external forces failing to combat insurgents and restore security.

    A unifying enemy

    As shown by Afrobarometer and Mali-Mètre, many Malians, as poor and destitute as they may be, take comfort from the regime’s confrontations with and – as it is presented to them – victories over such formidable adversaries as France and the UN.

    With nearly 60% of its population under the age of 25, Mali is one of the youngest countries in the world. The Malian case shows a youthful African population that is desperate for social change and willing to endure hardship to reach their promised land.

    The current political landscape in Mali, and in neighbouring Burkina Faso and Niger where conditions are similar, is an invitation to reconsider local agency. Citizens actively and rationally respond to their political contexts. Writing off people as ignorant or stupid will not advance understanding of the new political terrain.

    Our journal article is part of a forthcoming special issue in the Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding.

    Morten Bøås receives funding for the research that this article is based on from the Research Council of Norway – grant number 325236

    Viljar Haavik receives funding from the Research Council of Norway: Grant Number 325236.

    – ref. Winning hearts and power: how Mali’s military regime gained popular support – https://theconversation.com/winning-hearts-and-power-how-malis-military-regime-gained-popular-support-254518

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: What have the Democrats achieved in Trump’s first 100 days?

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Richard Hargy, Visiting Research Fellow in International Studies, Queen’s University Belfast

    The Democratic response to the first 100 days of Donald Trump’s second term has been sluggish. It has made many Congressional Democrats, and party members, anxious about what the party can do to push back against the president’s fast-moving agenda.

    “None of this feels like you’re fighting for us … The words are great, but I’m really not seeing any action,” said an exasperated constituent at a town hall event held in March by Colorado Democratic Senator Michael Bennet.

    According to reports, much of the anger in the room was aimed at the Democrats lacklustre fightback against Trump, and specifically a decision by some Democratic senators to support a Republican government funding bill in order to avert a federal government shutdown.

    Democrat Senate leader Chuck Schumer’s decision to support this bill attracted criticism from within the party. Opponents argued that rejecting the bill and forcing a government shutdown would have required Trump and Republicans to rethink their strategy and negotiate a more palatable deal with Democrats. Schumer, however, argued that it was a far worse option to allow “Trump to take even much more power via a government shutdown”.

    Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi offered a sharp critique of Schumer’s approach, saying “America has experienced a Trump shutdown before — but this damaging legislation only makes matters worse. Democrats must not buy into this false choice. We must fight back for a better way”.

    Some within the party viewed this as a missed opportunity by Democrats to portray themselves as an active opposition to Trump’s agenda, especially as Republicans currently control both parts of Congress – the US House of Representatives and the Senate.

    To progress to a vote on a bill in the Senate requires 60 votes. With 52 yes votes on their government-funding bill, Republicans needed eight Democrats to switch sides. Schumer could have sunk the bill and shut down the federal government. But, as Time magazine’s Philip Elliott said, while Democrats had this option, they “lacked the bandwidth to sell it as the other guys’ fault, or put forth a unified plan on how to reopen the government on better terms”.

    Nevertheless, the outcry within Democrat circles was fierce. Prominent progressive Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York said that “there is a deep sense of outrage and betrayal”. The fallout exposed wider divisions within the party, as well as friction between Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries.

    Polling data released in March showed Democrats with a favourability score of 29%, the party’s lowest point since 1992. This came as some of the Democrats’ major financial backers were publicly critical of the party’s ineffective and lethargic opposition and withheld financial backing.

    Democrat Chuck Schumer voted with the Republicans.

    Effective Democratic opposition will require sustained work, which connects with and mobilises voters. Darrell M. West, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington, said that previous victories “demonstrated that long-term success involves many steps, from … political alliance-building to candidate recruitment, fundraising, registration drives, and get-out-the-vote efforts”.

    Some Democrats in Congress are trying to hold the Trump administration accountable. Congressman James Raskin of Maryland and California Senator Adam Schiff have convened “shadow hearings” to highlight what they allege to be dubious decisions. Other Democrats have signed onto several court briefs that have challenged some of Trump’s executive orders.


    How is Donald Trump’s presidency shaping up after 100 days? Here’s what the experts think. If you like what you see, sign up to receive our weekly World Affairs Briefing newsletter.

    Other notable Democrats are mounting a fightback by trying to rally their supporters. Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont have held a series of rallies that saw huge crowds of over 200,000 people turn out in mainly Republican-supporting states to hear their anti-Trump message. Sanders declared that the “future of the Democratic Party is not going to rest with the kind of leadership that we’ve had”.

    Arguably the defining moment from this turbulent three-month period of Trump’s second term was the president’s “Liberation Day” announcement on April 2, when he imposed sweeping new tariffs on many major trading partners across the world.

    The economic turmoil that followed presented Democrats with a political opportunity. Yet their immediate response was restrained and lacklustre.

    As the economic shock waves from Trump’s tariff blitz reverberated, Jonathan Chait, staff writer at the Atlantic, asked why was Trump facing sharper political attacks from his allies than he is from the putative opposition.

    Weeks of market mayhem have given Democrats an opening to challenge Republican dominance in Washington ahead of next year’s midterm elections. A recent Morning Consult poll showed Democrats, for the first time in four-years, enjoying a three percentage point advantage (46% to 43%) over Republicans on economic competency.

    Democrats will have greater leverage if Trump’s tariff policies lead to inflation, and prices rising or even a recession.

    There’s just over 18 months until the next set of national elections in the US. In that time Democrats face the challenge of reconnecting with voters.

    Leah Greenberg, co-founder of the progressive grassroots organisation, Indivisible, gave an ominous judgement of the party’s current predicament, stating there have been “a lot of episodes over the last few months that have really soured people on whether the Democratic Party has … a clear assessment of the danger it’s facing right now”.

    This warning aside, three elections held at the beginning of April gave Democrats cause for some optimism. In a contest for a Wisconsin Supreme Court seat, the Trump-backed candidate, who was supported financially by the president’s ally Elon Musk, lost by a significant margin in a state that Trump won last November.

    In two congressional races in Florida, while the Republicans held both seats, results were far closer than those seen two years ago, signalling some disapproval of Republican policy.

    Elaine Kamarck, a Brookings fellow, believes that the large demonstrations that have sprung up around the country over the past months have started to alter the mood within the Democratic party, and that’s something they can build on.

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

    – ref. What have the Democrats achieved in Trump’s first 100 days? – https://theconversation.com/what-have-the-democrats-achieved-in-trumps-first-100-days-255139

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: From withheld cancer drugs to postcode lotteries in treatment: why people in police custody are missing vital medications

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Gethin Rees, Senior Lecturer in Sociology, Newcastle University

    NottmCity/Shutterstock

    When someone is taken into police custody, they don’t lose their basic rights, including access to healthcare. But new research suggests that, for many people detained by police in England, getting the care they need can be anything but straightforward.

    Our research investigated healthcare provision inside police custody suites and uncovered a troubling reality: people held in custody often face long delays in receiving vital treatments. In some cases, they’re denied their medication altogether – even when they have serious health conditions.

    This isn’t just a bureaucratic hiccup. These delays and denials can pose real risks to people’s health and wellbeing, especially for those already living with chronic conditions or acute mental health issues.

    Healthcare inside police custody isn’t always provided by the NHS. Instead, police forces across England commission providers through a competitive tender process. These providers then employ healthcare professionals who are responsible for treating detainees and responding to emergencies.

    But our research found that the system doesn’t always work as it should. In many cases, the healthcare professionals are not based full-time at custody suites. Instead, one professional may be expected to cover several sites, often dozens of miles apart. It’s not unusual for a healthcare professional to be responsible for multiple suites spread over 50 miles or more.

    That means when someone in custody needs medical attention – say, for prescribed medication – the healthcare professional may not be there. And even if they are, they’re likely to be balancing demands from several locations and having to try to prioritise those people that need attention most urgently. This triage process, while necessary under current conditions, can result in significant and dangerous delays.

    Delays, denials and disbelief

    Delays are often compounded by another issue: distrust.

    Our data – including interviews with healthcare staff, police officers and people with lived experience – showed that many custody staff are deeply sceptical about detainees’ claims regarding their medication. There’s a strong concern that detainees might be seeking drugs or exaggerating their needs, which leads to staff adopting a highly cautious approach.

    In practice, this means that detainees are often made to wait at least six hours before receiving any medication – because they need to wait until they can be sure that any drugs taken before arrest will have metabolised. This practice is aimed at reducing the risk of overdose, but has been criticised by experts, including the Faculty of Forensic and Legal Medicine, a charity founded by the Royal College of Physicians. It also paints every detainee as dishonest by default.

    Across interviews and custody logs, research found repeated examples of vulnerable people missing doses of medication – whether for mental health, diabetes, or pain management.
    Andrii Spy_k/Shutterstock

    Even when people bring their own prescribed medicine, officers and staff may refuse to administer it unless it’s in its original box with the full pharmacy label – a condition that many can’t meet, especially if they were arrested suddenly.

    One person we interviewed described being detained while undergoing treatment for cancer. Despite explaining his situation, he was left without his medication.

    I can live with not having food for a couple of hours, but you can’t live with not having your medication when you’re due it … They had to take me to hospital to make sure I was all right.

    His experience was not an outlier. Across interviews and custody logs, we saw repeated examples of vulnerable people missing doses of medication – whether for mental health, diabetes, or pain management – because the system either didn’t believe them or wasn’t equipped to help them in time.

    Closing the care gap

    Based on our findings, we made a series of recommendations to improve healthcare in police custody. Two are critical to ensure that detainees receive timely access to essential medications.

    First, every custody suite should have a dedicated healthcare professional embedded on site. This would significantly reduce delays in treatment, ensuring that detainees are promptly assessed and cared for by qualified clinicians.

    Second, standardise the list of available medications across all providers police custody healthcare. A universal list of approved treatments would ensure consistency and fairness, no matter where someone is detained.

    These recommendations have already been echoed by the Independent Custody Visitors Association and the Faculty of Forensic and Legal Medicine. Implementing them could make a real difference to people’s safety and dignity during custody.

    Police custody is often a place of crisis. It receives some of society’s most vulnerable people – those experiencing mental illness, substance use issues, homelessness, or poverty.

    These are people who already face barriers to healthcare in daily life. Detention shouldn’t become another one.

    Timely, appropriate, and compassionate care isn’t just something that is nice to have. It’s a human right. And right now, in too many custody suites, that right is being denied.

    Gethin Rees receives funding from the Economic and Social Research Council.

    – ref. From withheld cancer drugs to postcode lotteries in treatment: why people in police custody are missing vital medications – https://theconversation.com/from-withheld-cancer-drugs-to-postcode-lotteries-in-treatment-why-people-in-police-custody-are-missing-vital-medications-255054

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Politics with Michelle Grattan: pollster Kos Samaras on how voters are leaving the major parties behind

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

    As we enter the final days of campaigning, Labor leads with its nose in front on most polls, but the devil is in the detail of particular seats.

    To help get a read on what the voters are feeling at this late stage, we’re joined by RedBridge director Kos Samaras.

    RedBridge – a political research company, whose directors include both former Labor strategists like Samaras and former Liberal strategist Tony Barry – has been conducting focus groups and polling throughout the campaign.

    On Labor’s polling lead, Samaras says

    At the moment we’re looking at a situation where Labor will end up possibly forming minority government, with an outside chance of majority.

    On the large number of soft voters, Samaras says soft voters are more likely to represent people shifting from the majors to the minor parties, rather then from Liberal to Labor.

    The best way we can describe soft voters is it’s a permanent state of mind, and again we go back to talking about younger voters here, or those under the age of 45 in particular, who have very low levels of values connection to party politics in this country.

    Very low numbers of people switch from the majors these days. So I think a lot of political strategists, particularly on the Coalition side, still think they are living in the world of 20 years ago where a large soft vote means people will just transfer their entire support over to the other major party. That no longer is the case.

    By Saturday April 27, more than 2.3 million Australians (more than 13%) had already voted with a week to go to election day, according to analyst Antony Green. More than half a million votes were cast on the first day alone – a new record.

    On that early voting trend, Samaras says while it’s “standard practice now” that people vote early, both major parties have been too slow to adapt to this change.

    I would say, we haven’t seen any real evidence of the major parties really understanding the importance of starting early, although I would say Labor did start very early in the beginning of March. But you saw that the Coalition was very late to the game.

    I think there’s a way to go before the majors fully wrap their heads around that Australians are now voting very differently, and they need to actually alter their campaign to suit those practices.

    After a lacklustre campaign, voters are seeing Albanese as “the least worst option”:

    The best way we can capture it is they view Anthony Albanese as the least worst option and we can see that in our quantitative analysis as well. Both major parties and both leaders are still in the negative territory but Labor and Albanese have improved their position dramatically, whilst at the same time the Coalition and Peter Dutton’s ratings have actually dropped.

    And on political candidates lying in elections, Samaras says Australians think

    They all lie. That’s fundamentally what most Australians will tell you. They all lie and they don’t live the lives we live. That’s the sort of saying we hear all the time.

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

    – ref. Politics with Michelle Grattan: pollster Kos Samaras on how voters are leaving the major parties behind – https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-pollster-kos-samaras-on-how-voters-are-leaving-the-major-parties-behind-255421

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Italy’s Meloni is positioning herself as bridge between EU and Trump – but will it work?

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Julia Khrebtan-Hörhager, Associate Professor of Critical Cultural & International Studies, Colorado State University

    Italy Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni looks to thread a divide. Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images

    Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni recently became the first European leader to visit the United States after President Donald Trump announced a new tariff regime on trading partners, including a 20% levy on imports from the European Union.

    While those tariffs are currently on hold, the ongoing threat of them being enacted provided a telling backdrop for Meloni’s mid-April 2025 visit.

    Controversial and often perceived by critics as calculating, Meloni has walked a tightrope between European Union solidarity and embracing far-right causes since becoming Italy’s prime minister in 2022. She was the only European leader to attend Trump’s inauguration in January 2025 and counts tech titan Elon Musk among her allies.

    In many ways, Meloni reflects Europe’s own identity crisis: a regional power with global ambition. Italy, after all, was a founding pillar of the European Union, hosting the signing of the Treaties of Rome in 1957 establishing the European common market. Yet, for decades, Italy has often stood just outside the core of EU influence, overshadowed by the Franco-German partnership.

    Still, when the moment is right, Italy knows how to wield its leverage, especially as a bridge between clashing camps in Brussels.

    In Washington, Meloni made her pitch to Trump: a tighter ideological alliance over shared disdain for “woke” politics, diversity, equity and inclusion agendas, and lax immigration. She offered a sweetener – more Italian investment in the U.S. as a sop to the transatlantic trade dispute. But she also reiterated her and the EU’s support for Ukraine, a direct contrast to Trump’s skepticism to continued U.S. support in Ukraine’s conflict with Russia.

    In so doing, Meloni has cast herself as someone who can serve both Brussels and Washington without burning bridges on either side. The gamble? That balancing act could backfire. Trump’s demands over trade and increased defense spending by NATO countries force Meloni to choose between appeasing Washington or staying in line with EU norms. Her overtures to Trump risk alienating key European allies who are wary of his disruptive politics.

    In trying to play both sides, she could end up isolated from both – undermining Italy’s credibility and influence on the world stage.

    Italy was a founder member of the European Union, but it is often a third wheel behind Germany and France.
    Simona Granati/Corbis/Corbis via Getty Images

    Meloni as a bridge

    The story of modern Italy has been one of playing off sides.

    During the Cold War, Italy walked a fine line between NATO commitments and accommodating a powerful domestic Communist Party.

    Italy was regularly governed by a series of often fraught center-right coalitions that were forced to navigate fractious politics and quid pro quo political violence between the far right and far left. The center-right Christian Democrats that dominated this period married conservatism at home with a strong pro-European outlook.

    In the first decades after the Cold War ended, Italy continued to carve out its own lane – pushing for leniency on issues like immigration and fiscal rules. The period saw Italy oscillate between pro-European integration and bouts of euroscepticism, with successive governments frequently challenging Brussels over budgetary constraints or border management.

    Meloni’s own rise is deeply rooted in the post-2015 tensions, when Italy – overwhelmed by the Mediterranean migrant crisis – felt abandoned by its European partners. Her party’s hard-line stance on immigration capitalized on public frustration. While she now presents herself as firmly pro-EU, it’s a version of Europe that aligns with her own vision: more secure borders, stronger national sovereignty and less technocratic interference.

    Ironically, as the bloc itself drifts rightward on migration, Meloni’s positions no longer seem so fringe – perhaps allowing her to embrace the EU pragmatically, even as she critiques it ideologically. Meloni’s own background and rise reflect this ambiguity and duality. Emerging from a political movement with fascist roots, she now presents herself as a passionate Europeanist and pacifist while maintaining right-wing positions on immigration and cultural issues.

    Meloni has governed in that fashion: cultivating ties with conservative heavyweights like Trump and right-wing European leaders, pushing back against Brussels on contentious policy issues, but also remaining firmly committed to the European project when it suits her. Especially when the economy is at stake.

    Meloni as pragmatic European

    Meloni’s strongly nationalist rhetoric and right-wing cultural views might appear at odds with the EU’s purpose, but her approach to the continent is highly pragmatic.

    While she regularly critiques EU bureaucracy at home, her government remains the largest recipient of EU recovery funds, securing €191.5 billion (US$218 billion) from the EU’s post-COVID recovery plan program. That critical cash infusion for an aging country with persistently sluggish growth comes with a commitment to enact a series of stringent fiscal reforms and austerity measures by 2026. In addition, Italy continues to benefit from long-standing cohesion and structural funds, particularly the economically struggling south,.

    Meanwhile, Meloni’s support for Ukraine helps her stand apart from pro-Russia voices in her coalition and strengthens Italy’s standing with NATO and the EU. It’s another strategic move that boosts her credibility both at home and abroad. Far from being a fringe player, Italy under Meloni is central to the EU’s narrative of unity, solidarity and survival.

    A spaghetti Western alliance?

    While Meloni reconciles her nationalist views vis-a-vis the supranationalist EU, she has also prioritized selling her idea of Italy on a bilateral basis.

    That has largely focused on a shrewd charm offensive in the U.S., particularly since the return of Trump, whose right-wing administration provides any easy fit for Meloni. She has attempted to play both Trump and Musk to Italy’s advantage, leveraging Rome’s geopolitical position to secure economic agreements and ease tensions wrought by Trump tariffs, which Meloni called “wrong.”

    Trump has been quick to praise her stance against “anti-woke” politics, while Meloni promises to help resolve trade issues and boost U.S. gas imports, all while keeping Italy at the forefront of negotiations. With Musk, she has attempted to position Italy as a key partner in tech and energy, navigating the global game with both finesse and ambition.

    Italy runs a substantial trade surplus with the U.S. and underspends on NATO defense – two things that typically trigger Trump’s criticism. Yet with Meloni, Trump has been full of admiration: “She’s taken Europe by storm,” he said in April, agreeing during their last meeting to meet again in Rome in the near future.

    Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, left, has expressed solidarity with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
    Thierry Monasse/Getty Images

    Meloni’s diplomatic ambitions extend beyond the U.S., including making moves in the Middle East, particularly with Saudi Arabia. By promoting Italy as a gateway to Europe, she is securing key investments in energy and infrastructure, while boosting Italian exports and increasing her diplomatic leverage. The fact that many in Europe, and indeed Italy, eye such overtures toward Saudi money with distaste, appears neither here nor there. After all, in Italy there has long been an attitude among leaders that “money does not smell” – or “pecunia non olet” as the locals say – a phrase that by legend was uttered by Emperor Vespasian while slapping a tax on public urinals.

    Will all roads lead to Rome?

    While Meloni’s approach of casting Italy as a bridge between the U.S. and Europe may yield some short-term diplomatic gains, it’s nonetheless a delicate path fraught with risk. Cozying up to Washington under Trump, whose policies – especially on trade – have engendered widespread outrage in Europe, risks ruffling feathers in Brussels. Indeed, while Trump praised Meloni’s leadership, and both sides talked trade with no urgency on tariffs, Europe watched warily.

    Trying to navigate between Trump’s protectionist leanings and the EU’s collective trade stance could leave Meloni unable to satisfy either side. Should Trump push for concessions – like shrinking Italy’s trade surplus with the U.S. or increasing defense spending – Meloni may find herself at odds with EU standards and alienating European partners. But leaning too far into EU alignment – and the bloc’s commitment to Ukraine – risks souring her ties with Trump’s camp, potentially weakening her influence across the Atlantic.

    In trying to please both Washington and Brussels, Meloni could end up with enemies on both fronts – and very few wins to show for it.

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

    – ref. Italy’s Meloni is positioning herself as bridge between EU and Trump – but will it work? – https://theconversation.com/italys-meloni-is-positioning-herself-as-bridge-between-eu-and-trump-but-will-it-work-254955

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Oshikatsu, the fandom phenomenon Japan hopes can boost its flagging economy

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Fabio Gygi, Senior Lecturer in Anthropology, SOAS, University of London

    Posters in Tokyo’s enormous Shinjuku railway station are normally used for advertising commodities like cosmetics and food, as well as new films. But occasionally you may happen across a poster with a birthday message and a picture of a young man, often from a boy band and typically with impeccable looks.

    These posters are created by specialised advertising companies and are paid for by adoring fans. They are part of a phenomenon called oshikatsu, a term coined in recent years that is made from the Japanese words for “push” and “activity”.

    Oshikatsu refers to the efforts fans engage in to support their favourite oshi, which can mean an entertainer, an anime or manga character, or a group they admire and want to “push”.

    A considerable part of this support is economic in nature. Fans attend events and concerts, or buy merchandise such as CDs, posters and other collectables. Other forms of oshikatsu are meant to spread the fame of their idol by sharing content about their oshi, engaging in social media campaigns, and writing fan fiction or drawing fan art.

    A birthday message for Kogun, a South Korean singer trying to make it in Japan, in 2022.
    Fabio Gygi, CC BY-NC-ND

    Oshikatsu developed out of the desire of fans to have a closer link to their idols. The combination of oshi and katsu first appeared on social media networks in 2016 and became widespread as a hashtag on Twitter in 2018. In 2021, oshikatsu was nominated as a candidate for Japan’s word of the year, a sign that its use had become mainstream.

    Now, it has appeared on the radar of corporate Japan. The reason for this is a burst of inflation in recent years, caused by pandemic supply chain disruption and geopolitical shocks, that has caused Japanese consumers to reduce their spending.

    However, with wages set to rise again for the third time in three years, the government is cautiously optimistic that economic growth can be rekindled through consumer-driven spending. Entertainment and media companies are looking to oshikatsu as a potential driver of this, although it is unclear whether the upcoming pay hikes will be sufficient.

    A widespread phenomenon

    Contrary to popular perception, oshikatsu is no longer the purview solely of subcultures or young people. It has made inroads with older age groups in Japan as well.

    According to a 2024 survey by Japanese marketing research company Harumeku, 46% of women aged in their 50s have an oshi that they support financially. Older generations tend to have more money to spend, especially after their own children have finished education.

    Oshikatsu also signifies an interesting reversal in terms of gender. While husbands in the traditional Japanese household are still expected to be breadwinners, in oshikatsu it is more often women who financially support young men.

    How much fans spend on their oshi depends. According to a recent survey by Japanese marketing company CDG and Oshicoco, an advertising agency specialising in oshikatsu, the average amount fans spend on activities related to their oshis is 250,000 yen (about £1,300) annually.

    This contributes an estimated 3.5 trillion yen (£18.8 billion) to the Japanese economy each year, and accounts for 2.1% of Japan’s total annual retail sales.

    Oshikatsu will drive up consumer spending. But I doubt it will have the impact on the Japanese economy that the authorities are hoping for. For the younger fans, the danger is that government approval will kill any kind of cool clout, making oshikatsu less appealing to these people in the long run.

    And if you support an oshi who has not yet made it, you may have a stronger sense that your support matters. Hence some of the spending will go directly to individuals, rather than to established corporate superstars. But it’s also possible that struggling young oshis may spend more of this money than established celebrities.

    Japan hopes that fandom can help revitalise its economy.
    amri48 / Shutterstock

    The international press is focusing either on the economic side of oshikatsu, or on the quirkiness of “obsessive” fans who get second jobs to support their oshi and mothers spending large sums on a man half their age. But what such coverage misses is the slow yet profound societal transformation that oshikatsu is a sign of.

    Research from 2022 on people engaging in oshikatsu makes clear that “fan activities” address a deep wish for connection, validation and belonging. While this could be satisfied by friendship or an intimate partnership, an increasing number of Japanese young adults feel that such relationships are “bothersome”.

    Young men are leading in this category, especially those who do not work as white-collar corporate workers with relatively stable jobs, the so-called salarymen. Many who work part time or in blue-collar jobs are finding it difficult to imagine a future in which they have families.

    The tertiary sector is thus changing to accommodate an increasing number of services that turn intangible things such as friendship, companionship and escapist romance fantasies into paid-for services.

    From non-sexual cuddling to renting a friend for the day or going on a date with a cross-dressing escort, temporary respite from loneliness can be sought on a per-hour basis. As a result, human connection itself is becoming something that can be consumed for a fee.

    On the other hand, sharing oshikatsu activities can create new friendships. Fans coming together to worship their idols collectively is a powerful way of creating new communities. It remains to be seen how these shifts in the way people relate to each other will shape the future of Japan’s economy and society.

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

    – ref. Oshikatsu, the fandom phenomenon Japan hopes can boost its flagging economy – https://theconversation.com/oshikatsu-the-fandom-phenomenon-japan-hopes-can-boost-its-flagging-economy-253853

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: 50 years later, Vietnam’s environment still bears the scars of war – and signals a dark future for Gaza and Ukraine

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Pamela McElwee, Professor of Human Ecology, Rutgers University

    During the Vietnam War, the U.S. bombed and defoliated vast areas of forest and protective mangroves. AP Photo

    When the Vietnam War finally ended on April 30, 1975, it left behind a landscape scarred with environmental damage. Vast stretches of coastal mangroves, once housing rich stocks of fish and birds, lay in ruins. Forests that had boasted hundreds of species were reduced to dried-out fragments, overgrown with invasive grasses.

    The term “ecocide” had been coined in the late 1960s to describe the U.S. military’s use of herbicides like Agent Orange and incendiary weapons like napalm to battle guerrilla forces that used jungles and marshes for cover.

    Fifty years later, Vietnam’s degraded ecosystems and dioxin-contaminated soils and waters still reflect the long-term ecological consequences of the war. Efforts to restore these damaged landscapes and even to assess the long-term harm have been limited.

    As an environmental scientist and anthropologist who has worked in Vietnam since the 1990s, I find the neglect and slow recovery efforts deeply troubling. Although the war spurred new international treaties aimed at protecting the environment during wartime, these efforts failed to compel post-war restoration for Vietnam. Current conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East show these laws and treaties still aren’t effective.

    Agent Orange and daisy cutters

    The U.S. first sent ground troops to Vietnam in March 1965 to support South Vietnam against revolutionary forces and North Vietnamese troops, but the war had been going on for years before then. To fight an elusive enemy operating clandestinely at night and from hideouts deep in swamps and jungles, the U.S. military turned to environmental modification technologies.

    The most well-known of these was Operation Ranch Hand, which sprayed at least 19 million gallons (75 million liters) of herbicides over approximately 6.4 million acres (2.6 million hectares), of South Vietnam. The chemicals fell on forests, and also on rivers, rice paddies and villages, exposing civilians and troops. More than half of that spraying involved the dioxin-contaminated defoliant Agent Orange.

    A U.S. Air Force C-123 flies low along a South Vietnamese highway spraying defoliants on dense jungle growth beside the road to eliminate ambush sites during the Vietnam War.
    AP Photo/Department of Defense

    Herbicides were used to strip the leaf cover from forests, increase visibility along transportation routes and destroy crops suspected of supplying guerrilla forces.

    As news of the damage from these tactics made it back to the U.S., scientists raised concerns about the campaign’s environmental impacts to President Lyndon Johnson, calling for a review of whether the U.S. was intentionally using chemical weapons. American military leaders’ position was that herbicides did not constitute chemical weapons under the Geneva Protocol, which the U.S. had yet to ratify.

    Scientific organizations also initiated studies within Vietnam during the war, finding widespread destruction of mangroves, economic losses of rubber and timber plantations, and harm to lakes and waterways.

    A photo at the War Remnants Museum in Ho Chi Minh City, historically known as Saigon, shows the damage at Cần Giờ mangrove forest. The mangrove forest was destroyed by herbicides, bombs and plows.
    Gary Todd/Flickr

    In 1969, evidence linked a chemical in Agent Orange, 2,4,5-T, to birth defects and stillbirths in mice because it contained TCDD, a particularly harmful dioxin. That led to a ban on domestic use and suspension of Agent Orange use by the military in April 1970, with the last mission flown in early 1971.

    Incendiary weapons and the clearing of forests also ravaged rich ecosystems in Vietnam.

    The U.S. Forest Service tested large-scale incineration of jungles by igniting barrels of fuel oil dropped from planes. Particularly feared by civilians was the use of napalm bombs, with more than 400,000 tons of the thickened petroleum used during the war. After these infernos, invasive grasses often took over in hardened, infertile soils.

    Fires from napalm and other incendiary weapons cleared stretches of forest, in some cases scorching the soil so badly that nothing would regrow.
    AP Photo

    “Rome Plows,” massive bulldozers with an armor-fortified cutting blade, could clear 1,000 acres a day. Enormous concussive bombs, known as “daisy cutters”, flattened forests and set off shock waves killing everything within a 3,000-foot (900-meter) radius, down to earthworms in the soil.

    The U.S. also engaged in weather modification through Project Popeye, a secret program from 1967 to 1972 that seeded clouds with silver iodide to prolong the monsoon season in an attempt to cut the flow of fighters and supplies coming down the Ho Chi Minh Trail from North Vietnam. Congress eventually passed a bipartisan resolution in 1973 urging an international treaty to prohibit the use of weather modification as a weapon of war. That treaty came into effect in 1978.

    The U.S. military contended that all these tactics were operationally successful as a trade of trees for American lives.

    Despite Congress’ concerns, there was little scrutiny of the environmental impacts of U.S. military operations and technologies. Research sites were hard to access, and there was no regular environmental monitoring.

    Recovery efforts have been slow

    After the fall of Saigon to North Vietnamese troops on April 30, 1975, the U.S. imposed a trade and economic embargo on all of Vietnam, leaving the country both war-damaged and cash-strapped.

    Vietnamese scientists told me they cobbled together small-scale studies. One found a dramatic drop in bird and mammal diversity in forests. In the A Lưới valley of central Vietnam, 80% of forests subjected to herbicides had not recovered by the early 1980s. Biologists found only 24 bird and five mammal species in those areas, far below normal in unsprayed forests.

    Only a handful of ecosystem restoration projects were attempted, hampered by shoestring budgets. The most notable began in 1978, when foresters began hand-replanting mangroves at the mouth of the Saigon River in Cần Giờ forest, an area that had been completely denuded.

    Mangroves have been replanted in the Cần Giờ Biosphere Reserve near Ho Chi Minh City, but their restoration took decades.
    Tho Nau/Flickr, CC BY

    In inland areas, widespread tree-planting programs in the late 1980s and 1990s finally took root, but they focused on planting exotic trees like acacia, which did not restore the original diversity of the natural forests.

    Chemical cleanup is still underway

    For years, the U.S. also denied responsibility for Agent Orange cleanup, despite the recognition of dioxin-associated illnesses among U.S. veterans and testing that revealed continuing dioxin exposure among potentially tens of thousands of Vietnamese.

    The first remediation agreement between the two countries only occurred in 2006, after persistent advocacy by veterans, scientists and nongovernmental organizations led Congress to appropriate US$3 million for the remediation of the Da Nang airport.

    That project, completed in 2018, treated 150,000 cubic meters of dioxin-laden soil at an eventual cost of over $115 million, paid mostly by the U.S. Agency for International Development, or USAID. The cleanup required lakes to be drained and contaminated soil, which had seeped more than 9 feet (3 meters) deeper than expected, to be piled and heated to break down the dioxin molecules.

    Large amounts of Agent Orange had been stored at the Da Nang airport during the war and contaminated the soil with dioxin. The cleanup project, including heating contaminated soil to high temperatures, was completed in 2018.
    Richard Nyberg/USAID

    Another major hot spot is the heavily contaminated Biên Hoà airbase, where local residents continue to ingest high levels of dioxin through fish, chicken and ducks.

    Agent Orange barrels were stored at the base, which leaked large amounts of the toxin into soil and water, where it continues to accumulate in animal tissue as it moves up the food chain. Remediation began in 2019; however, further work is at risk with the Trump administration’s near elimination of USAID, leaving it unclear if there will be any American experts in Vietnam in charge of administering this complex project.

    Laws to prevent future ‘ecocide’ are complicated

    While Agent Orange’s health effects have understandably drawn scrutiny, its long-term ecological consequences have not been well studied.

    Current-day scientists have far more options than those 50 years ago, including satellite imagery, which is being used in Ukraine to identify fires, flooding and pollution. However, these tools cannot replace on-the-ground monitoring, which often is restricted or dangerous during wartime.

    The legal situation is similarly complex.

    In 1977, the Geneva Conventions governing conduct during wartime were revised to prohibit “widespread, long term, and severe damage to the natural environment.” A 1980 protocol restricted incendiary weapons. Yet oil fires set by Iraq during the Gulf War in 1991, and recent environmental damage in the Gaza Strip, Ukraine and Syria indicate the limits of relying on treaties when there are no strong mechanisms to ensure compliance.

    Remediation work to remove dioxin contamination was just getting started at the former Biên Hoà Air Base in Vietnam when USAID’s staff was dismantled in 2025.
    USAID Vietnam, CC BY-NC

    An international campaign currently underway calls for an amendment to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court to add ecocide as a fifth prosecutable crime alongside genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and aggression.

    Some countries have adopted their own ecocide laws. Vietnam was the first to legally state in its penal code that “Ecocide, destroying the natural environment, whether committed in time of peace or war, constitutes a crime against humanity.” Yet the law has resulted in no prosecutions, despite several large pollution cases.

    Both Russia and Ukraine also have ecocide laws, but these have not prevented harm or held anyone accountable for damage during the ongoing conflict.

    Lessons for the future

    The Vietnam War is a reminder that failure to address ecological consequences, both during war and after, will have long-term effects. What remains in short supply is the political will to ensure that these impacts are neither ignored nor repeated.

    Pamela McElwee receives funding from the Carnegie Corporation, National Science Foundation, and National Endowment for the Humanities.

    – ref. 50 years later, Vietnam’s environment still bears the scars of war – and signals a dark future for Gaza and Ukraine – https://theconversation.com/50-years-later-vietnams-environment-still-bears-the-scars-of-war-and-signals-a-dark-future-for-gaza-and-ukraine-254971

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Pierre Poilievre’s ‘More Boots, Less Suits’ election strategy held little appeal to women

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Elizabeth Goodyear-Grant, Professor, Political Studies; Director, Canadian Opinion Research Archive, Queen’s University, Ontario

    Pierre Poilievre stands between two workers — no women in sight — in a photo promoting the Conservative Party of Canada’s ‘More Boots, Less Suits’ campaign policies on the party’s website. (The Conservative Party of Canada website)

    Women represent more than 50 per cent of the Canadian population, and there is no easy path to power without their votes.

    The Conservative Party’s gender gap in support has grown in each election since 2011, when Stephen Harper closed it, paving the way to a majority government after two back-to-back minorities.

    In 2025, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre’s strategy doesn’t appear poised to achieve the same success in terms of closing the gender gap. In fact, his rhetoric and platform both seem aimed at men, particularly younger and working-class demographics.

    Like Donald Trump and other leaders of the populist right, Poilievre’s and the Conservative Party of Canada’s rise in the polls since 2023 has been in part due to strengthening their appeal to working-class voters, particularly men.

    Poilievre has spent much of his time as CPC leader courting blue-collar workers and shifting the party’s agenda to include pro-worker policies. The culmination of this is its “More Boots, Less Suits” plan, a package of promises to boost training and apprenticeship grants, improve access to EI, harmonize health and safety policies and provide tax write-offs for trades people’s travel and subsistence costs for out of town work.

    Male-dominated sectors

    These may be good proposals, but these policies — and the rhetoric in which they were couched during the election campaign — don’t seem to offer much opportunity for the party to close the sizeable gender gap in voter intention.

    The rhetoric is heavily masculine, including the “More Boots, Less Suits” tagline. The policies in the plan appeal to workers in sectors that are heavily male-dominated.

    Women are estimated to represent about five per cent or less of the skilled trades workers that the CPC’s 2025 platform is designed to woo.

    The role of class in how people vote

    Drawing on my forthcoming chapter “Gender, Class and Voting Behaviour” in The Working Class and Politics in Canada (UBC Press), we can examine a simple question: does class affect men and women differently as they decide how to vote?

    The CPC has considerable support among working-class voters, particularly predominantly non-unionized men, but far less support among working-class women, as my chapter shows based on analyses of the 2019 Canadian Election Study.

    This gender difference arises, in part, because there are many more working-class men, according to occupational definitions, than there are working-class women, as noted above in terms of skilled trades.

    Poilievre has made strong sector- and occupation-based appeals in this campaign, invoking the idea of blue-collar versus white-collar workers and campaigning on pro-trades policies.

    There is a second issue beyond the gender-based occupational segregation in blue-collar jobs. Even among working-class voters, the appeal of the Conservative Party is significantly greater among men compared to women.

    The graph below shows the predicted probabilities of a Conservative vote in 2019 for men and women voters grouped by working-class versus non-working class on a scale of zero to one (with control variables for other factors that influence CPC vote such as income, region and partisanship).

    A gender gap is visible in both working-class and non-working class groups, but is largest in the working-class group, with working-class men heavily supporting the Conservatives.

    What about this election?

    We can assess these numbers as probabilities that can help us think through how voters might cast their ballots today.

    What’s the probability they’ll vote Conservative? Based on the statistical analyses of 37,000 respondents to the Canadian Election Study in 2019, this chart tells us that for working-class men, more than one in two might be expected to vote CPC in 2025, which represents a majority preference.

    In contrast, only one in four non-working-class women would. This makes for a big vote gap — a chasm even — as working-class men form the backbone of the party’s voter base.

    Men and women have distinct pathways to supporting Conservatives. But key parts of the Conservative strategy in 2025 limited the party’s potential to appeal to women, even working-class women. “More Boots, Less Suits” offers little to women specifically, or provides them with an opportunity to see themselves reflected in the policy. The broader CPC platform mentions women only four times.

    One mention of women appears in a promise to end intimate partner violence and consider aggravating factors for violence against vulnerable women.
    The other three are in single policy promising to repeal a federal regulation on the rights of gender-diverse federal offenders.



    Read more:
    Pierre Poilievre’s proposals on intimate partner violence will do little to stop it

    There is a widening gender divide in Canadian electoral politics. The Conservative Party’s appeal to working-class men is clear, consistent and electorally meaningful. But this success comes at the cost of deepening the party’s gender gap, and this gap is not merely symbolic, but structural.

    With women comprising more than half of the electorate, the Conservative Party of Canada’s current trajectory risks locking the party into a limited base. The “More Boots, Less Suits” plan may have mobilized one key demographic, but it did so while alienating another the party couldn’t afford to ignore.

    Elizabeth Goodyear-Grant receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council

    – ref. Pierre Poilievre’s ‘More Boots, Less Suits’ election strategy held little appeal to women – https://theconversation.com/pierre-poilievres-more-boots-less-suits-election-strategy-held-little-appeal-to-women-255078

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Trump administration’s attempt to nix the labor rights of thousands of federal workers on ‘national security’ grounds furthers the GOP’s long-held anti-union agenda

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Bob Bussel, Professor Emeritus of History and Labor Education, University of Oregon

    Airline passengers wait at a Transportation Security Administration checkpoint before boarding to flights in Denver in 2022. Patrick T. Fallon/AFP via Getty Images

    As the Trump administration seeks to shrink the federal workforce, slash nonmilitary spending and curb opposition to its policies, it is taking steps beyond the firing and furloughing of thousands of government workers.

    The government is also trying to strip hundreds of thousands of federal employees of their right to bargain collectively and have a voice in their conditions of employment.

    Citing “national security” concerns, President Donald Trump issued an executive order on March 27, 2025, that canceled collective bargaining agreements at more than 30 federal agencies, commissions and programs, including the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Science Foundation and the Food and Drug Administration. A judge temporarily blocked the order’s enforcement on April 25.

    Over three decades of researching American unions, I’ve never witnessed such a sweeping assault on collective bargaining rights, which give workers represented by unions the ability to negotiate with employers about the terms of their employment.

    But advocates of strong labor rights should have known what might be in store given the labor policies recommended by the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025. That document, which Trump disavowed on the campaign trail in 2024 but has embraced in practice during his second term, questions whether public-sector unions should exist at all.

    Keeping Americans ‘safe’

    The Trump administration’s broad attack on federal workers’ rights arrived less than three weeks after an earlier, similar action by Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.

    On March 7, Noem announced that the government was scrapping collective bargaining rights for all Transportation Security Administration workers, eliminating a 2024 agreement. She cited what she called an “irreconcilable conflict” between union representation for those 47,000 federal workers and national security.

    Only a “flexible, at-will” workforce can possess the “organizational agility” needed to “safeguard our transportation systems and keep Americans safe,” she said. Employers may fire “at-will” workers at their discretion with few limitations.

    Noem’s claim that unions and national security aren’t compatible strikes me as disingenuous.

    Unionized workforces have displayed in recent history both patriotism and dedication in their efforts to keep Americans safe. Unionized firefighters, police officers and other first responders rushed to the World Trade Center attempting to rescue those trapped inside on 9/11, for example.

    Similarly, many unionized public-sector workers risked their health during the toxic cleanup that followed the terrorist attacks.

    It is also worth noting that veterans comprise approximately 30% of the federal workforce. Their history of military service attests, I would argue, to their clear record of demonstrating loyalty and patriotism.

    To my eye, the argument that federal workers belonging to unions compromises national security appears to be more rooted in ideology than evidence.

    Demonstrators rally in support of federal workers outside the Department of Health and Human Services on Feb. 14, 2025, in Washington.
    AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein

    TSA as a case study

    The TSA emerged as part of President George W. Bush’s administration’s response to the 9/11 attacks in 2001; it designated newly hired airport security officers as federal employees.

    At the time, Bush insisted that TSA security officers should not belong to a union. He invoked national security concerns, arguing that union representation would undercut the “culture of urgency” needed to wage the “war on terrorism.”

    TSA employees finally gained collective bargaining rights during the Obama administration when they joined the American Federation of Government Employees in 2011.

    But after joining a union, TSA workers were still paid less than most federal employees. And they still couldn’t appeal disciplinary cases outside of TSA’s authority to the external board used by other federal employees that they viewed as more impartial.

    However, in recent years, TSA workers have obtained wage increases and stronger rights of appeal, along with other advances contained in a 2024
    collective bargaining agreement that the American Federation of Government Employees described as “groundbreaking.” These gains included uniform allowances, greater input on safety concerns and a pledge to examine expanded child care options.

    Now, the union has sued Noem, another Trump administration official and the TSA itself to block the administration’s rollback of these workers’ rights and protect their 2024 contract.

    JFK empowered federal workers

    Federal employees had historically organized unions to advocate and lobby for their interests.

    However, these unions lacked the formal ability to negotiate with the federal government in a collective bargaining process where, as labor scholar Robert Repas has explained, “decisions are made jointly, rather than unilaterally,” or ultimately at managerial discretion.

    Their members did not gain collective bargaining rights until 1962 when President John F. Kennedy issued an executive order making that possible. Kennedy’s action reflected the view that government employees should not be denied basic union rights enjoyed by their private sector counterparts.

    Acknowledging concerns that union rights might limit the ability to exercise centralized command and control, Kennedy’s directive exempted the FBI, CIA and other agencies charged with national security functions from collective bargaining.

    Federal employees covered by the 1962 executive order were also barred from striking. They could not negotiate over wages and benefits; power to make these decisions remained in the hands of Congress.

    In 1978, Congress passed the Civil Service Reform Act, which expanded the right of federal employees to collectively bargain for better working conditions, which its authors said were “in the public interest.” This law created an authority to oversee federal labor relations and established an appeals board to adjudicate worker grievances.

    Although federal employees did not enjoy as many rights as most union members in the private sector, they did gain a stronger voice in determining their working conditions and accessing grievance procedures to address workplace issues and concerns.

    Reagan and the air traffic controllers union

    Three years later, however, President Ronald Reagan fired over 11,000 air traffic controllers who had gone on strike, even though they lacked the right to do so. The Federal Labor Relations Authority subsequently decertified their union, the Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization – known as PATCO.

    The strike’s failure seriously diminished the economic and political leverage of all U.S. unions for years. Membership in private-sector unions has declined sharply, while public-sector union membership remained relatively stable at about 1 in 3 workers. Overall, just under 10% of U.S. workers belonged to a union in 2024.

    Besides seriously diminishing the labor movement’s power and influence, the PATCO strike also had important political consequences. In his book about this labor dispute, historian Joseph McCartin wrote that crushing the PATCO strike led the Republican Party “in the direction of an unambiguous antiunionism” and a heightened antipathy toward unions in the public sector.

    Members of PATCO, the air traffic controllers union, hold hands and raise their arms during a strike in 1981.
    Bettmann/Getty Images

    Long-term goal

    The White House’s attack on federal unions represents an attempt to fulfill a longtime ambition of conservative activists.

    Executive orders, which can be rescinded by any president, lack the power of laws.

    But Sens. Mike Lee of Utah and Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, both Republicans, introduced a bill in March that would enshrine Trump’s executive order in law. If that bill were to become law, it would “end federal labor unions and immediately terminate their collective bargaining agreements,” Lee and Blackburn have said.

    Meanwhile, eight House Republicans have asked the president to reverse course on collective bargaining rights, as have all House Democrats. A bipartisan group of senators has made a similar request.

    As the courts make their determinations and political opposition gathers, the American public has, I believe, an important question to answer. Is the spirit of the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 – that “labor organizations and collective bargaining in the civil service are in the public interest” – worth upholding?

    This question warrants careful consideration and scrutiny. How the courts, Congress and the public respond will have enormous consequences for federal workers and the future of the union movement and the state of American democracy.

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

    – ref. Trump administration’s attempt to nix the labor rights of thousands of federal workers on ‘national security’ grounds furthers the GOP’s long-held anti-union agenda – https://theconversation.com/trump-administrations-attempt-to-nix-the-labor-rights-of-thousands-of-federal-workers-on-national-security-grounds-furthers-the-gops-long-held-anti-union-agenda-252347

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Bureaucrats get a bad rap, but they deserve more credit − a sociologist of work explains why

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Michel Anteby, Professor of Management and Organizations & Sociology at Questrom School of Business & College of Arts and Sciences, Boston University

    It’s telling that U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration wants to fire bureaucrats. In its view, bureaucrats stand for everything that’s wrong with the United States: overregulation, inefficiency and even the nation’s deficit, since they draw salaries from taxpayers.

    But bureaucrats have historically stood for something else entirely. As the sociologist Max Weber argued in his 1921 classic “Economy and Society,” bureaucrats represent a set of critical ideals: upholding expert knowledge, promoting equal treatment and serving others. While they may not live up to those ideals everywhere and every day, the description does ring largely true in democratic societies.

    I know this firsthand, because as a sociologist of work I’ve studied federal, state and local bureaucrats for more than two decades. I’ve watched them oversee the handling of human remains, screen travelers for security threats as well as promote primary and secondary education. And over and over again, I’ve seen bureaucrats stand for Weber’s ideals while conducting their often-hidden work.

    Bureaucrats as experts and equalizers

    Weber defined bureaucrats as people who work within systems governed by rules and procedures aimed at rational action. He emphasized bureaucrats’ reliance on expert training, noting: “The choice is only that between ‘bureaucratisation’ and ‘dilettantism.’” The choice between a bureaucrat and a dilettante to run an army − in his days, like in ours − seems like an obvious one. Weber saw that bureaucrats’ strength lies in their mastery of specialized knowledge.

    I couldn’t agree more. When I studied the procurement of whole body donations for medical research, for example, the state bureaucrats I spoke with were among the most knowledgeable professionals I encountered. Whether directors of anatomical services or chief medical examiners, they knew precisely how to properly secure, handle and transfer human cadavers so physicians could get trained. I felt greatly reassured that they were overseeing the donated bodies of loved ones.

    Weber also described bureaucrats as people who don’t make decisions based on favors. In other forms of rule, he noted, “the ruler is free to grant or withhold clemency” based on “personal preference,” but in bureaucracies, decisions are reached impersonally. By “impersonal,” Weber meant “without hatred or passion” and without “love and enthusiasm.” Put otherwise, the bureaucrats fulfill their work without regard to the person: “Everyone is treated with formal equality.”

    The federal Transportation Security Administration officers who perform their duties to ensure that we all travel safely epitomize this ideal. While interviewing and observing them, I felt grateful to see them not speculate about loving or hating anyone but treating all travelers as potential threats. The standard operating procedures they followed often proved tedious, but they were applied across the board. Doing any favors here would create immense security risks, as the recent Netflix action film “Carry-On” − about an officer blackmailed into allowing a terrorist to board a plane − illustrates.

    Advancing the public’s interests

    Finally, Weber highlighted bureaucrats’ commitment to serving the public. He stressed their tendency to act “in the interests of the welfare of those subjects over whom they rule.” Bureaucrats’ expertise and adherence to impersonal rules are meant to advance the common interest: for young and old, rural and urban dwellers alike, and many more.

    The state Department of Elementary and Secondary Education staff that I partnered with for years at the Massachusetts Commission on LGBTQ Youth exemplified this ethic. They always impressed me by the huge sense of responsibility they felt toward all state residents. Even when local resources varied, they worked to ensure that all young people in the state − regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity − could thrive. Based on my personal experience, while they didn’t always get everything right, they were consistently committed to serving others.

    Today, bureaucrats are often framed by the administration and its supporters as the root of all problems. Yet if Weber’s insights and my observations are any guide, bureaucrats are also the safeguards that stand between the public and dilettantism, favoritism and selfishness. The overwhelming majority of bureaucrats whom I have studied and worked with deeply care about upholding expertise, treating everyone equally and ensuring the welfare of all.

    Yes, bureaucrats can slow things down and seem inefficient or costly at times. Sure, they can also be co-opted by totalitarian regimes and end up complicit in unimaginable tragedies. But with the right accountability mechanisms, democratic control and sufficient resources for them to perform their tasks, bureaucrats typically uphold critical ideals.

    In an era of growing hostility, it’s key to remember what bureaucrats have long stood for − and, let’s hope, still do.

    Michel Anteby was during a decade a member of the Massachusetts Commission on LGBTQ Youth and a former Vice-Chair, and then Chair of the Commission.

    – ref. Bureaucrats get a bad rap, but they deserve more credit − a sociologist of work explains why – https://theconversation.com/bureaucrats-get-a-bad-rap-but-they-deserve-more-credit-a-sociologist-of-work-explains-why-253317

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Detroit’s lack of affordable housing pushes families to the edge – and children sometime pay the price

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Meghan Wilson, Assistant Professor of American Politics and Public Policy, Michigan State University

    Some of Detroit’s unhoused population take refuge in abandoned buildings, cars and parks. Adam J. Dewey/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images

    As outside temperatures dropped to the low- to mid-teens Fahrenheit on Feb. 10, 2025, two children died of carbon monoxide toxicity in a family van parked in a Detroit casino parking garage.

    We are political scientists who study urban and housing public policies, and in the months since this tragedy, we took a deep look at the trends in homelessness and housing policies that foreshadowed the events of that night.

    More kids are experiencing homelessness

    One important trend is that the number of homeless children in the city reached a record high in 2024. This is true even though the overall numbers of people experiencing homelessness in the city is declining overall.

    According to the Point-in-Time count, 455 children were experiencing homelessness in Detroit on Jan. 31, 2024, up from 312 the year before. The count captures data for one night each year.

    Most of these children were unhoused but considered sheltered because they had a place to sleep in an emergency shelter or transitional housing, or were able to temporarily stay with family or friends.

    Nineteen of the kids were unsheltered – meaning they were sleeping in places not designed for human habitation, like cars, parks or abandoned buildings.

    A different set of data comes from the Detroit Public Schools. The district looked at the entire 2022-2023 school year and found that roughly 1 in 19 students were unhoused at some point during that nine-month period — more than double the number in the 2019-2020 school year.

    A lack of temporary solutions

    The lack of adequate funding and staffing in the city’s shelter system means unhoused people often struggle to access temporary shelter beds.

    That includes kids. Even though the city prioritizes giving beds to the most vulnerable, the number of unsheltered children of school age has nearly tripled in three years, rising from an estimated 48 in the school year beginning in September 2019 to 142 in the school year beginning in September 2022. These figures align with the rise in unsheltered children recorded in the one-night Point-in-Time count, which increased from four in 2016 to 19 in 2024.

    The end of COVID-era funding that prevented many evictions is likely to increase the need for shelter and put additional strain on Detroit’s response to the crisis.

    Gaps in a vital system

    Children who experience housing insecurity are often caught in the middle of bureaucracy and failed regulation.

    The mother of the children who died in February had reached out to the city in November 2024 when they were staying with a family member. The mother noted that she wanted to keep all five of her children together.

    According to a report issued by the city, the Detroit Housing Authority did not follow up with her. Her situation was not considered an emergency at the time of contact since she was sheltered with family.

    At the time of the call, the family was a Category 2: immediate risk of homelessness – in other words, not the highest priority under the emergency shelter grants guideline. If the city had deemed the situation an emergency, protocol would be to dispatch immediate support for the family.

    The mother moved her family to the van after the request for help failed to provide a solution.

    The Detroit mayor’s office admitted that the family fell through the cracks and promised to expand available shelter beds and require homeless outreach employees to visit any unhoused families that call for help.

    “We have to make sure that we do everything possible to make sure that this doesn’t happen again,” Deputy Mayor Melia Howard told local media.

    More than 8 in 10 placed on wait list

    According to records from the Coordinated Assessment Model Detroit, the system responsible for connecting individuals to shelters, 82% of calls do not result in immediate help but rather being placed on a shelter waitlist. Similar to instances across the country, the wait time is long.

    Families in Detroit face an average wait of 130 days, while unaccompanied youth typically wait around 50 days.

    The long wait for shelter has contributed to the rise in people living on the streets or in their vehicles. The number of unsheltered individuals — including both adults and children — doubled from 151 in 2015 to 305 in 2024. This trend of increasing unsheltered homelessness contrasts with the overall decline in the total number of homeless people in the city, which is down from a peak of 2,597 in 2015.

    Children need safety and security to thrive.

    Their access to stable housing depends on their parents and what the adults in their life are able to provide. As rents increase in the city, some children are left vulnerable.

    Stricter regulations

    Over the past decade, Detroit, like many other U.S. cities, has experienced rising housing costs while wages fail to keep up, particularly for long-term residents.

    Since 2021, the number of rentals in the city has increased by 51%.

    Rents are also up. Since 2017, the average rent in Detroit has increased 55% for single-family homes and 43% for multifamily homes.

    While inflation and increased maintenance costs contribute to this rise, stricter rental regulations like the heightened enforcement of housing codes, expanded tenant protections and higher compliance cost for landlords have played an important role.

    Some landlords pass the expense of these regulations on to tenants, making housing less affordable. Others leave their properties vacant, pushing up prices by lessening the supply.

    The current average fair market rent for a two-bedroom apartment in Detroit is $1,314 per month. For the typical household in the city, this basic shelter cost, not including utilities, makes up 41% of the household income.

    For the lowest-income households, any unexpected expense can disrupt a delicate financial balance and lead to eviction and homelessness. Children in these situations often face major instability, moving between shelters – or, as in the case of the children who died in February, sleeping in cars.

    This kind of displacement disrupts education, strains mental health and increases exposure to danger.

    Detroit’s stricter housing regulations may have improved conditions for some renters, but a report by Outlier Media shows that only 8% of landlords are in compliance, leaving legacy residents in subpar rentals at higher prices.

    And these new rules have victims who are too often ignored until tragedy strikes.

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

    – ref. Detroit’s lack of affordable housing pushes families to the edge – and children sometime pay the price – https://theconversation.com/detroits-lack-of-affordable-housing-pushes-families-to-the-edge-and-children-sometime-pay-the-price-251591

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Pope Francis filled the College of Cardinals with a diverse group of men – and they’ll be picking his successor

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Joanne M. Pierce, Professor Emerita of Religious Studies, College of the Holy Cross

    The Catholic Church’s 115 cardinal-electors take part in a mass in St. Peter’s Basilica on March 12, 2013, ahead of entering the conclave for a papal election. Michael Kappeler/picture alliance via Getty Images

    Following the death of 88-year-old Pope Francis on Easter Monday, several cardinals who were already in Rome, or who traveled only short distances to arrive, held the first of several meetings – general congregations – to discuss preparations for the papal funeral and the election to follow.

    The College of Cardinals – which will elect the next pope – has 252 members, but only 135 can vote. Only those younger than 80 as of the day of a pope’s death may cast a ballot. Theoretically, church law allows the College of Cardinals to elect any Catholic man in the world to become the next pope – but in reality, as has been the case for more than 600 years, one of those cardinal-electors will almost certainly be Francis’ successor.

    As a specialist on medieval Catholicism and worship, I have studied how the role of cardinals has developed over time and how it has changed in the 20th and 21st centuries.

    How role of cardinals evolved

    During the early centuries of Christianity, three classes of ordained minsters came about to lead and serve Christian communities: bishops, priests and deacons.

    Bishops supervised local church communities and presided at liturgical ceremonies in the main churches – cathedrals. Priests advised the bishops and led individual communities – parishes. Deacons tended to the needs of the poor, widows and orphans and took care of community finances. They also had a special role during some worship services and often acted as the bishop’s secretaries.

    Over time, seven of these deacons in key Roman churches served as special advisers to the bishop of Rome, the pope. They came to be called cardinals, from Latin “cardo” – meaning hinge – and “cardinalis” meaning key or principal. Later popes would choose priests and bishops to be cardinals as well.

    Electing the pope

    In the earlier centuries, popes would be elected by the clergy and people of the city of Rome. As time went on, these elections could be manipulated by local civic leaders, wealthy families and political leaders outside of Rome and Italy.

    It was not until the 11th century that Pope Nicholas II formulated a process for selecting a new pope: election by an assembly of cardinals. However, it was not always possible for all the cardinals – known as the College of Cardinals – to come together, due to age, illness or distance. Those who had to travel long distances might arrive too late to vote.

    In order to avoid continued outside interference, Pope Gregory X in the 13th century adopted a new procedure: the conclave. Cardinals would remain in a locked location – from the Latin cum clave, “with a key” – in isolation from outside influences until the election concluded.

    The rules governing the conclave changed slightly over the years. The leader of the College of Cardinals is called the dean of the college. Over the centuries, his duties have come to include organizing the conclave, assisted by other Vatican officials. The size of the college has also varied over time but has steadily increased despite efforts to limit its size.

    Starting in the 19th century, popes began expanding the size and geography of the college. Once dominated by European and especially Italian cardinals, popes began to choose new cardinals from different areas of the globe. For example, the first cardinals born in North America were named: John McClosky, archbishop of New York, was named cardinal in 1875; James Gibbons, archbishop of Baltimore in 1886, and Elzéar-Alexandre Taschereau, archbishop of Quebec, also in 1886.

    The College of Cardinals receives final instructions from the Grand Marshal before adjourning to the Sistine Chapel to begin voting for a new pope in 1922.
    Bettmann via Getty Images

    The expansion of the college gathered momentum in the mid-20th century. The first native-born bishops from Asia were named at this time – for example, from China in 1946, Japan and the Philippines in 1960, and Sri Lanka in 1965. The first native-born cardinals of both Mexico and Uruguay were named in 1958, and the first native-born African of modern times, from Tanzania, was named in 1960. Popes continued this trend through the later 20th and early 21st centuries.

    Different visions

    By the time of his death, Francis had named a large number of new, non-European cardinals, especially from the Global South, where Catholicism is expanding. Currently, out of a total of 252 cardinals, 138 are non-European. Importantly, out of a total 135 cardinals eligible to vote, 82 are not from Europe, which makes a record number of non-Europeans eligible to vote.

    In addition, at this conclave, 80% of the cardinal-electors have been named by Francis: that is 108 cardinals out of 135. This is an overwhelming number, representing a wide variety of Catholic communities from several different cultures. A new pope must be elected with a two-thirds majority of the votes: a total of 90 votes. If no candidate receives 90 votes, balloting continues as scheduled.

    As I see it, there are several issues likely to arise and influence the vote for the upcoming election. Some of the cardinal-electors may want to choose a cardinal with more progressive views. But other cardinals, even if chosen by Francis, still might prefer to choose a more conservative candidate, to moderate what they see as the progressive agenda of the past 12 years. Their appointment by Francis doesn’t mean that they automatically agree with all of his ideas.

    In addition, specific issues facing the church will also shape opinions. Perhaps the most important include dealing with the scandal of clergy sexual abuse cases; the role of women in the church; and the treatment of immigrants and other instances of economic and social injustice.

    Catholics around the world will be praying for the Holy Spirit to guide the hearts and minds of the cardinals as they fill out their ballots. Many will hope for a pope as inspiring as his predecessor, one who can face the challenging problems of an increasingly complex world.

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

    – ref. Pope Francis filled the College of Cardinals with a diverse group of men – and they’ll be picking his successor – https://theconversation.com/pope-francis-filled-the-college-of-cardinals-with-a-diverse-group-of-men-and-theyll-be-picking-his-successor-254976

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Granular systems, such as sandpiles or rockslides, are all around you − new research will help scientists describe how they work

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Jacqueline Reber, Associate Professor of Earth, Atmosphere, and Climate, Iowa State University

    Sand is one type of granular system – hundreds of grains act collectively. Nenov/Moment via Getty Images

    Did you eat cereal this morning? Or have you walked on a gravel path? Maybe you had a headache and had to take a pill? If you answered any of these questions with a yes, you interacted with a granular system today.

    Scientists classify any collection of small, hard particles – such as puffed rice, sand grains or pills – as a granular system.

    Even though everyone has interacted with these kinds of systems, describing the physics of how the particles collectively act when they are close together is surprisingly hard.

    Granular systems sometimes move like a fluid. Think of an hourglass where sand, a very typical granular material, flows from one half of the glass to the other. But if you’ve run on a beach, you know that sand can also act like a solid. You can move over it without sinking through the sand.

    As a geologist, I’m interested in understanding when a granular system flows and when it has strength and behaves like a solid. This line of research is very important for many agricultural and industrial applications, such as moving corn kernels or pills in a pipeline or shoot.

    Understanding when a granular system might flow is also essential for geologic hazard assessments. For example, geologists would like to know whether the various boulders making up the slope of a mountain are stable or whether they will move as a rockslide.

    Transferring forces between grains

    To understand the behavior of a granular system, scientists can zoom in and look at the interactions between individual grains. When two particles are in contact with each other, they can transfer forces between each other.

    Imagine this scenario: You have three tennis balls – the grains in this experiment. You place the tennis balls in a row and squeeze the three balls between your hand and a wall, so that your hand presses against the first ball. The last ball is in contact with a wall, but the middle ball is free floating and touches only the other two balls.

    Tennis balls can act as grains in this simple granular system experiment. When you push against the tennis ball on the end, you exert a force, which acts upon the other two balls and eventually the wall.
    Jeremy Randolph-Flagg

    By pushing against the first ball, you have successfully transferred the force from your hand through the row of three tennis balls onto the wall, even though you’ve touched only the first ball.

    Now imagine you have many grains, like in a pile of sand, and all the sand grains are in contact with some neighboring grains. Grains that touch transfer forces between each other. How the forces are distributed in this granular system dictates whether the system is stable and unmoving or if it will move – such as a rockslide or the sand in an hourglass.

    On the left are photoelastic discs used for two-dimensional experiments (9 mm diameter), and on the right are photoelastic grains used for three-dimensional experiments (14 mm diameter).
    Nathan Coon

    Tracking forces in the lab

    This is where my research team comes in. Together with my students, I study how grains interact with each other in the laboratory.

    In our experiments, we can visualize the forces between individual grains in a granular system. While all granular systems have these forces present, we cannot see their distribution because force is invisible in most grains, such as sand or pills. We can see the forces only in some transparent materials.

    To make the forces visible, we made grains using a material that is transparent and has a special property called photoelasticity. When photoelastic materials are illuminated and experience force, they split light into two rays that travel at different speeds.

    This property forms bright, colorful bands in the otherwise transparent material that make the force visible. The brightness of the grains depends on how much force a grain is experiencing, so we can see how the forces are distributed in the granular system. The particles themselves do not emit light, but they change how fast light rays travel through them when they experience force – which makes them appear brighter.

    On side A is a three-dimensional photoelastic grain without force applied, while on side B is the same grain once force is applied. In this case, we just squish the grain from the top and bottom. The brighter green bands start at the top and bottom of the grain where the force is applied and are the result of the photoelastic property.
    Jacqueline Reber

    Scientists before us have used photoelasticity to visualize force in granular materials. These previous experiments, however, have examined only a single layer of grains. We developed a method to see the forces in not just a single layer of grains but throughout a whole heap.

    Observing the forces on the outside of the heap of grains is pretty easy, but seeing how the forces are distributed in the middle of the pile is a lot harder. To see into the middle of the granular system and to illuminate grains there, we used a laser light sheet.

    To generate a laser light sheet, we manipulated a laser beam so that the light spread out into a very narrow sheet.

    With this light sheet, we illuminated one slice throughout the granular system. On this illuminated slice, we could see which grains were transferring forces, similarly to the previous two-dimensional experiments, without having to worry about the third dimension.

    We then collected information from many slices across different parts of the grain heap. We used the information from the individual slices to reconstruct the three-dimensional granular system.

    This technique is similar to how doctors reconstruct three-dimensional shapes of the brain and other organs from the two-dimensional images obtained by a medical CT scanner.

    In 3D photoelastic experiments, the cart system shown at the top left is used to obtain regularly spaced laser light slices of the experiments, with the middle being sliced. The bottom left shows a schematic on how multiple slices can recreate a 3D object. The right shows three consecutive photos that are 0.7 cm apart – roughly one grain’s radius. The bright green crosshatch pattern shows how the forces are distributed between the individual grains.
    Nathan Coon

    In our current experiments, we’ve been using only a small number of grains – 107. This way we can keep track of every individual grain and test whether this method works to see the force distribution in three dimensions. These 107 grains fill a cube-shaped box that is about 4 inches (10 centimeters) wide, tall and deep.

    So far, the experimental method is working well, and we’ve been able to see how the force is distributed between the 107 grains. Next, we plan to expand the experimental setup to include more grains and explore how the force changes when we agitate the granular system – for example, by bumping it.

    This new experimental approach opens the door for many more experiments that will help us to better understand granular systems. These systems are all around you, and while they seem so simple, researchers still don’t truly understand how they behave.

    Jacqueline Reber receives funding from the Iowa State University College of Liberal Arts and Sciences Frontier Science Fund.

    – ref. Granular systems, such as sandpiles or rockslides, are all around you − new research will help scientists describe how they work – https://theconversation.com/granular-systems-such-as-sandpiles-or-rockslides-are-all-around-you-new-research-will-help-scientists-describe-how-they-work-251689

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: How does soap keep you clean? A chemist explains the science of soap

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Paul E. Richardson, Professor of Biochemistry, Coastal Carolina University

    Be sure to wash your hands for at least 20 seconds. Mladen Zivkovic/iStock via Getty Images Plus

    Curious Kids is a series for children of all ages. If you have a question you’d like an expert to answer, send it to CuriousKidsUS@theconversation.com.

    How does soap clean our bodies? – Charlie H., age 8, Stamford, Connecticut

    Thousands of years ago, our ancestors discovered something that would clean their bodies and clothes. As the story goes, fat from someone’s meal fell into the leftover ashes of a fire. They were astonished to discover that the blending of fat and ashes formed a material that cleaned things. At the time, it must have seemed like magic.

    That’s the legend, anyway. However it happened, the discovery of soap dates back approximately 5,000 years, to the ancient city of Babylon in what was southern Mesopotamia – today, the country of Iraq.

    As the centuries passed, people around the world began to use soap to clean the things that got dirty. During the 1600s, soap was a common item in the American colonies, often made at home. In 1791, Nicholas Leblanc, a French chemist, patented the first soapmaking process. Today, the world spends about US$50 billion every year on bath, kitchen and laundry soap.

    But although billions of people use soap every day, most of us don’t know how it works. As a professor of chemistry, I can explain the science of soap – and why you should listen to your mom when she tells you to wash up.

    You’ll be amazed at how much work it takes to make a bar of soap.

    The chemistry of clean

    Water – scientific name: dihydrogen monoxide – is composed of two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom. That molecule is required for all life on our planet.

    Chemists categorize other molecules that are attracted to water as hydrophilic, which means water-loving. Hydrophilic molecules can dissolve in water.

    So if you were to wash your hands under a running faucet without using soap, you’d probably get rid of lots of whatever hydrophilic bits are stuck to your skin.

    But there is another category of molecules that chemists call hydrophobic, which means water-fearing. Hydrophobic molecules do not dissolve in water.

    Oil is an example of something that’s hydrophobic. You probably know from experience that oil and water just don’t mix. Picture shaking up a jar of vinaigrette salad dressing – the oil and the other watery ingredients never stay mixed.

    So just swishing your hands through water isn’t going to get rid of water-fearing molecules such as oil or grease.

    Here’s where soap comes in to save the day.

    Soap, a complex molecule, is both water-loving and water-fearing. Shaped like a tadpole, the soap molecule has a round head and long tail; the head is hydrophilic, and the tail is hydrophobic. This quality is one of the reasons soap is slippery.

    It’s also what gives soap its cleaning superpower.

    The round head and long wiggly tail of the soap molecules work together to eradicate dirt, grease and grime.
    Tumeggy/Science Photo Library via Getty Images

    A microscopic view

    To see what happens when you wash your hands with soap and water, let’s zoom in.

    Picture all the gunk that you touch during the day and that builds up on your skin to make your hands dirty. Maybe there are smears of food, mud from outside, or even sweat and oils from your own skin.

    All of that material is either water-loving or water-fearing on the molecular level. Dirt is a jumbled mess of both. Dust and dead skin cells are hydrophilic; naturally occurring oils are hydrophobic; and environmental debris can be either.

    If you use only water to clean your hands, plenty will be left behind because you’d only remove the water-loving bits that dissolve in water.

    But when you add a bit of soap, it’s a different story, thanks to its simultaneously water-loving and water-fearing properties.

    Soap molecules work together to encapsulate grime within a bubblelike micelle structure.
    TUMEGGY/Science Photo Library via Getty Images

    Soap molecules come together and surround the grime on your hands, forming what’s known as a micelle structure. On a molecular level, it looks almost like a bubble encasing the hydrophobic bit of debris. The water-loving heads of the soap molecules are on the surface, with the water-fearing tails inside the micelle. This structure traps the dirt, and running water washes it all away.

    To get the full effect, wash your hands at the sink for at least 20 seconds. Rubbing your hands together helps force the soap molecules into whatever dirt is there to break it up and envelope it.

    It’s not just dirt

    Along with dirt, your body is covered by microorganisms – bacteria, viruses and fungi. Most are harmless and some even protect you from getting sick. But some microorganisms, known as pathogens, can cause illness and disease.

    Whether liquid or bar, soap gets the job done.
    velvelvel/iStock via Getty Images Plus

    They can also cause you to smell if you haven’t taken a bath in a while. These bacteria break down organic molecules and release stinky fumes.

    Although microorganisms are protected by a barrier – it’s called a membrane – soap and water can disrupt the membrane, causing the microorganism to burst open. The water then washes the remains of the microorganism away, along with the stink.

    To say that soap changed the course of civilization is an understatement. For thousands of years, it’s helped keep billions of people healthy. Think of that the next time Mom or Dad asks you to wash up – which will likely be sometime soon.

    Hello, curious kids! Do you have a question you’d like an expert to answer? Ask an adult to send your question to CuriousKidsUS@theconversation.com. Please tell us your name, age and the city where you live.

    And since curiosity has no age limit – adults, let us know what you’re wondering, too. We won’t be able to answer every question, but we will do our best.

    Paul E. Richardson receives funding from the NIH and NSF.

    – ref. How does soap keep you clean? A chemist explains the science of soap – https://theconversation.com/how-does-soap-keep-you-clean-a-chemist-explains-the-science-of-soap-247559

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Cancer research in the US is world class because of its broad base of funding − with the government pulling out, its future is uncertain

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Jeffrey MacKeigan, Professor of Pediatrics and Human Development, Michigan State University

    Without federal support, the lights will turn off in many labs across the country. Thomas Barwick/Stone via Getty Images

    Cancer research in the U.S. doesn’t rely on a single institution or funding stream − it’s a complex ecosystem made up of interdependent parts: academia, pharmaceutical companies, biotechnology startups, federal agencies and private foundations. As a cancer biologist who has worked in each of these sectors over the past three decades, I’ve seen firsthand how each piece supports the others.

    When one falters, the whole system becomes vulnerable.

    The United States has long led the world in cancer research. It has spent more on cancer research than any other country, including more than US$7.2 billion annually through the National Cancer Institute alone. Since the 1971 National Cancer Act, this sustained public investment has helped drive dramatic declines in cancer mortality, with death rates falling by 34% since 1991. In the past five years, the Food and Drug Administration has approved over 100 new cancer drugs, and the U.S. has brought more cancer drugs to the global market than any other nation.

    But that legacy is under threat. Funding delays, political shifts and instability across sectors have created an environment where basic research into the fundamentals of cancer biology is struggling to keep traction and the drug development pipeline is showing signs of stress.

    These disruptions go far beyond uncertainty and have real consequences. Early-career scientists faced with unstable funding and limited job prospects may leave academia altogether. Mid-career researchers often spend more time chasing scarce funding than conducting research. Interrupted research budgets and shifting policy priorities can unravel multiyear collaborations. I, along with many other researchers, believe these setbacks will slow progress, break training pipelines and drain expertise from critical areas of cancer research – delays that ultimately hurt patients waiting for new treatments.

    A 50-year foundation of federal investment

    The modern era of U.S. cancer research began with the signing of the National Cancer Act in 1971. That law dramatically expanded the National Cancer Institute, an agency within the National Institutes of Health focusing on cancer research and education. The NCI laid the groundwork for a robust national infrastructure for cancer science, funding everything from early research in the lab to large-scale clinical trials and supporting the training of a generation of cancer researchers.

    This federal support has driven advances leading to higher survival rates and the transformation of some cancers into a manageable chronic or curable condition. Progress in screening, diagnostics and targeted therapies – and the patients who have benefited from them – owe much to decades of NIH support.

    The Trump administration is cutting billions of dollars of biomedical research funding.

    But federal funding has always been vulnerable to political headwinds. During the first Trump administration, deep cuts to biomedical science budgets threatened to stall the progress made under initiatives such as the 2016 Cancer Moonshot. The rationale given for these cuts was to slash overall spending, despite facing strong bipartisan opposition in Congress. Lawmakers ultimately rejected the administration’s proposal and instead increased NIH funding. In 2022, the Biden administration worked to relaunch the Cancer Moonshot.

    This uncertainty has worsened in 2025 as the second Trump administration has cut or canceled many NIH grants. Labs that relied on these awards are suddenly facing funding cliffs, forcing them to lay off staff, pause experiments or shutter entirely. Deliberate delays in communication from the Department of Health and Human Services have stalled new NIH grant reviews and funding decisions, putting many promising research proposals already in the pipeline at risk.

    Philanthropy’s support is powerful – but limited

    While federal agencies remain the backbone of cancer research funding, philanthropic organizations provide the critical support for breakthroughs – especially for new ideas and riskier projects.

    Groups such as the American Cancer Society, Stand Up To Cancer and major hospital foundations have filled important gaps in support, often funding pilot studies or supporting early-career investigators before they secure federal grants. By supporting bold ideas and providing seed funding, they help launch innovative research that may later attract large-scale support from the NIH.

    Without the bureaucratic constraints of federal agencies, philanthropy is more nimble and flexible. It can move faster to support work in emerging areas, such as immunotherapy and precision oncology. For example, the American Cancer Society grant review process typically takes about four months from submission, while the NIH grant review process takes an average of eight months.

    Ted Kennedy Jr., right, and Jeff Keith raise money for the American Cancer Society in 1984.
    Mikki Ansin/Getty Images

    But philanthropic funds are smaller in scale and often disease-specific. Many foundations are created around a specific cause, such as advancing cures for pancreatic, breast or pediatric cancers. Their urgency to make an impact allows them to fund bold approaches that federal funders may see as too preliminary or speculative. Their giving also fluctuates. For instance, the American Cancer Society awarded nearly $60 million less in research grants in 2020 compared with 2019.

    While private foundations are vital partners for cancer research, they cannot replace the scale and consistency of federal funding. Total U.S. philanthropic funding for cancer research is estimated at a few billion dollars per year, spread across hundreds of organizations. In comparison, the federal government has typically contributed roughly five to eight times more than philanthropy to cancer research each year.

    Industry innovation − and its priorities

    Private-sector innovation is essential for translating discoveries into treatments. In 2021, nearly 80% of the roughly $57 billion the U.S. spent on cancer drugs came from pharmaceutical and biotech companies. Many of the treatments used in oncology today, including immunotherapies and targeted therapies, emerged from collaborations between academic labs and industry partners.

    But commercial priorities don’t always align with public health needs. Companies naturally focus on areas with strong financial returns: common cancers, projects that qualify for fast-track regulatory approval, and high-priced drugs. Rare cancers, pediatric cancers and basic science often receive less attention.

    Industry is also saddled with uncertainty. Rising R&D costs, tough regulatory requirements and investor wariness have created a challenging environment to bring new drugs to market. Several biotech startups have folded or downsized in the past year, leaving promising new drugs stranded in limbo in the lab before they can reach clinical trials.

    Without federal or philanthropic entities to pick up the slack, these discoveries may never reach the patients who need them.

    A system under strain

    Cancer is not going away. As the U.S. population ages, the burden of cancer on society will only grow. Disparities in treatment access and outcomes persist across race, income and geography. And factors such as environmental exposures and infectious diseases continue to intersect with cancer risk in new and complex ways.

    Addressing these challenges requires a strong, stable and well-coordinated research system. But that system is under strain. National Cancer Institute grant paylines, or funding cutoffs, remain highly competitive. Early-career researchers face precarious job prospects. Labs are losing technicians and postdoctoral researchers to higher-paying roles in industry or to burnout. And patients, especially those hoping to enroll in clinical trials, face delays, disruptions and dwindling options.

    Researchers have been rallying to protect the future of science in the U.S.
    AP Photo/John McDonnell

    This is not just a funding issue. It’s a coordination issue between the federal government, academia and industry. There are currently no long-term policy solutions that ensure sustained federal investment, foster collaboration between academia and industry, or make room for philanthropy to drive innovation instead of just filling gaps.

    I believe that for the U.S. to remain a global leader in cancer research, it will need to recommit to the model that made success possible: a balanced ecosystem of public funding, private investment and nonprofit support. Up until recently, that meant fully funding the NIH and NCI with predictable, long-term budgets that allow labs to plan for the future; incentivizing partnerships that move discoveries from bench to bedside without compromising academic freedom; supporting career pathways for young scientists so talent doesn’t leave the field; and creating mechanisms for equity to ensure that research includes and benefits all communities.

    Cancer research and science has come a long way, saving about 4.5 million lives in the U.S. from cancer from 1991 to 2022. Today, patients are living longer and better because of decades of hard-won discoveries made by thousands of researchers. But science doesn’t run on good intentions alone. It needs universities. It needs philanthropy. It needs industry. It needs vision. And it requires continued support from the federal government.

    Jeffrey MacKeigan receives funding from NIH National Cancer Institute. He has consulting agreements with Merck and scholarly activity with the Translational Genomics Research Institute and the Van Andel Research Institute.

    – ref. Cancer research in the US is world class because of its broad base of funding − with the government pulling out, its future is uncertain – https://theconversation.com/cancer-research-in-the-us-is-world-class-because-of-its-broad-base-of-funding-with-the-government-pulling-out-its-future-is-uncertain-254536

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: We’re throwing the Moomins a birthday party – and you’re invited

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Anna Walker, Senior Arts + Culture Editor

    Tove Jansson published her first Moomin book, The Moomins and the Great Flood, 80 years ago, in 1945. The story follows a family of hippo-like creatures called “Moomintrolls”, who become refugees after a flood washes away their home. Written at the end of the second world war, when millions were displaced, it reflects the struggles of rebuilding lives after disaster.

    The official theme of the anniversary is “the door is always open”, reflecting the themes of acceptance, kindness and chosen families that run through Jansson’s books.

    We’re celebrating 80 wonderful years of her magical creatures with a special screening of the 2014 film Moomins on the Riviera and a panel discussion. Come along to the National Science & Media Museum in Bradford on Friday May 23 to watch the film with us and take part in the Q&A with four expert Moominologists about the theme of the refugee experience in Jansson’s work.

    As a City of Sanctuary and home to one of four public art commissions honouring Moomin 80, Bradford is the perfect place to mark this milestone. Tickets include a free ebook of expert articles about Jansson and her Moominous creations.

    We’d love to see you there, so come along and join in the discussion. Readers of The Conversation get an exclusive 25% off the ticket price – you can book them here using the code Moomins25.

    – ref. We’re throwing the Moomins a birthday party – and you’re invited – https://theconversation.com/were-throwing-the-moomins-a-birthday-party-and-youre-invited-248586

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Vanuatu communities growing climate resilience in wake of Cyclone Lola

    Communities in Vanuatu are learning to grow climate resilient crops, 18 months after Cyclone Lola devastated the country.

    The category 5 storm struck in October 2023, generating wind speeds of up to 215 kmph, which destroyed homes, schools, plantations, and left at least four people dead.

    It was all the worse for following twin cyclones Judy and Kevin earlier that year.

    Save the Children Vanuatu country director Polly Banks said they have been working alongside Vanuatu’s Ministry of Agriculture and local partners, supporting families through the Tropical Cyclone Lola Recovery Programme.

    “It really affected backyard gardening and the communities across the areas affected – their ability to pursue an income and also their own nutritional needs,” she said.

    She said the programme looked at the impact of the cyclone on backyard gardening and on people’s economic reliance on what they grow in their gardens, and developed a recovery plan to respond.

    “We trained community members and also provided them with the equipment to establish cyclone resilient nurseries.

    Ready for harsh weather
    “So for example, nurseries that can be put up and then pulled down when a harsh weather event – including cyclones but even heavy rainfall — is arriving.

    “There was a focus on these climate resilient nurseries, but also through that partnership with the Department of Agriculture, there was also a much stronger focus than we’ve had before on teaching community members climate smart agricultural techniques.”

    Banks said these techniques included open pollinating seed and learning skills such as grassing; and another part of the project was introducing more variety into people’s diets.

    She said out of the project has also come the first seed bank on Epi Island.

    “That seed bank now has a ready supply of seeds, and the community are adding to that regularly, and they’re taking those seeds from really climate-resilient crops, so that they have a cyclone secure storage facility,” she said.

    “The next time a cyclone happens — and we know that they’re going to become more ferocious and more frequent — the community are ready to replant the moment that the cyclone passes.

    Setting up seed bank
    “But in setting the seed bank up as well, the community have been taught how to select the most productive seeds, the seeds that show the most promise; how to dry them out; how to preserve them.”

    Banks said they were also working with the Department of Agriculture in the delivery of a community-based climate resilience project, which is funded by the Green Climate Fund.

    Rolled out across 282 communities across the country, a key focus of it is the creation of more climate-resilient backyard gardening, food preservation and climate resilient nurseries.

    “We’re also setting up early warning systems through the provision of internet to really remote communities so that they have better access to more knowledge about when a big storm or a cyclone is approaching and what steps to take.

    “But that particular project is still just a drop in the ocean in terms of the adaptation needs that communities have.”

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Global: One in ten patient safety incidents in hospitals due to poor communication – new study

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jeremy Howick, Professor and Director of the Stoneygate Centre for Excellence in Empathic Healthcare, University of Leicester

    Patients’ lives are being put at risk by poor communication from healthcare professionals in hospitals worldwide, according to new research my colleagues and I conducted.

    Our analysis included 46 studies, published between 2013 and 2024, involving over 67,000 patients across Europe, North and South America, Asia and Australia. And the findings are alarming. We discovered that poor communication was the sole cause of patient-safety incidents in over one in ten cases and contributed to causing incidents in one in four cases.

    These aren’t just statistics, they represent real people harmed by preventable errors.

    In one documented case, a doctor accidentally shut off a patient’s Amiodarone drip (a drug to treat heart arrhythmias) while silencing a beeping pump. The doctor failed to tell the nurse, and the patient’s heart rate spiked dangerously.

    In another example, a patient died after a nurse failed to tell a surgeon that the patient was experiencing abdominal pains following surgery and had a low red blood cell count – clear indicators of internal bleeding. The patient later died from a haemorrhage that could have been prevented with adequate communication.

    These findings confirm what many healthcare professionals have long suspected: communication breakdowns directly threaten patient safety. What’s particularly concerning is that these incidents cut across different healthcare systems worldwide.

    The scale of the problem

    In the UK alone, over 1,700 lives are lost annually due to medication errors, and at least 3 million deaths occur due to medication errors worldwide. At least half of these – often resulting from poor communication – are preventable.

    In the US, communication failures contribute to over 60% of all hospital-based adverse events. Experts believe these figures probably underestimate the true extent of the problem as patient safety incidents are often underreported.

    This research fills an important gap in our understanding. While previous studies had established that poor communication was an issue in healthcare settings, this is the first rigorous analysis to quantify precisely how communication lapses affect patient safety.

    My colleagues and I also conducted a separate analysis of just the high-quality studies in the review, which yielded similar results, strengthening the validity of our findings.

    The critical importance of effective communication has been highlighted in major healthcare investigations. Both the Francis and Ockenden Reports in the UK, which examined serious healthcare failures, cited ineffective communication as a cause of unnecessary deaths at the Mid-Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust and the Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust, respectively.

    Further emphasising this point, the UK’s health ombudsman has identified poor communication as a contributing factor in about 48,000 avoidable sepsis deaths each year.

    Inadequate communication doesn’t just make people feel bad in a nonspecific sense, it causes actual harm. Misunderstandings lead to grave medical errors through misdiagnosis, suboptimal treatments and potentially life-threatening complications.

    Hope for improvement

    Despite these sobering findings, we emphasise that communication can be improved through targeted interventions. When healthcare practitioners receive training to communicate with additional empathy toward their patients, their empathic behaviour improves – and so do patient outcomes.

    Similarly, when healthcare professionals are taught to communicate more effectively with colleagues, measurable improvements follow.

    One notable study found that implementing a structured communication protocol in surgical teams reduced adverse events by 23% over a year. Another demonstrated that using standardised handoff procedures between shifts decreased medical errors by nearly 30%.

    These communication interventions often take as little as half a day to implement and are likely to be highly cost-effective. For a relatively small investment in training, healthcare systems could see significant reductions in preventable harm.

    The evidence is in. It’s time for healthcare leaders, educators and policymakers to act. Communication training must become a universal standard – not an optional extra – in safeguarding patient lives.

    Jeremy Howick receives funding from the Stoneygate Trust, and occasionally receives speaking fees for his talks.

    – ref. One in ten patient safety incidents in hospitals due to poor communication – new study – https://theconversation.com/one-in-ten-patient-safety-incidents-in-hospitals-due-to-poor-communication-new-study-252467

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Election Diary: Labor to slash more consultant costs and increase visa charges to pay for fresh election commitments

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

    The government has dug out last-minute savings of more than
    A$7 billion, to ensure its election commitments are more than offset in every year of the forward estimates.

    Its costings, released Monday, include savings of $6.4 billion from further reducing spending on consultants, contractors and labour hire, as well as non-wage expenses including travel, hospitality and property.

    The second saving is $760 million from increasing the visa application fee for primary student visa applicants to $2000 from July 1.

    Treasurer Jim Chalmers told a news conference Labor’s costings “show that we will more than offset our election campaign commitments in every year of the forward estimates”.

    “We will finish this election campaign with the budget in a stronger position than at the start of the election campaign”.

    “We have improved the budget position by more than $1 billion, comparing the pre-election outlook to the costings that we release today,” he said.

    With its costings out, Labor is piling the pressure onto the opposition to produce its numbers.

    “We call on the Coalition now to come clean on their cuts. We’ve made it very clear what our costs are and how we will pay for the commitments that we have made in this election campaign,” Chalmers said.

    The opposition “need to come clean on what their secret cuts for nuclear reactors means for Medicare, for pensions and payments, for skills and housing and other essential investments.

    “They have committed more than $60 billion in this election campaign and in their policy commitments, and that’s before we get to their $600 billion of nuclear reactors.”

    Chalmers said if the opposition costings did not include the cost of the nuclear reactors they “will not be worth the paper they are written on”.

    Shadow treasurer Angus Taylor said opposition costings, coming later this week, would project a stronger budget position than Labor’s. He also said if the Coalition was elected it would have an economic statement later this year.

    As the costings war ramps up, ratings agency S&P warned Australia’s AAA credit rating could be threatened if election promises resulted in larger structural deficits, and debt and interest expenses increased more than expected.

    Given deficits and international circumstances, “how the elected government funds its campaign pledges and rising spending will be crucial for maintaining the rating”, the agency said.

    Asked about the comments, Chalmers said: “I say to that particular agency, indeed, all of the ratings agencies, that in our time in office, we’ve engineered the biggest positive turnaround in a budget of any parliamentary term ever”. He pointed to the improvement in the budget numbers during the campaign to underline Labor’s credentials.

    The fresh impact of Labor’s promises on the bottom line has also been limited because most of them were already factored into the budget.

    After the savings and spends are netted out the deficit for 2025-26 is estimated to be $41.9 billion compared to the $42.2 billion in the pre-election economic and fiscal outlook.

    Chalmers says Dutton to build nuclear reactor in his own seat

    Jim Chalmers must carry off the prize for the most brazen “scare” of a campaign full of attempted scares.

    Chalmers picked up on Anthony Albanese’s question to Peter Dutton in Sunday’s debate, when the PM asked the opposition leader whether he’d be willing to have a nuclear power plant in his seat of Dickson. Dutton said he would.

    Chalmers’ message to voters in “that wonderful part of southeast Queensland” is: “your local member wants to build a nuclear reactor in your suburbs.”

    “[The Labor candidate,] Ali France, is not going to build a nuclear reactor in your local community but Peter Dutton wants to.

    “I would encourage you to think about that […] as you choose your local member,” Chalmers told his news conference.

    The treasurer kept a straight face while delivering this warning to Dickson voters.

    Dutton questions Welcome to Country ceremonies at Anzac Dawn services

    Peter Dutton has widened his criticism of the extent of Welcome to Country ceremonies by saying he does not believe they belong at Anzac Day dawn services.

    He said that listening to veterans, “I think the majority view would be that they don’t want it on that day”. But he said it was an individual decision up to the RSLs.

    Discussion of the Welcome to Country ceremonies has come to the fore after a group of neo-Nazis heckled the ceremony at the Shrine of Remembrance service on Friday. It also came up in Sunday’s debate between the leaders, when Dutton said the ceremonies should be reserved for significant occasions such as the opening of parliament.

    Questioned by reporters on Monday, Dutton said the acknowledgment to country given by Qantas when planes landed was “over the top”.

    “We are all equal Australians,” he said. “I believe we should stand behind one flag united to help Indigenous Australians deal with disparity around health outcomes, around education outcomes, around housing, around safety […] I want to provide support for practical reconciliation. The prime minister’s policy is to please inner city Greens, which is not something we signed up to.”

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

    – ref. Election Diary: Labor to slash more consultant costs and increase visa charges to pay for fresh election commitments – https://theconversation.com/election-diary-labor-to-slash-more-consultant-costs-and-increase-visa-charges-to-pay-for-fresh-election-commitments-255386

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: How much do election promises cost? And why have we had to wait so long to see the costings?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stephen Bartos, Professor of Economics, University of Canberra

    With the May 3 federal election less than a week away, voters have only just received Labor’s costings and are yet to hear from the Coalition.

    At the 2022 election, the costings were not released for nearly two months after polling day.

    Deputy Opposition Leader Sussan Ley last week told Sky News the Coalition costings will be “released in the lead up to election day and will be able to be fully interrogated”.

    This is now too late for the voters who have already cast their ballots. We have seen a record number of pre-poll votes this election, with more than 2.3 million as of Saturday. This means a sizeable percentage of the electorate has voted without knowing what their votes will cost.

    Voting without all the facts

    Whichever side wins, taxpayers eventually pay to implement policies. So knowing at least in broad terms the costs of the policies would be helpful.

    The Coalition has probably had many of its policies costed by the independent Parliamentary Budget Office. This process is thorough and impartial.

    Importantly, the Parliamentary Budget Office costs policies over ten years. This allows the full costs of policies to be understood better. Some policies such as large infrastructure take many years before the full impact on the budget is felt.

    Labor has already published the costs of many of its policies in the March 25 federal budget. This only covered the forward estimates, three years into the future, but is reliable for most policies. But we still need the costings for policies announced post-budget.

    The true picture?

    Even when we see the costings from both of the main parties, we can have no confidence their lists are accurate and complete. Parties may omit costings that might attract criticism.

    They may also present costings prepared by consultants rather than the Parliamentary Budget Office. You may recall controversy late last year over private modelling of the Coalition’s plans for nuclear power.

    Unfortunately we have to wait until after the election for a comprehensive and independent set of costings.

    The Parliamentary Budget Office does not publish its full list of costings (in the election commitments report) until well after the election. This is either 30 days from the end of the caretaker period or seven days before the new parliament first sits, whichever comes later.

    The election commitments report has some accountability value in relation to the party that forms government but does not help inform voters. It is a mystery why anyone would be interested in the costs of policies of the losing side. But they still must be published, according to electoral law.

    The report must include the major parties, although minor parties and independents can also be included in the report if they wish.

    Are there other approaches?

    By contrast, in New South Wales the state Parliamentary Budget Office publishes a complete set of costings five days before the election. Policies announced after this date miss out but these rarely affect the budget bottom line.

    Although, as occurs federally, many voters cast their ballots in advance, at least NSW’s approach gives most voters a chance to see the costs. This encourages the major parties to compete to produce a fiscally responsible total.

    The NSW approach is self-policing. Each major party studies the statements and if the other side omits something – large or small – they rapidly and loudly complain. Parties therefore try to make their policy lists as accurate as possible.

    Both sides are obliged by law to provide the budget office with all the proposed policies of the leader’s party.

    Toting up all the costs

    Federally, the budget office takes on the time-consuming job of tracking down all the policy announcements to cost and include in its post-election report.

    The differences arise from the different legislation that applies to each PBO.

    NSW has arguably an easier job because it costs policies only for the premier and leader of the opposition. The federal budget office costs for all members of parliament.

    The federal system requires policies submitted during the caretaker period, and their costings, must be published “as soon as practicable”. But major parties are highly unlikely to submit a policy only to have it and its costing released at a time not of its choosing.

    The requirement is likely motivated by transparency, but clashes with political reality. In NSW costings remain confidential until the leader advises the budget office the policy has been announced. This gives parties a way to have policies costed with a low risk of their premature release.

    DIY assessments

    Federally, there are other ways to estimate the costs of policies. The budget office has a Build your Own Budget Tool, and a tool for modelling alternative
    income tax proposals (SMART), both available online.

    These provide a fair approximation and are often used by journalists trying to get behind political announcements.

    The OECD lists 35 independent fiscal bodies in 29 OECD countries responsible for assessing election costings. Some are tiny, with just a few analysts. Some are
    huge and influential, like the US Congressional Budget Office. Few have the same focus on costing election policies that applies in Australia.

    Costs are a big deal here. Both parties have run advertisements attacking the other side on the question of whether their policies are affordable.

    On major policies such as the Coalition plans for nuclear power there are massive differences between cost estimates put forward by each side. Such differences could be resolved by an independent and impartial costing. This is why Australian voters deserve to see such costings as soon as possible.

    Stephen Bartos was NSW Parliamentary Budget Officer for the past three NSW general elections. He is now a professor at the University of Canberra.

    – ref. How much do election promises cost? And why have we had to wait so long to see the costings? – https://theconversation.com/how-much-do-election-promises-cost-and-why-have-we-had-to-wait-so-long-to-see-the-costings-255104

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Big and small spending included in Labor costings, but off-budget items yet to be revealed

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stephen Bartos, Professor of Economics, University of Canberra

    The federal budget will be stronger than suggested in last month’s budget, according to Treasurer Jim Chalmers who released Labor’s costings on Monday.

    Many of the policies included in the costings were already detailed in either the 2025 Budget or the Pre-Election Fiscal Outlook, so are shown as having a net zero cost.

    But that does not mean they are costless. It means simply that their costs were included in previously published budget updates.

    Monday’s media announcement is akin to the reconciliation table published in each update, prepared by the Treasury and Finance departments setting out how the numbers have changed.

    It seems likely this media release drew on the same methodology.

    It includes two savings measures. One is relatively small: $700 million from increasing the visa application charge for primary student visas. The big saving is $6.4 billion from further reducing spending on consultants, contractors, labour hire, and non-wage expenses such as travel, hospitality and property.

    Travel, hospitality and property expenses are small bikkies. Undoubtedly departments could make savings on these, but they won’t get anywhere near the total. The bulk of the savings will come from reducing spending on consultants and contractors.

    Labor has shown that such savings on consultants are possible; it did it in its first term. However, counterbalancing this, we saw increased spending on the public service.

    It is the same problem as with the Coalition’s promise to make savings by cutting public servants. Without cuts to programs and activities, work remains to be done. People have to be employed to do that work, leading either to more spending on the public service (Labor) or bringing back consultants (Coalition).

    There was no independent signoff suggesting Monday’s release included all of Labor’s policy announcements. We won’t get that until the Parliamentary Budget Office does its election commitments report.

    But this full list of costings is not released by the PBO until well after the election. This is either 30 days from the end of the caretaker period or seven days before the new parliament first sits, whichever comes later.

    However, Monday’s costings release does appear comprehensive, including not only the large headline announcements but several announcements of less than a million dollars a year.

    What are missing, though, are costings of items that are off-budget because they are balance sheet adjustments – for example, the reduction in student HECS debt.

    These do have a financial impact but due to their accounting treatment are not disclosed as hitting the budget balance. Ideally, these should be disclosed as well.

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

    – ref. Big and small spending included in Labor costings, but off-budget items yet to be revealed – https://theconversation.com/big-and-small-spending-included-in-labor-costings-but-off-budget-items-yet-to-be-revealed-255425

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: A ketamine nasal spray will be subsidised for treatment-resistant depression. Here’s what you need to know about Spravato

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nial Wheate, Professor, School of Natural Sciences, Macquarie University

    WPixz/Shutterstock

    An antidepressant containing a form of the drug ketamine has been added to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS), making it much cheaper for the estimated 30,000 Australians with treatment-resistant depression. This is when a patient has tried multiple forms of treatment for major depression – usually at least two antidepressant medications – without any improvement.

    From May 1, a dose of Spravato (also known as esketamine hydrochloride) will cost $A31.60 and $7.70 for concession card holders.

    However, unlike oral antidepressants, Spravato can’t be taken at home. Here’s how it works, and who it’s expected to help.

    What is Spravato?

    The chemical ketamine is used as an anaesthetic. In this formulation it combines both the right-handed (designated “R”) and left-handed (called “S”) forms of the molecule.

    This means they are mirror images of each other, similar to how your left hand is a mirror image of your right hand. The left- and right-hand forms can have different effects in the body.

    Spravato contains only the left-handed version, giving the drug its generic name esketamine.

    Spravato works by increasing the levels of glutamate in the brain. Glutamate is a key chemical messenger molecule that excites brain nerve cells, lifting and improving mood. It also plays a role in learning and forming memories.

    How is it taken?

    Spravato cannot be taken at home.

    A patient can self-administer, but it must be done at a registered treatment facility, such as a hospital, under the supervision of medical staff so they can look out for blood pressure changes and monitor potential side effects.

    The drug is provided as a single-use nasal spray. This application means it’s absorbed directly through the nasal lining into the brain, so it starts to work within minutes.

    Spravato must also be taken alongside an oral antidepressant. This will be a new one the patient hasn’t tried before. In clinical trials, it was usually an SNRI or SSRI medication.

    When a patient first starts on Spravato, they are given the spray twice a week in the first month. It is then administered once a week for the second month, and then weekly or fortnightly after that.

    Once there are signs the medicine is working, treatment is continued for at least six months.

    You can use the spray yourself but it must be under medical supervision in a registered facility.
    Scarc/Shutterstock

    How effective is it?

    Spravato was approved for sale in Australia based on clinical trial data from more than 1,600 patients who were administered the drug for a period of four weeks. Each was given either Spravato, or a nasal placebo, and an oral antidepressant.

    Patients were given a starting dose of either 28 or 56mg, which could be then increased up to 84mg by their doctor.

    By the end of the four weeks, a greater percentage of patients who were given Spravato were found to have had a meaningful response to the treatment when compared with patients who received the placebo. Patients who were taking Spravato were also found to relapse at a lower rate. For those who did relapse, it took the Spravato patients longer to relapse when compared with patients who took the placebo.

    It is expected Spravato will benefit a wide range of patients. The clinical trials demonstrated effectiveness for men and women, people aged 18 to 64, and those from a range of different ethnic backgrounds.



    Read more:
    Depression too often gets deemed ‘hard to treat’ when medication falls short

    Potential side effects

    As with any medicine, Spravato may cause side effects, some of which can be serious. The most common include:

    • dissociation (feeling disconnected from yourself or what is around you)
    • dizziness
    • nausea and vomiting
    • drowsiness
    • headache
    • change in taste
    • vertigo.

    Because Spravato can potentially increase blood pressure, medical staff will monitor a patient before and after it is administered.

    Usually, blood pressure spikes around 40 minutes after taking the drug, so a reading is taken around this time. After taking Spravato, if their blood pressure has stayed low, or it’s dropping, the patient is given the all-clear to go home.

    Due to the potential for this and other serious side effects, Spravato carries a black triangle warning. This means medical staff are encouraged to report any problem or side effect to the Therapeutic Goods Administration. A black triangle warning is generally used for new medicines or medicines that are being used in a new way.

    Who will be eligible?

    To be eligible for a prescription, a patient will need to have been diagnosed with treatment-resistant depression. In practice, this means they will have unsuccessfully tried at least two other antidepressant drugs first.

    Australia’s Therapeutic Goods Administration approved Spravato for use in Australia in 2021, meaning it was available but not subsidised. Since then, the sponsoring company, Janssen-Cilag (an Australian subsidiary of the multinational Johnson & Johnson), applied to have it added to the PBS four times.

    In December 2024, the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee recommended a PBS listing.

    The new PBS listing, capping the price of a single treatment at $31.60, is a significant price drop. In 2023, single doses of branded Spravato were reported to cost anywhere between $500 and $900.

    However, patients may still have to pay hundreds of dollars for appointments at private clinics where Spravato can be administered. Public places are available but limited.

    Spravato may be suitable for you if you’ve tried different antidepressants without success. If it is suitable for you, then your doctor can discuss the next steps.

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

    Nial Wheate in the past has received funding from the ACT Cancer Council, Tenovus Scotland, Medical Research Scotland, Scottish Crucible, and the Scottish Universities Life Sciences Alliance. He is a fellow of the Royal Australian Chemical Institute. Nial is the chief scientific officer of Vaihea Skincare LLC, a director of SetDose Pty Ltd (a medical device company) and was previously a Standards Australia panel member for sunscreen agents. He is a member of the Haleon Australia Pty Ltd Pain Advisory Board. Nial regularly consults to industry on issues to do with medicine risk assessments, manufacturing, design and testing.

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

    – ref. A ketamine nasal spray will be subsidised for treatment-resistant depression. Here’s what you need to know about Spravato – https://theconversation.com/a-ketamine-nasal-spray-will-be-subsidised-for-treatment-resistant-depression-heres-what-you-need-to-know-about-spravato-255403

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Peter Dutton calling the ABC and the Guardian ‘hate media’ rings alarm bells for democracy

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Denis Muller, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of Melbourne

    In front of a crowd of party faithful last weekend, Opposition Leader Peter Dutton referred to the ABC, Guardian Australia and other news platforms as “hate media”. The language was extreme, the inference being these outlets were not simply doing their jobs, but attacking him and his side of politics because of ideological bias.

    Speaking at a Liberal Party campaign rally in the Melbourne western suburb of Melton, Dutton said:

    Forget about what you have been told by the ABC, The Guardian and the other hate media. Listen to what you hear [at] doors. Listen to what people say on the pre-polling. Know in your hearts that we are a better future for our country.

    Melton is in the Labor-held seat of Hawke, which the Liberals believe they can win.

    Dutton provided no evidence to support his accusation, for the good reason that there has been nothing in the ABC’s or Guardian Australia’s coverage of Dutton that could remotely justify it.

    By a process of elimination, the “other hate media” to which he referred can only be The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald, given the News Corporation mastheads have been unflagging in their support for him throughout the campaign.

    What has been common to the campaign coverage by the ABC, Guardian Australia, The Age and the SMH has been close scrutiny of both sides and both leaders.

    The three newspapers in particular have put renewed resources into independently fact-checking claims made by both Dutton and Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, and have caught out both men telling falsehoods.

    The broadcast news media on the whole have played it straight, except of course for Sky News after dark, which has been as relentlessly pro-Coalition as their News Corp newspaper stablemates.

    Beyond these professional mass media platforms, there have been clearly partisan social media influencers working on both sides, as well as a range of podcasters, but none of these has been guilty of hate speech towards Dutton or anyone else.

    The inescapable conclusion is that Dutton equates scrutiny of him by journalists with hate speech.

    This is where his attitude becomes dangerous to democracy. It comes straight from US President Donald Trump’s playbook, where the professional mass media are “fake news” and the “enemy of the people”.

    It is designed to play not just on people’s longstanding distrust of the news media in general – though not of the ABC – but on some voters’ sense of grievance at the way governments have treated them.

    This worked for Trump in the United States, but it became obvious early in the campaign that any association with Trumpism was a strong political negative in Australia, particularly in the atmosphere of alarm generated by his tariff war.

    Dutton then took pains to distance himself from Trumpism, and at the Liberal launch in Western Australia his face was a picture of alarm when Jacinta Nampijinpa Price, whom he had appointed to the Trumpian-sounding post of shadow minister for government efficiency, used the slogan “Make Australia Great Again”.

    But it is typical of his incoherent campaign that at the start of the last week he should be echoing the Trumpian view of the media in such extreme terms, creating even more instability. In an ABC interview, his shadow minister for finance, Jane Hume, refused to support him, saying “that wouldn’t be a phrase I would use”.

    It also raises legitimate questions about how Dutton would treat the media should he become prime minister. For example, if a media platform refused to obey his wishes, or provide him with coverage of which he approved, would its representatives be excluded from prime ministerial access?

    Not long ago, such a proposition would have been inconceivable, but Trump banned the Associated Press (AP) from presidential access because it would not obey his instruction to rename the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of America. A federal judge later found the ban violated the First Amendment, and ordered AP’s access to be restored.

    It is very improbable Dutton would even try to impose his will on the commercial media in Australia, especially the newspapers.

    In fact, Guardian Australia has turned his remark into a fundraising opportunity. It emailed subscribers with the subject line “A note from the ‘hate media’,” comparing Dutton’s language to that of Trump, and asking for financial support to keep holding figures like Dutton to account.

    But his potential to punish the publicly funded ABC is another matter.

    From statements he has made during the campaign, it seems certain the ABC would be in for more funding cuts and an investigation into its operations of the kind Trump has launched into America’s National Public Radio.



    Read more:
    What would – and should – happen to the ABC under the next federal government?

    Coalition prime ministers going back to John Howard have had a hostile relationship with the ABC. Howard stacked the ABC board, and the panel that nominates its members, with ideological mates.

    In the eight years from 2014 to 2022, under the Coalition governments of Tony Abbott, Malcolm Turnbull and Scott Morrison, $526 million was cut from the ABC’s budget.

    During that time, there was also a series of inquiries into the ABC, set up to satisfy politicians with a beef against the ABC, notably Pauline Hanson.

    The day after Dutton’s “hate media” statement, the ABC’s 4 Corners program revealed he failed for two years to disclose he was the beneficiary of a family trust that operated lucrative childcare businesses when he was a cabinet minister.

    This is unlikely to improve his view of the national broadcaster. He may even see it as more hate. In fact, it is just good journalism.

    Denis Muller and Nicole Chvastek will discuss this further on their Truth, Lies and Media podcast on Wednesday April 30.

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

    – ref. Peter Dutton calling the ABC and the Guardian ‘hate media’ rings alarm bells for democracy – https://theconversation.com/peter-dutton-calling-the-abc-and-the-guardian-hate-media-rings-alarm-bells-for-democracy-255412

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: PodTalk.live ushers in new ‘indie’ information and debate era

    PodTalk.live

    After a successful beta-launch this month, PodTalk.live has now called for people to register as foundation members — it’s free to join the post and podcast social platform.

    The foundation membership soft-launch is a great opportunity for founders to help shape a brand new, vibrant, algorithm-free, info discussion and debate social platform.

    “PodTalk.live has been put to test by selected individuals and we’re pleased to report that it has performed fabulously,” said the the platform developer Selwyn Manning.

    Manning is founder and managing director of the company that custom-developed PodTalk.live — Multimedia Investments Ltd.

    PodTalk.live . . . a new era. Image: PodTalk screenshot APR

    MIL is based in Aotearoa New Zealand, where PodTalk.live was developed and is served from.

    And now, PodTalk.live has emerged from its beta stage and is ready for foundation members to shape the next phase of its development.

    An alternative platform
    PodTalk.live was designed to be an alternative platform to other social media platforms.

    PodTalk has all the functions that most social media platforms have but has placed the user-experience at the centre of its backend design and engineering.

    PodTalk.live has been custom-designed, created and is served from New Zealand.

    “We ourselves became annoyed at how social media giants use algorithms to drive what content their users see and experience,” Manning said.

    “And, we also were appalled at how some social media companies trade user data, and were unresponsive to user-concerns.

    “So we decided to create a platform that focuses on ‘discussion and debate’ communities, and we have engineered PodTalk to ensure the content that users see is what they choose — rather than some obscure algorithm making that decision for them.

    “PodTalk.live is independent from other social media platforms, and at best will become an alternative choice for people who seek a community where they are the centre of a platform’s core purpose.

    Sign-up invitation
    ““And today, we invite people to sign up now and become foundation members of this new and ethically-based social community platform,” Manning said.

    What PodTalk.live provides includes:

    • user profiles with full interactivities with other users and friends;
    • user created groups, posts, video, images, polls, and file sharing;
    • private and secure one-on-one (and group) messages;
    • availability of all the above for entry users with a free membership;
    • premium membership for podcasters and event publishers requiring easy to use podcast publication and syndication services; and next-level community engagement tools that users have all on the one platform.

    Manning said PodTalk.live was founded on the belief that for social, political and economical progress to occur people needed to discuss issues in a safe environment and embark on robust debate.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Plans to stockpile critical minerals will help Australia weather global uncertainty – and encourage smaller miners

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mohan Yellishetty, Professor, Co-Founder, Critical Minerals Consortium, and Australia-India Critical Minerals Research Hub, Monash University

    RHJPhtotos/Shutterstock

    The world needs huge quantities of critical minerals to make batteries, electric vehicles, wind turbines, mobile phones, computers and advanced weaponry.

    Many of these minerals lie under Australian soil. Australia is able to produce 9 out of 10 mineral elements required to produce lithium-ion batteries, such as lithium, nickel and cobalt. It also has the highest total reserves of battery minerals.

    But at a time of major geopolitical upheaval, critical minerals are also contested. China controls many critical mineral supply chains, allowing it to dominate clean energy technologies. The ongoing United States–China trade war has intensified competition for access to critical minerals.

    It’s against this backdrop that Labor has proposed a A$1.2 billion strategic reserve of critical minerals. It’s a timely and welcome step in the right direction.

    Why is this reserve needed?

    Critical minerals are vital to the industries of the future. But supply can be hard to secure and disruptions can be devastating.

    After US President Donald Trump jacked up tariffs on China, Beijing responded by clamping down on critical mineral exports. Almost 80% of US weaponry depends on Chinese critical minerals.

    China now dominates mining and refining of many critical minerals. Beijing controls 90% of the world’s rare earth refining, 80% of lithium refining and 68% of nickel refining. The US and other nations are belatedly trying to catch up.

    Mining has long been a major Australian industry, particularly iron ore and coal. But Australia has huge reserves of many critical minerals, producing the largest volume of lithium ore in the world as well as stocks of cobalt, manganese, rutile and others. Australian miners Lynas and Australian Strategic Materials are two of the few rare-earth mining companies not owned by China.

    That’s where this strategic reserve comes in. If it comes to fruition, the federal government would buy agreed volumes of critical minerals from commercial projects, or establish an option to purchase them at a given price. It would then keep stockpiles of these key minerals to prevent market manipulation by China and stabilise prices by releasing or holding stocks strategically.

    The reserve would give Canberra more leverage in negotiating with trading partners and enable a rapid response to supply disruptions. Government backing for the industry would boost onshore processing, scale up domestic production and encourage more high-wage, high-skill jobs in regional areas.

    Which minerals will be stockpiled? That’s yet to be determined. The list of ‘critical minerals’ can vary between countries, and a mineral critical to one nation may not be to another.

    Australia lists 31 critical minerals while Japan lists 35, the US lists 50 and the European Union 34. Australia’s list is unique in that it reflects global demand, not domestic dependency.

    The minerals most commonly included in these lists include cobalt, gallium, indium, niobium, tantalum, platinum group minerals and rare earth elements.

    Why is the government intervening?

    In 2023, major miners produced close to a billion tonnes of iron ore in Western Australia.

    By contrast, critical mineral volumes are small. For instance, only 610 tonnes of gallium were mined in 2023. Major miners such as Rio Tinto, BHP and Vale don’t tend to bother.

    Critical mineral markets are often opaque and highly concentrated. The barrier to entry is high. Globally, the market for the 31 critical minerals on Australia’s list is valued at around A$344 billion – about the size of the global aluminium market.

    That leaves it to mid-tier and small miners to bridge the gap between rapidly growing demand and supply. The problem is, raising capital is often very difficult. The price of critical minerals can fluctuate wildly. The price of lithium and nickel have fallen sharply over the last two years due to market oversupply.

    The strategic reserve would make it easier for these miners by providing access to capital through loans from Export Finance Australia and private investors, reducing financial uncertainty and cost overruns and acting as a buffer against market volatility.

    For instance, mid-tier miner Illuka Resources is building Australia’s first rare earths refinery in Western Australia. The project already has significant government support, but it is likely to need more.

    Despite Australia’s significant mineral resources, it faces an uphill battle to gain market share. China’s dominance has been driven by low production costs; low environmental, social and goverance standards; and a competitive labour market. But intensifying geopolitical competition between China and the US means Australian minerals would likely be sought by the US.

    How can Australia best play its hand?

    In volatile market conditions, cheaper operations have a significant advantage, while new mines face an uphill battle.

    Australia’s critical minerals hub framework could help offset capital costs. Smaller miners could form cooperatives to share infrastructure and manage logistics, processing and access to international markets. Sharing infrastructure such as roads, rail, energy and ports would reduce the investment risk.

    There are other challenges to overcome, such as the long lead times of 10 years or more to go from discovery to production, limited access to low-cost renewable energy and a shortage of technical and scientific capabilities.

    Labor’s strategic reserve would help. But it won’t be enough to make Australia into a critical mineral giant. The government should consider:

    • building more regional processing hubs with shared infrastructure and microgrids
    • offering royalty exemptions, tax incentives and energy subsidies early on
    • giving incentives to retrofit facilities to produce critical minerals found alongside main ores, such as cobalt found alongside copper and antimony with gold
    • encouraging models where rare earths are concentrated in Australia and processed overseas in partner countries
    • establishing Centres of Excellence on critical minerals and creating shared libraries of intellectual property to support research, avoid duplication and optimise resource allocation.

    Overall, the proposed reserve is an excellent idea. Government intervention will be necessary to absorb and mitigate risks from price fluctuations and geopolitical shocks.

    Mohan Yellishetty receives funding from the Australian Research Council, Geoscience Australia, Defense Science Institute, Boral Limited, AGL Loy Yang, Indian Ministry of Education. He is affiliated with AusIMM as its fellow, Honorary Academic Fellow, Australia India Institute, Foreign Fellow, Indian Geophysical Union, and affiliated with Indian Institute of Technology (Dharwad, Mumbai, Hyderabad). David Whittle contributed to the research base and data for this article.

    – ref. Plans to stockpile critical minerals will help Australia weather global uncertainty – and encourage smaller miners – https://theconversation.com/plans-to-stockpile-critical-minerals-will-help-australia-weather-global-uncertainty-and-encourage-smaller-miners-255320

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Young women are among those who care most about the cost of living. It could be bad for the major parties

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Intifar Chowdhury, Lecturer in Government, Flinders University

    Unsplash

    As was widely predicted, the cost of living has dominated the federal election campaign. Soaring rents, grocery bills and energy prices have squeezed household budgets.

    But these pressures aren’t new. In 2022, voter frustration over living costs helped Labor oust the Coalition.

    With economic pressures persisting, will history repeat?

    Analysis of cost-of-living trends and voting patterns in the last election reveals the voters most motivated by hip-pocket concerns: young women.

    What was the situation in 2022?

    In the 2022 Australian Election Study – a nationally representative post-election survey – about 23.3% of respondents (577 out of 2,478) identified cost of living as the most important issue shaping their vote.

    Younger Australians were the most concerned about the issue. Among the age groups, 38.9% of those aged 18–30 prioritised it, compared with 30.4% aged 31–45, 28.5% aged 46–60, and just 15.4% among those aged 61–90.

    The generational pattern was clear: the younger you were, the more likely you were to vote on cost-of-living concerns.

    Gender also played a role. A slightly higher proportion of women (25.1%) than men (21.1%) rated cost of living as their top issue.

    But the age-gender breakdown reveals more: among cost-of-living voters aged 18–45, women made up roughly 70%.

    In contrast, men outnumbered women among older cost-of-living voters (aged 60 and over).

    These trends suggest the cost of living is especially salient for younger women — a key electoral demographic to watch. Evidence shows this cohort is almost twice as likely as young men to be undecided voters.

    If we look at housing, cost-of-living concerns were most prevalent among renters, with 38.5% of public housing tenants and 32.3% of private renters citing it as their top issue, compared to just 16.4% of those who own their home outright.

    Those paying off a mortgage (27.3%) and people in alternative living arrangements such as boarding or living at home (35.6%) also reported elevated concern, highlighting the strong link between housing insecurity and financial stress.

    Looking at household incomes, it’s no surprise low-income households were overrepresented among cost-of-living voters.

    But concern wasn’t limited to them. Middle-income households, including many earning six-figure incomes, also featured prominently, reflecting how rising rents and mortgage repayments are squeezing even those once considered financially secure.

    A generation defining crisis

    Cost-of-living pressures are widespread, but financial vulnerability heightens the risk of poverty, which already affects more than three million Australians.

    As shown above, young people and young families are at the deep end of the crisis.
    For many, this is a generation-defining crisis, reshaping life expectations.

    In 2017, 62.2% of Australians aged 18–24 saw home ownership as highly important. By 2024, that dropped to 49.5%. A similar decline occurred among 25–34-year-olds.



    Read more:
    Every generation thinks they had it the toughest, but for Gen Z, they’re probably right

    Those in the poorest suburbs or the poorest household are the least likely to value home ownership. This is potentially a sign they feel permanently locked out, deepening inequality.

    As renting becomes more common, and rent prices skyrocket, young people are increasingly struggling to secure affordable rent.

    It’s no surprise Gen Z is more financially anxious than any other generation. The mental health toll of financial stress is stark, contributing to the high prevalence of mental health disorders among this age group.

    With a sizeable youth electorate this time around, financially struggling young voters could be the power brokers of the election. So who might they vote for?

    The politics of living costs

    In the last election, 61.7% of voters concerned about the cost of living backed a left-of-centre party, while 38.3% voted for the right. Despite the Coalition’s historic advantage on economic issues, they faced an incumbent disadvantage among cost-of-living voters.

    In an Election Monitoring Survey conducted in October 2024, only 23.7% of Australians were living comfortably on their present income, while 46.4% were coping, and 29.9% were struggling.

    Those facing financial hardship were more dissatisfied with the country’s direction, less confident in the government, and more likely to dislike both major party leaders.

    Unsurprisingly, October 2024 saw a decline in trust in the federal government, with 15.7% of Australians reporting no trust at all, up from 8.3% in May 2022. Those who did trust the government remained around 32%.

    This shows cost-of-living voters – much like young and female voters – are likely to explore alternatives beyond the major parties, continuing the 2022 trend.

    Both major parties have seen a steady decline in support over the past two decades, with less than 70% of the primary vote between them in 2022.

    This time around, Labor can afford to lose only two seats before facing minority government. Peter Dutton, on the other hand, faces a tougher task, needing nearly 20 seats for a majority.

    With increasing dislike for the major parties among financially struggling voters, there’s a real chance of a hung parliament, where neither party secures the 76 seats needed to govern outright, making negotiations with minor parties and independents crucial.

    Policy battleground

    The major parties know how important the rising cost of living is to voters. A slew of policies has already been announced, from cheaper doctors visits, to lower cost medicines and power bill rebates. On all these fronts, the Coalition has agreed to match Labor’s proposals, ensuring a tightly contested debate.

    Notably, Labor’s proposal to top up stage three income tax cuts won’t kick in until mid-next year, but will cost the government $17 billion over four years.

    Meanwhile, the Coalition’s pledge to halve the excise on fuel duty for a year, will cost $6 billion in lost tax revenue in a year.

    But whether it will be enough to stop cost-of-living voters siding with a minor party or independent remains to be seen.

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

    – ref. Young women are among those who care most about the cost of living. It could be bad for the major parties – https://theconversation.com/young-women-are-among-those-who-care-most-about-the-cost-of-living-it-could-be-bad-for-the-major-parties-254988

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: What political ads are Australians seeing online? Astroturfing, fake grassroots groups, and outright falsehoods

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Daniel Angus, Professor of Digital Communication, Director of QUT Digital Media Research Centre, Queensland University of Technology

    In the lead-up to the 2025 Australian federal election, political advertising is seemingly everywhere.

    We’ve been mapping the often invisible world of digital political advertising across Facebook, Instagram and TikTok.

    We’ve done this thanks to a panel of ordinary Australians who agreed to download an ad tracking app developed through the Australian Internet Observatory.

    We’re also tracking larger trends in political ad spending, message type and tone, and reach via the PoliDashboard tool. This open source tool aggregates transparency data from Meta (including Facebook and Instagram) which we use to identify patterns and items of concern.

    While the major parties are spending heavily and are highly visible in the feeds of our participants, it is the prevalence of third-party political advertising that is most striking. We’ve observed a notable trend: for every ad from a registered political party, there is roughly one ad from a third-party entity.

    Astroturfing and the illusion of grassroots support

    One of the most concerning trends we’re seeing is a rise in astroturfing. This refers to masking the sponsors of a message to make it appear as though it originates from ordinary citizens or grassroots organisations.

    Astroturfing ads do often adhere to the formal disclosure requirements set out by the Australian Electoral Commission. However, these disclosures don’t meaningfully inform the public on who is behind these misleading ads.

    Authorisation typically only includes the name and address of an intermediary. This may be a deliberately opaque shell entity set up just in time for an election.

    A key example seen by participants in our study involves the pro-gas advocacy group Australians for Natural Gas.

    It presents itself as a grassroots movement, but an ABC investigation revealed this group is working with Freshwater Strategy – the Coalition’s internal pollster. Emails obtained by the ABC show Freshwater Strategy is “helping orchestrate a campaign to boost public support for the gas industry ahead of the federal election”.

    Other examples we’ve encountered in our monitoring include groups with benign-sounding names like Mums for Nuclear and Australians for Prosperity. These labels and the ads they are running suggest grassroots concern, but they obscure the deeper agendas behind them.

    In the case of Australians for Prosperity, an ABC analysis revealed backing from wealthy donors, former conservative MPs and coal interests.

    The battle over energy

    Nowhere is this more evident than in messaging around energy policy, especially nuclear power and gas.

    In recent months, both major parties and a swathe of third-party advertisers have run targeted online campaigns focused on the costs and benefits of different energy futures. These ads play to deeply felt concerns about cost of living, action on climate change, and national sovereignty.

    Yet many of these messages, particularly those that promote gas and nuclear, come from organisations with opaque funding and undeclared political affiliations or connections. Voters may see a slick Facebook ad or a sponsored TikTok explainer without any idea who paid for it, or why.

    And with no obligation to be truthful, much of this content may be deeply misleading. It muddies public understanding at a critical moment for climate action.

    Truth not required

    Truth in political advertising isn’t legally required in all of Australia. While businesses can’t mislead consumers under consumer law, political parties and third-party campaigners are exempt from those same standards.

    This means misleading or outright false claims – about opponents, policies or the state of the economy – can be repeated and amplified without consequence, provided they’re framed as political opinion.

    Despite calls for reform from politicians, experts and civil society groups, federal legislation continues to lag behind community expectations.

    South Australia and the Australian Capital Territory do have truth in political advertising laws, but there is still no national standard.

    In the digital advertising environment, where ads are fast, fleeting, and often tailored to individuals, the absence of such independent scrutiny allows misinformation to flourish unchecked.

    Most people are seeing very little – or so it seems

    Paradoxically, our data shows the majority of participants are seeing very few political ads. Of the total ads seen, less than 2% pertained to political topics or the election specifically.

    This is partly a result of how the advertising products offered by platforms like Meta and TikTok allow ads to be targeted to specific demographics, locations or interests. This means even two people in the same household may have entirely different ad experiences.

    But it’s also a reminder social media ads are just the tip of the iceberg. Much political persuasion online happens outside paid ad campaigns – via influencer content, YouTube recommendations, algorithmic amplification, mainstream media coverage and more.

    Because platforms and publishers aren’t required to share this broader content with researchers or the public, we can’t easily track it – although we are trying.

    We need meaningful observability

    If democracy is to thrive in a digital age, we need to be able to independently observe online political communication, including advertising.

    Existing measures like campaign finance disclosures and transparency tools provided by platforms will never be enough. They don’t include user experiences or track patterns across populations and over time. This inevitably means some advertising activity flies under the radar.

    We lack robust tools to understand and analyse our current fragmented information landscape.

    Where platforms don’t provide meaningful data access to researchers and the public, tools like the Ad Observatory and PoliDashboard offer valuable glimpses into a fragmented information landscape, while remaining incomplete.

    However, tools on their own are not enough. We also need to be willing to call out and act when politicians mislead the public.

    Acknowlegement: The Australian Ad Observatory is a team effort. The authors wish to acknowledge the contribution of Jean Burgess, Nicholas Carah, Alfie Chadwick, Kyle Herbertson, Tina Kang, Khanh Luong, Abdul Karim Obeid, Lina Przhedetsky, and Dan Tran.

    Daniel Angus receives funding from Australian Research Council through Linkage Project ‘Young Australians and the Promotion of Alcohol on Social Media’. He is a Chief Investigator with the ARC Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision Making & Society.

    Christine Parker receives funding from the Australian Research Council through the ARC Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision-Making and Society.

    Giselle Newton received funding from the Foundation for Alcohol Research and Education for the project ‘How alcohol and gambling companies target people most at risk with marketing for addictive products on Facebook’.

    Mark Andrejevic receives funding from the Australian Research Council through the Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision Making and Society and through the Discovery Program.

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

    – ref. What political ads are Australians seeing online? Astroturfing, fake grassroots groups, and outright falsehoods – https://theconversation.com/what-political-ads-are-australians-seeing-online-astroturfing-fake-grassroots-groups-and-outright-falsehoods-255225

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: How much do election promises cost? And why haven’t we seen the costings yet?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stephen Bartos, Professor of Economics, University of Canberra

    With the May 3 federal election less than a week away, voters still have little reliable information on the costs of Labor or Coalition policies.

    Treasurer Jim Chalmers has said Labor’s policy costings will be released imminently. At the 2022 election, the costings were not released for nearly two months after polling day.

    Deputy Opposition Leader Sussan Ley last week told Sky News the Coalition costings will be “released in the lead up to election day and will be able to be fully interrogated”.

    This is now too late for the voters who have already cast their ballots. We have seen a record number of pre-poll votes this election, with more than 2.3 million as of Saturday. This means a sizeable percentage of the electorate has voted without knowing what their votes will cost.

    Voting without all the facts

    Whichever side wins, taxpayers eventually pay to implement policies. So knowing at least in broad terms the costs of the policies would be helpful.

    The Coalition has probably had many of its policies costed by the independent Parliamentary Budget Office. This process thorough and impartial.

    Importantly, the Parliamentary Budget Office costs policies over ten years. This allows the full costs of policies to be understood better. Some policies such as large infrastructure take many years before the full impact on the budget is felt.

    Labor has already published the costs of many of its policies in the March 25 federal budget. This only covered the forward estimates, three years into the future, but is reliable for most policies. But we still need the costings for policies announced post-budget.

    The true picture?

    Even when we see what the parties release, we can have no confidence their lists will be accurate and complete. Parties may omit costings that might attract criticism.

    They may also present costings prepared by consultants rather than the Parliamentary Budget Office. You may recall controversy late last year over private modelling of the Coalition’s plans for nuclear power.

    Unfortunately we have to wait until after the election for a comprehensive and independent set of costings.

    The Parliamentary Budget Office does not publish its full list of costings (in the election commitments report) until well after the election. This is either 30 days from the end of the caretaker period or seven days before the new parliament first sits, whichever comes later.

    The election commitments report has some accountability value in relation to the party that forms government but does not help inform voters. It is a mystery why anyone would be interested in the costs of policies of the losing side. But they still must be published, according to electoral law.

    The report must include the major parties, although minor parties and independents can also be included in the report if they wish.

    Are there other approaches?

    By contrast, in New South Wales the state Parliamentary Budget Office publishes a complete set of costings five days before the election. Policies announced after this date miss out but these rarely affect the budget bottom line.

    Although, as occurs federally, many voters cast their ballots in advance, at least NSW’s approach gives most voters a chance to see the costs. This encourages the major parties to compete to produce a fiscally responsible total.

    The NSW approach is self-policing. Each major party studies the statements and if the other side omits something – large or small – they rapidly and loudly complain. Parties therefore try to make their policy lists as accurate as possible.

    Both sides are obliged by law to provide the budget office with all the proposed policies of the leader’s party.

    Toting up all the costs

    Federally, the budget office takes on the time-consuming job of tracking down all the policy announcements to cost and include in its post-election report.

    The differences arise from the different legislation that applies to each PBO.

    NSW has arguably an easier job because it costs policies only for the premier and leader of the opposition. The federal budget office costs for all members of parliament.

    The federal system requires policies submitted during the caretaker period, and their costings, must be published “as soon as practicable”. But major parties are highly unlikely to submit a policy only to have it and its costing released at a time not of its choosing.

    The requirement is likely motivated by transparency, but clashes with political reality. In NSW costings remain confidential until the leader advises the budget office the policy has been announced. This gives parties a way to have policies costed with a low risk of their premature release.

    DIY assessments

    Federally, there are other ways to estimate the costs of policies. The budget office has a Build your Own Budget Tool, and a tool for modelling alternative
    income tax proposals (SMART), both available online.

    These provide a fair approximation and are often used by journalists trying to get behind political announcements.

    The OECD lists 35 independent fiscal bodies in 29 OECD countries responsible for assessing election costings. Some are tiny, with just a few analysts. Some are
    huge and influential, like the US Congressional Budget Office. Few have the same focus on costing election policies that applies in Australia.

    Costs are a big deal here. Both parties have run advertisements attacking the other side on the question of whether their policies are affordable.

    On major policies such as the Coalition plans for nuclear power there are massive differences between cost estimates put forward by each side. Such differences could be resolved by an independent and impartial costing. This is why Australian voters deserve to see such costings as soon as possible.

    Stephen Bartos was NSW Parliamentary Budget Officer for the past three NSW general elections. He is now a professor at the University of Canberra.

    – ref. How much do election promises cost? And why haven’t we seen the costings yet? – https://theconversation.com/how-much-do-election-promises-cost-and-why-havent-we-seen-the-costings-yet-255104

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –