Category: Australia

  • MIL-Evening Report: The Dalai Lama is a cisgender man – yet he has an unexpected connection to the trans community

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stephen Kerry, Lecturer in Sociology, Charles Darwin University

    Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama, turns 90 this week – a milestone that’s reigniting speculation over his eventual successor.

    While the Dalai Lama is the face of Buddhism to many people across the world, he is actually the head of just one tradition within Tibetan Buddhism known as the Gelug school.

    Tibetans believe the Dalai Lama to be the manifestation of Avalokiteśvara, the bodhisattva of compassion, and the “one who hears the cries of the world”.




    Read more:
    What is a bodhisattva? A scholar of Buddhism explains


    Avalokiteśvara is prayed to across Asia, and is known as Chenrezig in Tibet, Guanyin in China, and Kannon or Kanzeon in Japan.

    A statue of Avalokiteśvara.
    Wikimedia, CC BY-SA

    In Buddhism, a bodhisattva is a person, or a mythic representation of a person, who denies themselves enlightenment until all beings can achieve enlightenment. Avalokiteśvara appears to living beings in whatever form could best save them.

    Although Avalokiteśvara originated in India as a man, they can be depicted as either a man, woman, or non-binary being. This gender fluidity has led to them being revered as a trans icon in the West.

    I have spent the past five years investigating the lives of queer Buddhists in Australia. As part of this research, I have surveyed and interviewed 109 LGBTQIA+ Buddhist Australians.

    The words of these individuals, and my own experience as a genderqueer Buddhist person, reveal how the Dalai Lama emerges an an unlikely inspiration for individuals sharing a trans and Buddhist identity.

    The Big Buddha is a large bronze sculpture located near the Po Lin Monastery on Lantau Island, Hong Kong.
    Joshua J. Cotten/Unsplash

    Letting go of binaries

    Through my work I have found LGBTQIA+ Buddhist Australians are generally reluctant to disclose their queer identities to their Buddhist communities, and may be told to remain silent about their identities.

    For some, Avalokiteśvara’s gender fluidity has been important for reaffirming both their queer and Buddhist selves.

    One Buddhist trans woman, Annie*, told me Guanyin had special significance for her. Annie spoke about Avalokiteśvara travelling from India to China as a male, before “transitioning” to the mainly female presentation of Guanyin over centuries. Annie said:

    I pray to her regularly and often find I get a response. Of course the enlightened state is beyond all manner of worldly binaries, including gender, and is immensely important in letting go of binaries in my journey towards enlightenment.

    Walter* has had a long fascination with depictions of Avalokiteśvara that “showed ‘him’ looking effeminate and handsome, with a cute moustache […] A little bit homoerotic, a little bit provocatively gender fluid, as seen through my eyes”.

    Walter adds:

    A great many people in different cultures, across history, worship these figures. Clever how this figure can morph into a radical trans! We all want to feel comforted, safe and saved from suffering.

    As queer Buddhists, we turn to to Avalokitesvara to feel “comforted, safe and saved”.

    Another interviewee, Brian*, told me about a Tibetan invocation practice he did with a senior Tibetan monk, in which he encountered Guanyin:

    [She] took my right hand and passed some sort of power into it. She never spoke to me but just returned the way she had come. I was given some sort of gift, that’s all I know.

    Since this experience, Brian has “always felt a strong connection to the feminine through her”. He has a special Guanyin altar on his farm.

    You can’t be what you can’t see

    Some Buddhists deny Avalokiteśvara’s queerness.

    Asher*, a genderqueer Buddhist I interviewed, told me about a teacher who said to them, “there was absolutely no way a gay person could be enlightened”.

    Asher retorted:

    What about Kanzeon, the bodhisattva of compassion, who has manifested as both male and female and, in the stories from Japan, has had erotic relationships with monks?

    The teacher dismissed this, replying, “those are just stories”.

    A black statue of Avalokiteśvara outside a Japanese temple.
    Wikimedia, CC BY

    In her 1996 book Transgender Warriors, trans activist Leslie Feinberg writes: “I couldn’t find myself in history. No one like me seemed to have ever existed.”

    Similarly, Annie evoked the statement: “You can’t be what you can’t see.”

    I, too, experience this need to see myself as a genderqueer, non-binary practitioner of Zen Buddhism. It was only through doing these interviews with other queer Buddhists that I came to realise Guanyin, a trans icon, is a statuette which adorns the altar of the Buddhist group I belong to.

    Knowing Avalokitesvara may be depicted as a man, woman, or non-binary being lets us queer Buddhists know we exist – and have always existed – within Buddhism.

    Despite being a cisgender man who has been somewhat inconsistent in his support of queer people, the Dalai Lama, as the manifestation of the bodhisattva of compassion, is a possible spiritual link between today’s queer Buddhists and centuries-long traditions of gender transition and fluidity.

    *Names have been changed.

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

    ref. The Dalai Lama is a cisgender man – yet he has an unexpected connection to the trans community – https://theconversation.com/the-dalai-lama-is-a-cisgender-man-yet-he-has-an-unexpected-connection-to-the-trans-community-260106

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI Australia: First in-depth look at jobs and skills in regional Australia identifies both barriers and opportunities

    Source: Jobs and Skills Australia

    First in-depth look at jobs and skills in regional Australia identifies both barriers and opportunities

    Linda


    Media release
    A JSA report – Jobs and Skills Roadmap for Regional Australia – Phase 1

    MIL OSI News

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Media release: Major Project Status for Bonaparte project recognises important role of CCS – Australian Energy Producers

    Source: Australian Petroleum Production & Exploration Association

    Headline: Media release: Major Project Status for Bonaparte project recognises important role of CCS – Australian Energy Producers

    The Federal Government’s awarding of Major Project Status to the INPEX-led Bonaparte Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) project acknowledges the potential of CCS to advance Australia’s low-carbon future.

    Australian Energy Producers Chief Executive Samantha McCulloch said Industry and Innovation Minister Tim Ayres’ announcement was welcome recognition of the essential role of CCS in driving large-scale emissions reductions in Australia and the region.

    “The granting of Major Project Status to the Bonaparte CCS project recognises CCS is a key technology in driving progress to net zero, and of Australia’s role as a global leader in this proven technology,” Ms McCulloch said.

    “Australia has a comparative advantage in CCS, with world class geology, industry experience, and strong links with regional trading partners looking to collaborate on CCS.”

    Australia already hosts two of the world’s largest operational CCS projects, Chevron’s Gorgon and Santos–Beach Energy’s Moomba projects, which together store the equivalent of taking one million cars off the road every year.

    According to a Net Zero Australia study, Australia will need between two and 20 Moomba-scale CCS projects to be built each year between now and 2050 to reach net zero.

    “CCS is essential for achieving climate goals, with the International Energy Agency, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and CSIRO all clear that there is no pathway to net zero without CCS,” Ms McCulloch said.

    “CCS is particularly important for manufacturing, because without it industries like fertiliser and chemical production, steel, bricks and cement will find it harder and more expensive to reach net zero.”

    “CCS is delivering significant emissions reductions in Australia today, and the oil and gas sector stands ready to work with other industries to deliver real emissions reductions.”

    Australian Energy Producers NT Director David Slama said the announcement is a major win for the Territory.

    “This proposed project has the potential to be a game-changer for the Northern Territory, bringing new jobs, investment, and emissions reduction opportunities,” Mr Slama said.

    “It underscores the importance of the oil and gas industry to the Territory’s long-term economic growth and energy security.”

    Media contact: 0434 631 511

    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Transcript – 2GB Mornings with Mark Levy

    Source: Murray Darling Basin Authority

    MARK LEVY: Minister, good morning to you.

    JASON CLARE, MINISTER FOR EDUCATION: Good morning, mate.

    LEVY: Look, I know this is not easy to talk about, but it’s an important conversation we need to have. And put simply, I mean, clearly, we’ve got a problem that needs to be addressed, Minister.

    CLARE: Bang on. This is sickening stuff and it’s serious. It demands serious action from the Federal Government and from state and territory governments. I know it’s not easy to talk about, but we can’t turn away here. It’s too important. There are things that we’ve already done, but not enough and not fast enough. One of the reasons why, when Parliament comes back at the end of this month, I’ll introduce legislation to cut off funding to centres that aren’t up to scratch when it comes to safety and quality. This is the big weapon that the Federal Government can wield here. We fund child care centres. About 70 per cent of the funding to run them comes from taxpayers. And if they’re repeatedly not meeting the sort of safety and quality standards we need, then you’ve got to have the power to cut the funding off.

    LEVY: What was your reaction, Minister, when you heard about the allegations levelled against these two men, these two vile humans in Victoria? And to think back to the case and the allegations and the offences that he pleaded guilty to involving Ashley Griffith, Australia’s worst paedophile. Did it make you sick like the rest of the country?

    CLARE: It did. Of course it did. One of my friends is directly involved in this. One of my friends who lives in Victoria, her two girls are directly affected by this. She was one of the more than 1,000 parents the other day that got a notification saying that they need to get medical advice. You can imagine what she said to me, and I can’t repeat it on the radio, but she’s burning with rage and confusion about what she needs to do to keep her kids safe. I know how parents are feeling because they’ve told me. And it’s not just what’s happening in Victoria. I don’t want to speak specifically about that case because it’s before the court. But when that other mongrel was arrested in Queensland a couple of years ago, we commissioned a review into child safety across the country. It’s the reason why we’ve taken action on mobile phones and mandatory reporting, but it’s also the reason why we’ve got to do more here, whether it’s a national register of workers in these centres or whether it’s the sort of action that’s been recommended by the former NSW Ombudsman last week around CCTV and more and better information for parents. The honest answer, mate, is the work here will never be done and there will always be bad people that will try to break through the net. But that doesn’t mean that we don’t have to take action and that we don’t have to take action faster, because we do.

    LEVY: I know you’ve said that you’ll be moving legislation when the Parliament returns, but. And this is not a Labor versus Liberal thing, this is not a Labor versus Coalition thing, right? I’m just sitting here expressing the anger of so many people who are, who are writing to me and talking to me about this. We had a Royal Commission into institutional responses to child sexual abuse in 2015, 10 years ago. It made a number of recommendations, including a nationally consistent working with children scheme, something that includes a national register of individuals working with children, particularly in out of home care settings. Yet we’ve seen nothing, not from your Government, nor the former Coalition Government. So, do politicians and those elected officials. And look, you’re the one that’s got to front up and answer these tough questions today, but do you all need to put your hand up and say, look, we’ve been sitting on our hands for too long and we’ve allowed this system to deteriorate to a point where innocent, defenceless children are being preyed upon.

    CLARE: You’ve got to cough up and say it’s taken too bloody long. And that’s what I have said repeatedly about this. And to be fair when we sit around the table as Education Ministers, Labor and Liberal, we all agree it’s taken too bloody long, and we’re determined to act here. I can give you a long answer about how complicated this is, but to be honest, people listening don’t give a bugger about that. They don’t want excuses, they want action. And I spoke to the Attorney-General about this the other day. The Attorney-Generals across the country are leading work on Working with Children Checks. She agrees. If she was on the program now, she’d say exactly the same thing. We need to fix the Working with Children Checks. We need to make sure that the information goes from state to state and that if somebody’s criminal record changes, then it’s updated. Don’t think, though, that this is a silver bullet, because a lot of these mongrels you’re talking about here got a Working with Children Check, because at the time they didn’t have a criminal record. So, it’s not the only thing that needs fixing here. There’s a lot that needs to be done, but that’s one of them.

    LEVY: There is one thing, though, I want to challenge you on, Minister. And earlier this week you announced that taking photos and videos of children on personal phones and devices will be restricted by early childhood education centres who adopt the new National Model Code and guidelines, code that’s now in place, but it’s voluntary. Why is it voluntary?

    CLARE: The ban was put into the National Code last year. Voluntary from July but will become mandatory this year. Again, you’re not interested, and your listeners aren’t interested in the convoluted process to make this system mandatory. But it goes into regulations in a couple of months. Most centres are already doing it. All centres need to do it. Because we are doing this for a reason. All of the advice from the cops and from the regulator is that we’ve got to get the phones and the personal devices out of these centres. The only photos that mums and dads should be getting at lunchtime from their centre should be from the centre issued phone or the centre issued camera.

    LEVY. So, it will become mandatory.

    CLARE: Yes.

    LEVY: Good. That’s good news. Because when I think about voluntary and you know, I’ve sat here, Minister, with respect, and I pointed to a Four Corners report recently and, you know, there were some horrifying examples of, you know, children being used as mops, babies being slapped, 3,000 babies and toddlers sent to hospital with injuries sustained in child care. Last year, more than 26,000 serious incidents reported. That’s a 27 per cent increase over the last three years. And I thought there shouldn’t be any voluntary nature about this, but it is going to be mandatory, well, that’s a good thing. I wanted to ask you as well. And I know we’re limited with time. There’s a call today by Louise Edmunds, a founding of the Independent Collective of Survivors, to ban men from working in this sector. I disagree with that. I’d be interested in your response as the Minister.

    CLARE: I don’t think it’s the solution. You just mentioned the Four Corners report. Go back and look at that footage. It’s not men there, right? This is not just about blokes, it’s about people that work in our centres. If you go back and look at whether it’s the Royal Commission from 10 years ago or the child safety review that I kicked off, or the work that Chris Wheeler, the former Deputy Ombudsman, handed down last week, we know what we need to do. They’re not recommending that. What they’re saying is we need to toughen the penalties, improve the information for parents. Look at CCTV and the centres where they’re not up to scratch; introduce new laws to cut off funding where centres aren’t up to scratch; national register of all of the workers in this system because they move from state to state and fix the Working with Children Checks. They’re the sorts of things that Education Ministers discussed last Friday when I got people together to talk about this. And that’s the sort of work we’ve got to accelerate right now.

    LEVY: All right, well, Minister, can I thank you for your strong comments this morning. We’ve got to follow those strong comments up with action, so you’ve got an open invitation. If there’s any updates you want to provide to myself and my listeners, you just give us a ring and jump on and let us know. This is such an important issue. We’re talking about innocent, defenceless children, babies. And I think there’s a lot of parents listening to you today saying this is all well and good, but we need to follow it up. So, we’re going to put it in your capable hands, and fingers crossed we can sort this out sooner rather than later because we don’t need these grubs preying on our children. Thanks so much for joining us.

    CLARE: Thanks, mate, I appreciate it.
     

    MIL OSI News

  • MIL-Evening Report: Overtourism is reshaping communities in Europe – could Australia be next?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Freya Higgins-Desbiolles, Adjunct professor and adjunct senior lecturer in tourism management, University of South Australia

    Bumble Dee/Shutterstock

    A media frenzy erupted over the recent Jeff Bezos “wedding of the century” in Venice.

    Also notable were the public protests that showed tensions around tourism, especially mass tourism, are increasing. Leading the action was the activist collective No space for Bezos, which declared:

    [This wedding] is at the expense of those who live, work, and study in this city [and who are] already faced with countless difficulties after years of mass tourism.

    They complained Venice had been turned into a “private amusement park” for the rich. Locals were fighting for what they describe as a “living Venice”, not a tourism playground.

    The backlash against overtourism is sparking protests across several countries. It has even prompted the US State Department to urge travellers to be cautious when heading to Europe this summer.

    Growth at all costs

    Local residents feel their communities are being reshaped to cater for visitors, and are pushing back against what they call the “touristification” of place.

    Touristification describes a situation where locals fear their home towns and cities are being developed, designed and managed to attract and accommodate tourists.

    This touristification process benefits commerce and industries that profit from catering to visitors. Everyone else misses out, or is literally pushed out by rising housing costs.

    At the heart of this polarising issue are some key questions. Are such places “tourism destinations” or do they belong to the local people who live there? Whose interests should prevail when tourism growth exacerbates tensions?

    These issues are being thoroughly investigated, including through a project I am involved in – Chronic Emergencies and Ecosocial Transformations in Touristified Coastal Spaces. Such research is focused on understanding the problems of tourism and co-designing solutions with communities.

    Continual growth in tourism is one of the guiding principles the industry promotes. It is this “growth fetish” that is catalysing overtourism and unsustainability. This is when tourism exceeds the local social and ecological carrying capacity of a place.

    It means there are simply too many tourists, and the impact is poorly managed.

    Aussie hotspots

    The dynamics of overtourism are emerging in some Australian locations. This includes popular coastal destinations such as Byron Bay and small towns along the scenic Great Ocean Road.

    Some places are overwhelmed by short-term overtourism. This may be the result of mega cruise ship visits or viral postings on social media, such as images of Western Australia’s popular pink lakes.

    Byron Bay offers a telling example. It has evolved from a place attractive for alternative lifestyles, to a magnet for social media influencers and the location for the Netflix series Byron Baes.

    As a result, Byron Bay is the epitome of overtourism in Australia. Local housing, for instance, is being sacrificed for holiday rentals, facilitated by agencies such as Airbnb.

    Not surprisingly, there is growing local resistance to tourism overwhelming the sense of place.

    Is Australia in danger of touristification?

    If we aren’t careful, popular opposition to mass tourism will continue to grow here in Australia.

    But whether we see the European phenomenon of touristification is harder to discern.

    It may already be evident when environmental and social regulations are overturned to make development processes more friendly to the tourism industry.

    Projects can be fast tracked if they are declared a high-priority “major development”, which allows governments to override restrictive regulations. Anti-red-tape rhetoric is clear in Queensland’s tourism strategy harnessing the growth power of the 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games.

    Another example of touristification may be when taxpayer-funded events are run for branding presence on a national or international stage rather, than for the benefit of the surrounding community.

    For example, the South Australian government found itself in hot water when its tourism commission held a marketing event featuring a Sam Smith concert at d’Arenberg winery. Social media influencers were invited to attend – many from interstate with all expenses paid – but locals weren’t welcome.

    It also occurs when public commons are appropriated for tourism purposes, including national parks and protected areas, public spaces and beaches.

    Another example – again from South Australia – involves the decision to move the annual LIV Golf tournament to the Adelaide Parklands from 2028. The state government is being accused of a public land grab. The Adelaide community loves these heritage listed parklands and has resisted attempts to co-opt their use for private interests for decades.

    Reclaimining a sense of place

    Ultimately, in places like Venice, Bali and even in Byron Bay, local communities do not feel heard or empowered by tourism models which are focused on growth.

    Their protest actions are designed to ensure their quality of life is not undermined in the process of catering to tourists. It is a struggle for reclaiming places as local people’s homes, rather than as tourist destinations.

    While locations can be shared, tourism must be better managed so locals don’t find their homes unrecognisable – or even worse, find themselves displaced.

    Freya Higgins-Desbiolles is a collaborator on a project led by colleagues at the University of the Balearic Islands entitled ‘Chronic Emergencies and Ecosocial Transformations in Touristified Coastal Spaces’. This article is part of the R+D+i PID2022-137648OB-C21 financed by MICIU/AEI/ 10.13039/501100011033 and by “ERDF, EU”.

    ref. Overtourism is reshaping communities in Europe – could Australia be next? – https://theconversation.com/overtourism-is-reshaping-communities-in-europe-could-australia-be-next-260173

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-Evening Report: Childcare sexual abuse is mostly committed by men. Failing to recognise that puts children at risk

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Delanie Woodlock, Senior research fellow, UNSW Sydney

    Australians are reeling from the news that Victorian childcare worker Joshua Dale Brown has been charged with more than 70 offences against children, including rape.

    As 1,200 children await results for sexually transmitted infections, a horror no parent should ever face, media commentary has begun to focus on how this case might have implications for male childcare workers.

    Early childhood education is a heavily female-dominated field, and past inquiries into child sexual abuse by male educators have found that, in efforts to avoid appearing discriminatory, male workers are often subject to less scrutiny. This dynamic is compounded by efforts for gender balance in childcare, particularly for the perceived benefits of male role models.

    Ironically, this fear of seeming biased can create the very conditions that offenders exploit – grooming colleagues, parents and children to commit abuse while hidden in plain sight.

    While it is an uncomfortable fact to confront, research shows men with a sexual interest in children are disproportionately more likely to work with children, including in early education and care. Recent data show that one in 20 men in the Australian community are motivated offenders (individuals who reported both sexual interest in and offending against children). However, they are almost three times more likely to work with children compared to other men.

    Unfortunately, systematic data on child sexual abuse in childcare settings are limited. However, existing findings align with the only comprehensive study conducted on this issue, which followed the highly publicised McMartin Preschool trial in the United States.

    This study examined cases from 1983 to 1985, and identified 270 daycare centres where 1,639 children were found to have experienced substantiated sexual abuse. Although men made up only about 5% of childcare staff, they were responsible for 60% of the offences. The abuse was often severe, with 93% of victims subjected to some form of penetrative sexual violence.

    Those who deliberately pursue employment with children to abuse them are often referred to as “professional perpetrators”. These individuals typically have multiple victims and pose a high risk of repeated harm.

    In our current research on serial child sex offenders in childcare settings in Australia and internationally, we identified six cases involving between seven and 87 confirmed victims under the age of five. Five of the offenders were male and one was female. Together, they sexually abused at least 245 children.

    There were striking similarities across these cases. Offenders primarily targeted pre-verbal children, evaded detection for long periods, and were only exposed through external investigations, most often related to the possession and distribution of child sexual abuse material.

    Much like the details emerging from the case of Joshua Dale Brown in Victoria, none of these offenders was uncovered through internal safeguarding systems.

    As is also alleged in the case of Brown, the perpetrators in our case studies were not isolated offenders. They were operating within online communities that normalise and reinforce abusive behaviour and the sharing of child sex abuse material of children who were in their care.

    Research shows child sex offenders typically target pre-verbal children in their care.
    Shutterstock

    If, as some suggest, male workers are subject to close and sometimes unfair scrutiny, these cases highlight a troubling contradiction. Despite this purported scrutiny, child sexual abuse by male staff can and does occur over extended periods without detection in childcare settings. In fact, evidence from another case suggests staff are often hesitant to raise concerns about male colleagues for fear of being perceived as discriminatory.

    It is important to highlight that although women comprise a small minority of child sexual abuse offenders, the reluctance to view women, particularly mothers, as potential perpetrators can also contribute to such abuse going undetected.

    There also needs to be greater awareness of how these offenders infiltrate and groom institutions. In the case studies we analysed, offenders were seen as kind and competent workers. They were often friendly with management or held senior positions themselves, and would socialise outside of work with families whose children they cared for. Even when whistleblowers raised an alarm about the offenders, these concerns were often dismissed, with some offenders even being promoted.

    While most child sexual abuse occurs within families, institutional abuse is no less serious. Unlike families, institutions that work with children can be effectively regulated, making such abuse entirely preventable through robust and consistently enforced safeguarding measures.

    Since children under five may not be developmentally capable of reporting abuse, safeguards must be proactive and preventative. Childcare centres should implement surveillance measures in most areas and observe the “four eyes” rule, requiring at least two adults to be present during nappy changes and other care tasks. A strict no-phone policy could also reduce the risk of image-based offences.

    Moreover, we must confront the uncomfortable truth that some men are drawn to work with children because of a sexual interest in them. Truly centring child protection in early education means prioritising children’s safety above profit, reputational concerns, and fears of appearing biased against men. Preventing child sexual abuse in childcare is not only possible, it is a collective responsibility we must all uphold.

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

    ref. Childcare sexual abuse is mostly committed by men. Failing to recognise that puts children at risk – https://theconversation.com/childcare-sexual-abuse-is-mostly-committed-by-men-failing-to-recognise-that-puts-children-at-risk-260292

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-Evening Report: Childcare sexual abuse is mostly committed by men. Failing to recognise that puts children at risk

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Delanie Woodlock, Senior research fellow, UNSW Sydney

    Australians are reeling from the news that Victorian childcare worker Joshua Dale Brown has been charged with more than 70 offences against children, including rape.

    As 1,200 children await results for sexually transmitted infections, a horror no parent should ever face, media commentary has begun to focus on how this case might have implications for male childcare workers.

    Early childhood education is a heavily female-dominated field, and past inquiries into child sexual abuse by male educators have found that, in efforts to avoid appearing discriminatory, male workers are often subject to less scrutiny. This dynamic is compounded by efforts for gender balance in childcare, particularly for the perceived benefits of male role models.

    Ironically, this fear of seeming biased can create the very conditions that offenders exploit – grooming colleagues, parents and children to commit abuse while hidden in plain sight.

    While it is an uncomfortable fact to confront, research shows men with a sexual interest in children are disproportionately more likely to work with children, including in early education and care. Recent data show that one in 20 men in the Australian community are motivated offenders (individuals who reported both sexual interest in and offending against children). However, they are almost three times more likely to work with children compared to other men.

    Unfortunately, systematic data on child sexual abuse in childcare settings are limited. However, existing findings align with the only comprehensive study conducted on this issue, which followed the highly publicised McMartin Preschool trial in the United States.

    This study examined cases from 1983 to 1985, and identified 270 daycare centres where 1,639 children were found to have experienced substantiated sexual abuse. Although men made up only about 5% of childcare staff, they were responsible for 60% of the offences. The abuse was often severe, with 93% of victims subjected to some form of penetrative sexual violence.

    Those who deliberately pursue employment with children to abuse them are often referred to as “professional perpetrators”. These individuals typically have multiple victims and pose a high risk of repeated harm.

    In our current research on serial child sex offenders in childcare settings in Australia and internationally, we identified six cases involving between seven and 87 confirmed victims under the age of five. Five of the offenders were male and one was female. Together, they sexually abused at least 245 children.

    There were striking similarities across these cases. Offenders primarily targeted pre-verbal children, evaded detection for long periods, and were only exposed through external investigations, most often related to the possession and distribution of child sexual abuse material.

    Much like the details emerging from the case of Joshua Dale Brown in Victoria, none of these offenders was uncovered through internal safeguarding systems.

    As is also alleged in the case of Brown, the perpetrators in our case studies were not isolated offenders. They were operating within online communities that normalise and reinforce abusive behaviour and the sharing of child sex abuse material of children who were in their care.

    Research shows child sex offenders typically target pre-verbal children in their care.
    Shutterstock

    If, as some suggest, male workers are subject to close and sometimes unfair scrutiny, these cases highlight a troubling contradiction. Despite this purported scrutiny, child sexual abuse by male staff can and does occur over extended periods without detection in childcare settings. In fact, evidence from another case suggests staff are often hesitant to raise concerns about male colleagues for fear of being perceived as discriminatory.

    It is important to highlight that although women comprise a small minority of child sexual abuse offenders, the reluctance to view women, particularly mothers, as potential perpetrators can also contribute to such abuse going undetected.

    There also needs to be greater awareness of how these offenders infiltrate and groom institutions. In the case studies we analysed, offenders were seen as kind and competent workers. They were often friendly with management or held senior positions themselves, and would socialise outside of work with families whose children they cared for. Even when whistleblowers raised an alarm about the offenders, these concerns were often dismissed, with some offenders even being promoted.

    While most child sexual abuse occurs within families, institutional abuse is no less serious. Unlike families, institutions that work with children can be effectively regulated, making such abuse entirely preventable through robust and consistently enforced safeguarding measures.

    Since children under five may not be developmentally capable of reporting abuse, safeguards must be proactive and preventative. Childcare centres should implement surveillance measures in most areas and observe the “four eyes” rule, requiring at least two adults to be present during nappy changes and other care tasks. A strict no-phone policy could also reduce the risk of image-based offences.

    Moreover, we must confront the uncomfortable truth that some men are drawn to work with children because of a sexual interest in them. Truly centring child protection in early education means prioritising children’s safety above profit, reputational concerns, and fears of appearing biased against men. Preventing child sexual abuse in childcare is not only possible, it is a collective responsibility we must all uphold.

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

    ref. Childcare sexual abuse is mostly committed by men. Failing to recognise that puts children at risk – https://theconversation.com/childcare-sexual-abuse-is-mostly-committed-by-men-failing-to-recognise-that-puts-children-at-risk-260292

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI China: Chinese brands offer more choices to worldwide consumers: Spokesperson

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    This undated photo shows people waiting in line in front of a Mixue store in Sydney, Australia. [Photo/Xinhua]

    Chinese brands, by going global, offer more choices to worldwide consumers, foreign ministry spokesperson Mao Ning told a regular press briefing on Wednesday, noting that China also welcomes more quality foreign brands to enter the Chinese market.

    Mao made the remarks when answering a query concerning the global expansion of many Chinese brands. Chinese beverage brands such as Mixue Bingcheng and Chagee recently filed for overseas listings, which drew a lot of attention.

    Indeed, many Chinese brands appeal to foreign consumers thanks to their high-tech, aesthetics, design, and emotional resonance, Mao said.

    From “Made-in-China” to “Chinese brands,” this is a natural result of China’s high-quality development, and enabled by China’s complete industrial system, fair and open market environment and sustained investment in innovation, Mao said.

    She said China welcomes more quality foreign brands to enter the Chinese market to thrive together and bring the benefit of economic globalization to people of all countries.

    MIL OSI China News

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Legislation: Law Experts Issue Open letter to Govt calls for halt to the undemocratic Regulatory Standards Bill

    Source: Professor Emeritus Jane Kelsey


    As some of the country’s senior lawyers and researchers in a range of disciplines (law, economics, Tiriti o Waitangi, public policy, environment), including a former Prime Minister and two New Zealanders of the Year, we cannot stand by as the Regulatory Standards Bill is rushed through a parliamentary select committee next week.


    Each of us has written extensively and spoken out against this Bill from our respective areas of expertise. Many of us have done so for the three previous iterations of this Bill when it was promoted unsuccessfully by the Act Party and the Business Round Roundtable (later, the New Zealand Institute).


    On each of those occasions Parliament has rejected the Bill as philosophically and legally unsound, profoundly undemocratic,  and contrary to Te Tiriti o Waitangi.


    This time the Act Party has sought to bypass rigorous parliamentary scrutiny by securing commitments from the National and New Zealand First parties to legislate the Bill into law. There was an opportunity for public submissions on the proposal late last year, where it secured the support of only 0.33% of the over 23,000 New Zealanders who expressed their views on the consultation document.  It is evident that the advice in virtually all the submissions was ignored by the government.


    The Bill could have profound constitutional consequences. It establishes a set of principles as a benchmark for good legislation/regulation, many of which are highly questionable and designed to establish a presumption in favour of a libertarian view of the role of the state – one that ceased to have any currency globally more than a century ago. Te Tiriti o Waitangi has been excluded altogether.  The power vested in the Minister for Regulation and a ministerial-appointed board is not subject to the normal accountabilities of Crown entities,  conferring significant yet largely unaccountable authority on the executive.


    Dr Jim Salinger, 2024 New Zealander of the Year, further notes the chilling effect the Bill will have on any future policy on climate change and adaptation following the almost $4 billion cost of the 2023 Auckland Anniversary weekend floods and Cyclone Gabrielle, the highest in our history.


    While there is a select committee review of the Bill, it is truncated and circumscribed.


     The Coalition government has decided to submit the Bill to the Finance and Expenditure Committee rather than the Justice Committee, limiting the time to hear many tens of thousands of oral submissions to just 30 hours – at most 360 submissions –  with 5 minutes per submitter, and truncating the period for those hearings and the committee’s report, further exposes the hypocrisy that this Bill is about good governance, better laws, improved regulation, greater transparency and enhanced governmental accountability. We are gravely concerned that the National Party and New Zealand First appear to be complicit in this undemocratic process.


    We have each thought long and hard about whether to say we want to challenge this Bill before the select committee, lest it give some credibility to a process that is devoid of legitimacy. Some of us, such as Professor Dame Anne Salmond, 2013 New Zealander of the Year, and Professor Andrew Geddis, made written submissions, but feel there is no point in participating such a harmful process.


    Professor Emeritus Jonathan Boston, Dr Geoffrey Bertram, Dr Bill Rosenberg and Dr Max Harris have indicated they want to address the committee to reinforce their submissions.  In Professor Boston’s view:  “The current Bill is destined to have a very short and ignominious life as an Act of Parliament: it enjoys virtually no public support; it lacks cross-party backing; it is opposed by the very Ministry that will be responsible for its implementation; and it endorses principles that have been found wanting by multiple generations of people throughout the world”.


    In similar vein, long-standing academic critic of the Bill Professor Emeritus Jane Kelsey feels a responsibility “to speak truth to power” – in this case the abuse of proper process and the Act Party’s ongoing contempt for Te Tiriti o Waitangi.


    For a time it appeared the Sir Geoffrey Palmer, former Prime Minister and Minister of Justice, Professor of Law at Te Herenga Waka/ Victoria University of Wellington, author of numerous books on parliamentary constitutinalism, and staunch critic of the Bill, was originally not invited to address the select committee, despite saying but he wanted to be heard. He was subsequently offered an opportunity.


    All of us appeal to the National and New Zealand First parties to find their democratic voice and prevent this Bill from proceeding past the select committee.


    Equally importantly, they are calling on Speaker of the House Gerry Brownlee, as the Chair of the forthcoming review of Standing Orders, to conduct a first principles review of the select committee processes to find an appropriate balance for democratic participation in the digital era, and an effective  way to reinstate some degree of integrity and rigorous review to law-making in Aotearoa New Zealand.


    Signatures include:


    Dame Anne Salmond

    Sir Geoffrey Palmer

    Professor Emeritus Jonathan Boston

    Professor Andrew Geddis

    Dr Jim Salinger

    Dr Geoff Bertram

    Dr Bill Rosenberg

    Dr Max Harris

    Professor Emeritus Jane Kelsey.

    MIL OSI New Zealand News

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Shaping the future of regional jobs and skills

    Source: Jobs and Skills Australia

    Shaping the future of regional jobs and skills

    Linda


    News and updates
    Regional communities face different challenges, than in cities – from distance and infrastructure to service availability. These challenges extend beyond a one-size-fits-all approach.

    MIL OSI News

  • MIL-Evening Report: Creative Australia’s backflip on Venice Biennale representatives exposes deep governance failures

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Samuel Cairnduff, Lecturer in Media and Communications, The University of Melbourne

    The reinstatement of artist Khaled Sabsabi and curator Michael Dagostino as Australia’s representatives for the 2026 Venice Biennale closes a bruising recent cultural episode and exposes the fragility of the systems meant to protect artistic freedom in Australia.

    An independent review released this week confirms this was not simply a communications misstep.

    It was a full-scale institutional failure inside Australia’s peak cultural agency, Creative Australia, marked by poor risk management, inadequate escalation protocols, and a fundamental confusion about how to respond when artistic expression meets political controversy.

    What triggered the collapse

    The crisis began in February, just six days after Sabsabi and Dagostino were announced as Australia’s representatives.

    In a sudden reversal, Creative Australia’s board rescinded their appointment.

    At the centre of the backlash were two of Sabsabi’s earlier works – one referencing Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, the other depicting a view of the Twin Towers on 9/11.

    Coalition senator Claire Chandler raised the issue in Parliament. That evening the board held an emergency meeting. The artists were removed, with Creative Australia citing concerns about “a prolonged and divisive debate” that posed “an unacceptable risk to public support for Australia’s artistic community”.

    The decision triggered resignations, protests and widespread condemnation.

    Mikala Tai, Head of Visual Arts, and program manager Tahmina Maskinyar both resigned. Artist and board member Lindy Lee stepped down. Major donor Simon Mordant withdrew support, calling the move “unprecedented”. More than 4,300 people signed petitions demanding reinstatement.

    In May, chair Robert Morgan resigned from the board, after telling a February senate hearing he would not step down.

    What the review found

    This week’s review, conducted by governance consultancy Blackhall & Pearl, offers a damning but restrained post-mortem.

    It finds no evidence of political interference but reveals Creative Australia lacked basic tools to respond to controversy.

    The agency lacked formal risk assessment processes, a crisis plan, and a clear mechanism for escalating or containing reputational issues.

    More troublingly, the report found the board and staff misunderstood risk itself, believing that identifying risks meant avoiding them.

    In other words, Creative Australia treated controversy as something to flee, not manage. The result was paralysis and ultimately capitulation.

    A fragile funding model

    The episode also exposes the fragility of Australia’s arms-length funding model. As cultural policy expert Jo Caust has noted, this model relies on two key elements: peer review and operational independence from political direction. Both were tested by these events.




    Read more:
    Creative Australia’s decisions should be peer reviewed and at arm’s length. Where did things go wrong?


    Arts Minister Tony Burke’s public expression of “shock” at Sabsabi’s appointment and his suggestion he should have been briefed sent a troubling signal about government oversight.

    In a message released with the review, Creative Australia CEO Adrian Collette acknowledged the damage done:

    The decision the Board took in February has weighed heavily on many people, most particularly the artistic team – and for that we are sorry […] We are also sorry that this has caused concern and uncertainty for many in the broader arts community and we are committed to rebuilding trust in our processes for the commissioning of the Venice Biennale.

    What must change

    The report makes nine recommendations, including clearer governance frameworks, stronger risk protocols and better board training. But the deeper issue is cultural.

    Institutions must find the courage to support artists under pressure, not retreat.

    This means rejecting the false binary between risk management and artistic freedom. Effective risk planning should equip institutions to defend challenging work, not discourage it.

    It also requires cultural leaders to accept that controversy is not a failure to be avoided, but often a by-product of meaningful expression.

    A global warning

    The sector has been here before. The 2015 “Brandis affair”, when then-arts minister George Brandis redirected A$105 million from the Australia Council (predecessor to Creative Australia) into a minister-controlled fund, sparked similar alarm about political influence.

    But this crisis is more revealing. The pressure came not through overt interference but through internal uncertainty and a lack of institutional resolve.

    Globally, cultural institutions face similar strains. Book bans in the United States, museum purges in Hungary, and artistic blacklists in Russia all point to a global narrowing of space for free expression.

    What happened here is not the same, but it warns that institutions can fail without censorship, simply by lacking the will to stand firm.

    A turning point – or not?

    Sabsabi and Dagostino’s reinstatement is not just a symbolic correction. It is a test.

    Can Creative Australia rebuild trust with a community that saw it falter? Will future risk processes be used to support bold programming or suppress it? And will this moment mark the beginning of a stronger, more principled approach to cultural leadership, or a drift into safer, smaller territory?

    As Sabsabi and Dagostino prepare for Venice, they carry more than artistic hopes. They carry a test of whether this moment marks a turning point in Australian cultural governance.

    Their reinstatement is not simply a symbolic reversal. It is a chance to restore trust and demonstrate that institutions can learn from failure.

    Whether this becomes a real shift or missed opportunity depends not only on Creative Australia, but on whether institutions across the country defend artistic integrity and rebuild the leadership culture this moment demands.

    Samuel Cairnduff 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. Creative Australia’s backflip on Venice Biennale representatives exposes deep governance failures – https://theconversation.com/creative-australias-backflip-on-venice-biennale-representatives-exposes-deep-governance-failures-260402

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-Evening Report: How should I talk to my kids about abuse and body safety?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Elizabeth Westrupp, Associate Professor in Psychology, Deakin University

    Jose Luis Peleaz/Getty

    Hearing about child abuse in trusted places such as childcare centres is every parent’s worst nightmare.

    So, how can we talk to our kids about it and help them stay safe?

    While it’s not always possible to prevent abuse – and it’s never the victim’s responsibility – there are practical, age-appropriate ways to help children trust their instincts and feel confident to speak up.

    These conversations don’t have to be frightening. They’re about teaching kids body safety, boundaries and trust in a calm, shame-free way.

    Here’s what parents and carers can do right now and some resources that might help.

    Use real names for body parts

    Many of us grew up in families where private parts were given nicknames or not mentioned at all. Basic body functions were treated as embarrassing or joked about. But when we flinch or make jokes, we teach our children these topics shouldn’t be spoken about.

    Instead, we need to speak about bodies in a clear, matter-of-fact way.

    Research shows one of the simplest and most effective protective factors for children is teaching them correct names for their genitals – penis, vulva, vagina, anus, bottom – without shame or secrecy.

    Using the right words gives children the language to ask questions and tell a trusted adult if something feels wrong.

    We can use everyday moments, such as bath time or getting dressed, to weave these words in. While your child is in the bath you might say: “Have you cleaned your vulva/penis? This is your special area and it’s up to you to look after it.”

    It’s also important to explain, in simple terms, that some things are just for adults. This isn’t about making the topic scary, but about setting safe boundaries: “Sex is for grown-ups. It’s not for children, and it’s never OK for an adult or another child to involve you in anything like that.”

    If you’re unsure how to begin, children’s books about bodies and private parts can help start the conversation. Here are some of my favourites, for toddlers up to late primary school:

    Teaching children the correct names for body parts is one of the most protective things you can do.
    simarik/Getty

    Respect their ‘no’

    Children are often taught to be polite and do as they’re told. While manners matter, this can sometimes teach children not to trust their own instincts.

    It’s vital for children to know they are in charge of their own bodies: they get to decide what happens to them.

    This means they never have to hug, kiss or touch anyone if they don’t want to, not even close family members. As parents, this can feel socially awkward. But we can help by offering alternatives, such as high five, a wave or just saying hello.

    When we respect children saying “no” to safe adults, we reinforce that their boundaries matter and they always have a right to speak up.

    Trusting our children helps them learn to trust themselves.

    Encourage them to listen to their in-built sense when something isn’t right – an “uh-oh” feeling in their tummy. Let them know: “If someone ever makes you feel weird or yucky inside, you can always tell me, even if someone tells you not to. I’ll always listen and believe you.”

    This helps build the confidence to speak up if something doesn’t feel right, whether it’s with another child on a play date, an adult at school, or even a date when they’re older.

    Most importantly, it sends the message that adults will listen, believe and protect them.

    Secrets vs surprises

    From a young age, children can understand safe grown-ups don’t ask them to keep secrets.

    It’s helpful to explain the difference between a secret and a surprise.

    Surprises are fun and temporary, like hiding a birthday present, and are always revealed.

    Secrets are about hiding something for a long time, and can make people feel scared or sad. You might say: “You can tell me anything. You won’t get in trouble, even if an adult says it’s a secret.”

    How to listen and what to look for

    Sometimes children can’t find the words or feel too scared to speak up. They might not fully understand what happened until they’re older.

    One of the most protective things you can do is remind your child it’s never too late to tell you if something’s worrying them. If they raise something from the past, stay calm, listen and thank them for trusting you.

    If your child ever discloses something distressing:

    • take a deep breath before you respond

    • let them know you believe them

    • avoid asking lots of detailed questions and just listen.

    Seek professional help if needed. This might mean talking to your GP, calling a child protection helpline or speaking to a trusted mental health professional.

    Not all children will disclose abuse directly. Look for sudden changes in behaviouror language that seems too mature, fear of certain people or places, regression such as bedwetting or nightmares.

    These signs don’t automatically mean abuse has occurred. But they are cues to gently check in, ask open questions and get help if needed.

    You don’t have to do this perfectly. Small conversations, repeated over time, help protect children and show them you’re always there to listen.


    If this story has raised any issues for you, please contact one of the services below:

    Elizabeth Westrupp receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council. She is affiliated with the Parenting and Family Research Alliance, Editor-in-Chief of Mental Health & Prevention, and is a registered clinical psychologist.

    ref. How should I talk to my kids about abuse and body safety? – https://theconversation.com/how-should-i-talk-to-my-kids-about-abuse-and-body-safety-260309

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-Evening Report: Homes are more than walls and a roof, especially for Indigenous people. It’s time housing policy reflects that

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Giles Gunesekera, PhD Researcher, University of Technology Sydney

    Australia is experiencing a housing crisis. But for many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, the challenge runs deeper than high rents and limited supply. A major problem is that housing in Australia is rarely designed with Indigenous communities in mind.

    In 2021, roughly 13% of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander households faced unmet housing needs. This equated to around 45,700 low-income Indigenous households lacking suitable accommodation.

    Overcrowding remains a significant issue, with only 81.4% of Indigenous Australians living in appropriately sized housing in 2021, falling short of the 88% target set for 2031 under Closing The Gap.

    Cultural obligations, such as caring for extended family and accommodating kinship networks, are often at odds with standard tenancy agreements that limit guest numbers and occupancy terms.

    These mismatches contribute to stress, overcrowding and, in some cases, eviction.

    Housing that works

    Housing is often described as a human right. In reality, housing policy is shaped by market forces, supply targets and regulatory compliance. While these may meet administrative goals, they frequently fail to reflect the cultural, social and emotional needs of First Nations people.

    But there are programs that work.

    Our research examines how community-led, culturally safe housing can support long-term improvements in health, stability and inclusion for Indigenous and marginalised communities

    One compelling example is the Ngalang Moort Wangkiny project in Western Australia. Led by Aboriginal researchers, this project explored the experiences of Aboriginal families living in social housing. Through yarning circles, tenants shared how housing design and tenancy rules often work against their cultural needs.

    Many homes are built for small families and do not accommodate extended kinship networks. Tenancy agreements may limit guests or require the names of all residents.

    These arrangements create tension for Aboriginal families who have a strong cultural obligation to care for relatives and host kin. Policies that ignore these responsibilities are stressful and often produce in unsuitable results.

    The research demonstrated many of these issues can be avoided through co-design. Aboriginal families who are involved in planning, decision-making and service delivery are more likely to experience positive housing outcomes. They feel a sense of safety, support and community ownership.

    With models like these, housing can be a stable foundation, not a point of vulnerability.

    The benefits of culturally safe housing extend beyond comfort or cultural fit. Evidence shows strong links between stable housing and improvements in education, employment and health.

    People who feel respected and secure in their homes are more likely to access services, remain in school and sustain employment.

    Planning with, not planning for

    Across Australia, Aboriginal Community-Controlled Organisations (ACCOs) are at the forefront of culturally safe housing.

    These organisations are governed by Aboriginal communities and grounded in local knowledge and values. In housing, they provide tenancy support, manage properties, and deliver wraparound services such as mental health care and employment programs.

    Some receive government support.

    Many of these organisations continue to operate under pressure. Funding is often short-term, rigid and inconsistent, with recent findings showing governments are leaving the financial heavy lifting to under-resourced Aboriginal groups.

    But policies are designed remotely with little input from communities. Tenancy frameworks still reflect assumptions based on Western models of home life, which may not align with Indigenous ways of living.

    Standard house layouts with separate, enclosed rooms may not support communal living or outdoor gathering spaces that are central to many Indigenous households.

    Addressing these gaps requires national policy reform recognising housing as essential social infrastructure. Long-term funding, flexible tenancy arrangements and support for Indigenous-led organisations would all help.

    A more inclusive planning system would ensure co-design becomes standard practice rather than the exception.

    Doing more to meet goals

    We can also draw valuable lessons from international models.

    Globally, community land trusts have enabled low-income and racially marginalised communities to secure long-term control of housing and land.

    These trusts work by holding land in a nonprofit trust while allowing residents to own or rent homes on it through long-term, renewable leases. This structure removes land from the speculative market, keeps housing costs stable and ensures decisions remain in the hands of the local community.

    In Chile, the Half a House model gives families a solid, expandable foundation to grow their homes as their resources allow.

    A growing number of Australian policymakers have acknowledged this need for change. The National Agreement on Closing the Gap includes targets for improved housing outcomes and increased community control.

    The 2024 Implementation Plan outlines steps toward reducing overcrowding and strengthening Aboriginal-controlled service delivery.

    Turning these goals into practice requires sustained effort. Indigenous communities must be seen as partners in decision-making, not simply as service recipients. Their insights and lived experiences should shape every stage of the housing process.

    Uniform solutions will not meet diverse local needs. Place-based approaches, developed in collaboration with communities, are essential.

    Housing is more than shelter. For Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, it is a space to practise culture, strengthen kinship, and pass on knowledge. It is where identity is lived and preserved.

    Proven models already exist. Communities across Australia are leading the way. What is required now is a policy environment that listens, invests and follows their lead.

    Giles Gunesekera OAM works for Global Impact Initiative, an organisation that constructs impact investments with the dual focus of sustainable financial return and measurable, actionable, social impact.

    Dr Allan Teale receives funding from UTS.
    In 2023, he received a Churchill Fellowship that enabled him to travel to Canada and the United States to study Indigenous community housing. My report can be found at this link: https://www.churchilltrust.com.au/fellow/allan-teale-nsw-2022/

    ref. Homes are more than walls and a roof, especially for Indigenous people. It’s time housing policy reflects that – https://theconversation.com/homes-are-more-than-walls-and-a-roof-especially-for-indigenous-people-its-time-housing-policy-reflects-that-259147

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-Evening Report: Homes are more than walls and a roof, especially for Indigenous people. It’s time housing policy reflects that

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Giles Gunesekera, PhD Researcher, University of Technology Sydney

    Australia is experiencing a housing crisis. But for many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, the challenge runs deeper than high rents and limited supply. A major problem is that housing in Australia is rarely designed with Indigenous communities in mind.

    In 2021, roughly 13% of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander households faced unmet housing needs. This equated to around 45,700 low-income Indigenous households lacking suitable accommodation.

    Overcrowding remains a significant issue, with only 81.4% of Indigenous Australians living in appropriately sized housing in 2021, falling short of the 88% target set for 2031 under Closing The Gap.

    Cultural obligations, such as caring for extended family and accommodating kinship networks, are often at odds with standard tenancy agreements that limit guest numbers and occupancy terms.

    These mismatches contribute to stress, overcrowding and, in some cases, eviction.

    Housing that works

    Housing is often described as a human right. In reality, housing policy is shaped by market forces, supply targets and regulatory compliance. While these may meet administrative goals, they frequently fail to reflect the cultural, social and emotional needs of First Nations people.

    But there are programs that work.

    Our research examines how community-led, culturally safe housing can support long-term improvements in health, stability and inclusion for Indigenous and marginalised communities

    One compelling example is the Ngalang Moort Wangkiny project in Western Australia. Led by Aboriginal researchers, this project explored the experiences of Aboriginal families living in social housing. Through yarning circles, tenants shared how housing design and tenancy rules often work against their cultural needs.

    Many homes are built for small families and do not accommodate extended kinship networks. Tenancy agreements may limit guests or require the names of all residents.

    These arrangements create tension for Aboriginal families who have a strong cultural obligation to care for relatives and host kin. Policies that ignore these responsibilities are stressful and often produce in unsuitable results.

    The research demonstrated many of these issues can be avoided through co-design. Aboriginal families who are involved in planning, decision-making and service delivery are more likely to experience positive housing outcomes. They feel a sense of safety, support and community ownership.

    With models like these, housing can be a stable foundation, not a point of vulnerability.

    The benefits of culturally safe housing extend beyond comfort or cultural fit. Evidence shows strong links between stable housing and improvements in education, employment and health.

    People who feel respected and secure in their homes are more likely to access services, remain in school and sustain employment.

    Planning with, not planning for

    Across Australia, Aboriginal Community-Controlled Organisations (ACCOs) are at the forefront of culturally safe housing.

    These organisations are governed by Aboriginal communities and grounded in local knowledge and values. In housing, they provide tenancy support, manage properties, and deliver wraparound services such as mental health care and employment programs.

    Some receive government support.

    Many of these organisations continue to operate under pressure. Funding is often short-term, rigid and inconsistent, with recent findings showing governments are leaving the financial heavy lifting to under-resourced Aboriginal groups.

    But policies are designed remotely with little input from communities. Tenancy frameworks still reflect assumptions based on Western models of home life, which may not align with Indigenous ways of living.

    Standard house layouts with separate, enclosed rooms may not support communal living or outdoor gathering spaces that are central to many Indigenous households.

    Addressing these gaps requires national policy reform recognising housing as essential social infrastructure. Long-term funding, flexible tenancy arrangements and support for Indigenous-led organisations would all help.

    A more inclusive planning system would ensure co-design becomes standard practice rather than the exception.

    Doing more to meet goals

    We can also draw valuable lessons from international models.

    Globally, community land trusts have enabled low-income and racially marginalised communities to secure long-term control of housing and land.

    These trusts work by holding land in a nonprofit trust while allowing residents to own or rent homes on it through long-term, renewable leases. This structure removes land from the speculative market, keeps housing costs stable and ensures decisions remain in the hands of the local community.

    In Chile, the Half a House model gives families a solid, expandable foundation to grow their homes as their resources allow.

    A growing number of Australian policymakers have acknowledged this need for change. The National Agreement on Closing the Gap includes targets for improved housing outcomes and increased community control.

    The 2024 Implementation Plan outlines steps toward reducing overcrowding and strengthening Aboriginal-controlled service delivery.

    Turning these goals into practice requires sustained effort. Indigenous communities must be seen as partners in decision-making, not simply as service recipients. Their insights and lived experiences should shape every stage of the housing process.

    Uniform solutions will not meet diverse local needs. Place-based approaches, developed in collaboration with communities, are essential.

    Housing is more than shelter. For Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, it is a space to practise culture, strengthen kinship, and pass on knowledge. It is where identity is lived and preserved.

    Proven models already exist. Communities across Australia are leading the way. What is required now is a policy environment that listens, invests and follows their lead.

    Giles Gunesekera OAM works for Global Impact Initiative, an organisation that constructs impact investments with the dual focus of sustainable financial return and measurable, actionable, social impact.

    Dr Allan Teale receives funding from UTS.
    In 2023, he received a Churchill Fellowship that enabled him to travel to Canada and the United States to study Indigenous community housing. My report can be found at this link: https://www.churchilltrust.com.au/fellow/allan-teale-nsw-2022/

    ref. Homes are more than walls and a roof, especially for Indigenous people. It’s time housing policy reflects that – https://theconversation.com/homes-are-more-than-walls-and-a-roof-especially-for-indigenous-people-its-time-housing-policy-reflects-that-259147

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-Evening Report: Antarctic research is in decline, and the timing couldn’t be worse

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Elizabeth Leane, Professor of Antarctic Studies, School of Humanities, University of Tasmania

    Oleksandr Matsibura/Shutterstock

    Ice loss in Antarctica and its impact on the planet – sea level rise, changes to ocean currents and disturbance of wildlife and food webs – has been in the news a lot lately. All of these threats were likely on the minds of the delegates to the annual Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting, which finishes up today in Milan, Italy.

    This meeting is where decisions are made about the continent’s future. These decisions rely on evidence from scientific research. Moreover, only countries that produce significant Antarctic research – as well as being parties to the treaty – get to have a final say in these decisions.

    Our new report – published as a preprint through the University of the Arctic – shows the rate of research on the Antarctic and Southern Ocean is falling at exactly the time when it should be increasing. Moreover, research leadership is changing, with China taking the lead for the first time.

    This points to a dangerous disinvestment in Antarctic research just when it is needed, alongside a changing of the guard in national influence. Antarctica and the research done there are key to everyone’s future, so it’s vital to understand what this change might lead to.

    Why is Antarctic research so important?

    With the Antarctic region rapidly warming, its ice shelves destabilising and sea ice shrinking, understanding the South Polar environment is more crucial than ever.

    Ice loss in Antarctica not only contributes to sea level rise, but impacts wildlife habitats and local food chains. It also changes the dynamics of ocean currents, which could interfere with global food webs, including international fisheries that supply a growing amount of food.

    Research to understand these impacts is vital. First, knowing the impact of our actions – particularly carbon emissions – gives us an increased drive to make changes and lobby governments to do so.

    Second, even when changes are already locked in, to prepare ourselves we need to know what these changes will look like.

    And third, we need to understand the threats to the Antarctic and Southern Ocean environment to govern it properly. This is where the treaty comes in.

    What is the Antarctic Treaty?

    The region below 60 degrees south is governed by the 1959 Antarctic Treaty, along with subsequent agreements. Together they are known as the Antarctic Treaty System.

    Fifty-eight countries are parties to the treaty, but only 29 of them – called consultative parties – can make binding decisions about the region. They comprise the 12 original signatories from 1959, along with 17 more recent signatory nations that produce substantial scientific research relating to Antarctica.

    This makes research a key part of a nation’s influence over what happens in Antarctica.

    For most of its history, the Antarctic Treaty System has functioned remarkably well. It maintained peace in the region during the Cold War, facilitated scientific cooperation, and put arguments about territorial claims on indefinite hold. It indefinitely forbade mining, and managed fisheries.

    Lately, however, there has been growing dysfunction in the treaty system.

    Environmental protections that might seem obvious – such as marine protected areas and special protections for threatened emperor penguins – have stalled.

    Because decisions are made by consensus, any country can effectively block progress. Russia and China – both long-term actors in the system – have been at the centre of the impasse.




    Read more:
    Antarctic summer sea ice is at record lows. Here’s how it will harm the planet – and us


    What did our report find?

    Tracking the amount of Antarctic research being done tells us whether nations as a whole are investing enough in understanding the region and its global impact.

    It also tells us which nations are investing the most and are therefore likely to have substantial influence.

    Our new report examined the number of papers published on Antarctic and Southern Ocean topics from 2016 to 2024, using the Scopus database. We also looked at other factors, such as the countries affiliated with each paper.

    The results show five significant changes are happening in the world of Antarctic research.

    • The number of Antarctic and Southern Ocean publications peaked in 2021 and then fell slightly yearly through to 2024.
    • While the United States has for decades been the leader in Antarctic research, China overtook them in 2022.
    • If we look only at the high-quality publications (those published in the best 25% of journals) China still took over the US, in 2024.
    • Of the top six countries in overall publications (China, the US, the United Kingdom, Australia, Germany and Russia) all except China have declined in publication numbers since 2016.
    • Although collaboration in publications is higher for Antarctic research than in non-Antarctic fields, Russia, India and China have anomalously low rates of co-authorship compared with many other signatory countries.

    Why is this research decline a problem?

    A recent parliamentary inquiry in Australia emphasised the need for funding certainty. In the UK, a House of Commons committee report considered it “imperative for the UK to significantly expand its research efforts in Antarctica”, in particular in relation to sea level rise.

    US commentators have pointed to the inadequacy of the country’s icebreaker infrastructure. The Trump administration’s recent cuts to Antarctic funding are only likely to exacerbate the situation. Meanwhile China has built a fifth station in Antarctica and announced plans for a sixth.

    Given the nation’s population and global influence, China’s leadership in Antarctic research is not surprising. If China were to take a lead in Antarctic environmental protection that matched its scientific heft, its move to lead position in the research ranks could be positive. Stronger multi-country collaboration in research could also strengthen overall cooperation.

    But the overall drop in global Antarctic research investment is a problem however you look at it. We ignore it at our peril.

    Elizabeth Leane receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the Dutch Research Council, the Council on Australian and Latin American Relations DFAT and HX (Hurtigruten Expeditions). She has received in-kind support from Hurtigruten Expeditions in the recent past. The University of Tasmania is a member of the UArctic, which has provided support for this project.

    Keith Larson is affiliated with the UArctic and European Polar Board. The UArctic paid for the development and publication of this report. The UArctic Thematic Network on Research Analytics and Bibliometrics conducted the analysis and developed the report. The Arctic Centre at Umeå University provided in-kind support for staff time on the report.

    ref. Antarctic research is in decline, and the timing couldn’t be worse – https://theconversation.com/antarctic-research-is-in-decline-and-the-timing-couldnt-be-worse-260197

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-Evening Report: Antarctic research is in decline, and the timing couldn’t be worse

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Elizabeth Leane, Professor of Antarctic Studies, School of Humanities, University of Tasmania

    Oleksandr Matsibura/Shutterstock

    Ice loss in Antarctica and its impact on the planet – sea level rise, changes to ocean currents and disturbance of wildlife and food webs – has been in the news a lot lately. All of these threats were likely on the minds of the delegates to the annual Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting, which finishes up today in Milan, Italy.

    This meeting is where decisions are made about the continent’s future. These decisions rely on evidence from scientific research. Moreover, only countries that produce significant Antarctic research – as well as being parties to the treaty – get to have a final say in these decisions.

    Our new report – published as a preprint through the University of the Arctic – shows the rate of research on the Antarctic and Southern Ocean is falling at exactly the time when it should be increasing. Moreover, research leadership is changing, with China taking the lead for the first time.

    This points to a dangerous disinvestment in Antarctic research just when it is needed, alongside a changing of the guard in national influence. Antarctica and the research done there are key to everyone’s future, so it’s vital to understand what this change might lead to.

    Why is Antarctic research so important?

    With the Antarctic region rapidly warming, its ice shelves destabilising and sea ice shrinking, understanding the South Polar environment is more crucial than ever.

    Ice loss in Antarctica not only contributes to sea level rise, but impacts wildlife habitats and local food chains. It also changes the dynamics of ocean currents, which could interfere with global food webs, including international fisheries that supply a growing amount of food.

    Research to understand these impacts is vital. First, knowing the impact of our actions – particularly carbon emissions – gives us an increased drive to make changes and lobby governments to do so.

    Second, even when changes are already locked in, to prepare ourselves we need to know what these changes will look like.

    And third, we need to understand the threats to the Antarctic and Southern Ocean environment to govern it properly. This is where the treaty comes in.

    What is the Antarctic Treaty?

    The region below 60 degrees south is governed by the 1959 Antarctic Treaty, along with subsequent agreements. Together they are known as the Antarctic Treaty System.

    Fifty-eight countries are parties to the treaty, but only 29 of them – called consultative parties – can make binding decisions about the region. They comprise the 12 original signatories from 1959, along with 17 more recent signatory nations that produce substantial scientific research relating to Antarctica.

    This makes research a key part of a nation’s influence over what happens in Antarctica.

    For most of its history, the Antarctic Treaty System has functioned remarkably well. It maintained peace in the region during the Cold War, facilitated scientific cooperation, and put arguments about territorial claims on indefinite hold. It indefinitely forbade mining, and managed fisheries.

    Lately, however, there has been growing dysfunction in the treaty system.

    Environmental protections that might seem obvious – such as marine protected areas and special protections for threatened emperor penguins – have stalled.

    Because decisions are made by consensus, any country can effectively block progress. Russia and China – both long-term actors in the system – have been at the centre of the impasse.




    Read more:
    Antarctic summer sea ice is at record lows. Here’s how it will harm the planet – and us


    What did our report find?

    Tracking the amount of Antarctic research being done tells us whether nations as a whole are investing enough in understanding the region and its global impact.

    It also tells us which nations are investing the most and are therefore likely to have substantial influence.

    Our new report examined the number of papers published on Antarctic and Southern Ocean topics from 2016 to 2024, using the Scopus database. We also looked at other factors, such as the countries affiliated with each paper.

    The results show five significant changes are happening in the world of Antarctic research.

    • The number of Antarctic and Southern Ocean publications peaked in 2021 and then fell slightly yearly through to 2024.
    • While the United States has for decades been the leader in Antarctic research, China overtook them in 2022.
    • If we look only at the high-quality publications (those published in the best 25% of journals) China still took over the US, in 2024.
    • Of the top six countries in overall publications (China, the US, the United Kingdom, Australia, Germany and Russia) all except China have declined in publication numbers since 2016.
    • Although collaboration in publications is higher for Antarctic research than in non-Antarctic fields, Russia, India and China have anomalously low rates of co-authorship compared with many other signatory countries.

    Why is this research decline a problem?

    A recent parliamentary inquiry in Australia emphasised the need for funding certainty. In the UK, a House of Commons committee report considered it “imperative for the UK to significantly expand its research efforts in Antarctica”, in particular in relation to sea level rise.

    US commentators have pointed to the inadequacy of the country’s icebreaker infrastructure. The Trump administration’s recent cuts to Antarctic funding are only likely to exacerbate the situation. Meanwhile China has built a fifth station in Antarctica and announced plans for a sixth.

    Given the nation’s population and global influence, China’s leadership in Antarctic research is not surprising. If China were to take a lead in Antarctic environmental protection that matched its scientific heft, its move to lead position in the research ranks could be positive. Stronger multi-country collaboration in research could also strengthen overall cooperation.

    But the overall drop in global Antarctic research investment is a problem however you look at it. We ignore it at our peril.

    Elizabeth Leane receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the Dutch Research Council, the Council on Australian and Latin American Relations DFAT and HX (Hurtigruten Expeditions). She has received in-kind support from Hurtigruten Expeditions in the recent past. The University of Tasmania is a member of the UArctic, which has provided support for this project.

    Keith Larson is affiliated with the UArctic and European Polar Board. The UArctic paid for the development and publication of this report. The UArctic Thematic Network on Research Analytics and Bibliometrics conducted the analysis and developed the report. The Arctic Centre at Umeå University provided in-kind support for staff time on the report.

    ref. Antarctic research is in decline, and the timing couldn’t be worse – https://theconversation.com/antarctic-research-is-in-decline-and-the-timing-couldnt-be-worse-260197

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Universities and Security – Counterterrorism watchdog needed – legal expert – UoA

    Source: University of Auckland (UoA)

    An independent watchdog would shine a light into the shadowy world of security and counterterrorism, says Associate Professor John Ip in a research paper.

    Since the 2019 Christchurch mosque attacks, New Zealand has introduced several counterterrorism laws, significantly expanding state power. Now, a legal expert says it’s time to follow the UK, Australia and Ireland in appointing an independent watchdog to keep that power in check.

    In his paper, ‘The case for an independent reviewer of counterterrorism legislation in New Zealand,’ University of Auckland Law Associate Professor, John Ip, says although necessary, counterterrorism legislation often lacks provision for ongoing oversight.

    Counterterrorism legislation, says Ip, is characterised by a government’s need to react to an incident decisively and quickly, leaving little time for public input, legislative deliberation or scrutiny. Once on the books, counterterrorism legislation is rarely repealed and difficult to ratchet back.

    “This makes scrutiny and oversight essential, especially given the potential impact on individual rights and freedoms.”

    Since 2019, New Zealand has introduced counterterrorism legislation including the Terrorism Suppression (Control Orders) Act, the Counter-Terrorism Legislation Act, and the Counter-Terrorism Acts (Designations and Control Orders) Amendment Act. But Ip says this relative flurry of legislation hasn’t been matched by any permanent oversight mechanism.

    “It’s important that any unintended consequences, gaps and shortcomings are brought to light and that the public have confidence that the powers conferred by counterterrorism legislation are being used appropriately.”

    Ip argues that creating an independent review entity would enhance public understanding, facilitate evidence-based policymaking and augment existing legal and political avenues of scrutiny and oversight.

    “Countries around the world quickly react to acts of terrorism, and in this, we see expansion, or at the very least, some consolidation of the power of the state. We see the creation of a stronger national security state. And as this is happening, we should strengthen the oversight and control of those same institutions.”

    However, the options for oversight currently available, says Ip, have limitations.
    “As is typical of national security matters, secrecy shrouds the operation of counterterrorism law. Secrecy around national security creates a problem – those who might provide oversight often don’t have access to the whole picture.

    “In the courts, legal challenges depend on individuals bringing cases, but secrecy can mean a wrong can’t be established because of a lack of publicly available evidence. When they do hear cases, without a comprehensive picture, judges are also likely to be more deferential.”

    Temporary review bodies such as public inquiries also have limits, says Ip. For example, the terms of reference for the Royal Commission into the 15 March attacks meant that the Commission was not allowed to look into the police’s initial response.

    “These kinds of inquiries and bodies also stop existing once they deliver their final report. If the government chooses not to act on the recommendations, there’s little option in following up or pushing for change later on.

    “These limitations, including that more specialised review bodies tend to be either ad hoc or otherwise circumscribed in scope, suggest the need for something different.”

    In his paper, Ip examines overseas models, including the UK’s Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation (IRTL). The IRTL is legally qualified, independent of government, and has access to the same classified information as ministers, enabling impartial, informed oversight.

    Unlike courts, which look into specific cases, the IRTL has a broad mandate to review counterterrorism legislation as a whole.

    While the UK model is interesting, Ip says New Zealand might more closely follow the formal statutory approach exemplified by Australia’s Independent National Security Legislation Monitor, and to a lesser extent Ireland’s Independent Examiner of Security Legislation (IESL). Both are created by legislation with clearly defined powers and responsibilities.

    “A permanent independent office, with comprehensive access to information, could review the operation of counterterrorism legislation here and publish reports with findings and recommendations,” says Ip.

    “Independent review bodies play a crucial role in shining a light into the shadowy corners of the world of security and counterterrorism.”

    Read the paper: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5265484#:~:text=Drawing%20on%20models%20from%20the,with%20its%20findings%20and%20recommendations.

    MIL OSI New Zealand News

  • MIL-Evening Report: Fallout: Spies on Norfolk Island – SBS podcast

    Pacific Media Watch

    In July 1985, Australia’s Pacific territory of Norfolk Island (pop. 2188) became the centre of a real life international spy thriller.

    Four French agents sailed there on board the Ouvéa, a yacht from Kanaky New Caledonia, after bombing the Rainbow Warrior in Auckland, killing Greenpeace photographer Fernando Pereira.

    The Rainbow Warrior was the flagship for a protest flotilla due to travel to Moruroa atoll to challenge French nuclear tests.

    Australian police took them into custody on behalf of their New Zealand counterparts but then, bafflingly, allowed them to sail away, never to face justice.

    On the 40th anniversary of the bombing (10 July 2025), award-winning journalist Richard Baker goes on an adventure from Paris to the Pacific to get the real story – and ultimately uncover the role that Australia played in the global headline-making affair.

    The programme includes an interview with Pacific journalist David Robie, author of Eyes of Fire: The Last Voyage and Legacy of the Rainbow Warrior. David’s article about this episode is published at Declassified Australia here.

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-Evening Report: Fallout: Spies on Norfolk Island – SBS podcast

    Pacific Media Watch

    In July 1985, Australia’s Pacific territory of Norfolk Island (pop. 2188) became the centre of a real life international spy thriller.

    Four French agents sailed there on board the Ouvéa, a yacht from Kanaky New Caledonia, after bombing the Rainbow Warrior in Auckland, killing Greenpeace photographer Fernando Pereira.

    The Rainbow Warrior was the flagship for a protest flotilla due to travel to Moruroa atoll to challenge French nuclear tests.

    Australian police took them into custody on behalf of their New Zealand counterparts but then, bafflingly, allowed them to sail away, never to face justice.

    On the 40th anniversary of the bombing (10 July 2025), award-winning journalist Richard Baker goes on an adventure from Paris to the Pacific to get the real story – and ultimately uncover the role that Australia played in the global headline-making affair.

    The programme includes an interview with Pacific journalist David Robie, author of Eyes of Fire: The Last Voyage and Legacy of the Rainbow Warrior. David’s article about this episode is published at Declassified Australia here.

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Universities – Hotspots for conservation of threatened native tree identified in Wellington – Vic

    Source: Te Herenga Waka—Victoria University of Wellington

    Hotspots for the conservation of maire tawake or swamp maire in the Wellington region have been identified by researchers hoping to save this threatened native tree from the deadly myrtle rust disease.

    Swamp maire is thought to have been common in the wetlands that once covered the Wellington region. However, farming and urban development have significantly reduced its numbers. The arrival of myrtle rust in 2017 added a new threat and the tree has a conservation status of “nationally vulnerable”.

    Priority areas for its conservation have now been mapped in the western suburbs of Lower and Upper Hutt and in the towns of Paraparaumu, Waikanae, Ōtaki, Masterton, Carterton, and Featherston. These priority areas comprise up to 52 km2.

    “We’ve identified sites that are likely to have the highest abundance of swamp maire and the lowest risk of myrtle rust. They’re also easy to access so we think focusing on these sites offers the most cost-effective conservation strategy,” said Dr Sarah Herbert, a researcher in biological sciences at Te Herenga Waka—Victoria University of Wellington.

    Dr Herbert said the sites could act as refuges for swamp maire, with additional planting undertaken to help maintain the tree’s population as myrtle rust spreads.

    “Myrtle rust is a fungal plant pathogen that is primarily spread by the wind. It has a devastating effect on swamp maire, causing an almost complete loss of flowers, fruits, and new leaves. There’s an urgent need to identify sites where conservation and wetland restoration can take place to help ensure this treasured tree’s survival,” she said.

    In addition to the priority sites for conservation, the researchers identified other areas that could act as refuges for the tree but these areas would require more intensive management.

    “We mapped up to 233 km2 where swamp maire is present in relatively high abundance but where there is a higher risk of myrtle rust, so more effort would be needed to manage the sites. On the plus side, these areas are easy to access and existing community conservation efforts could be supported to allow more intensive control of myrtle rust.”

    Pockets of less accessible land in the wider Wellington region could also be considered as refuges for the tree’s conservation, she says.

    “We identified up to 134 km2, mostly within indigenous forest in the eastern Tararua range and in farmland in the Wairarapa, with potential for swamp maire conservation. Wetland restoration and swamp maire planting programmes by landowners and communities may be possible in places that can be accessed by off-road vehicles or on foot.”

    The researchers were able to identify areas for swamp maire conversation by using models of the Wellington region’s soil moisture and plant distribution to pinpoint sites where swamp maire was likely to be growing. They then mapped the risk of myrtle rust infection in these areas and graded sites by how easy they were to access.

    Results of the research are published in the journal Conversation Biology: https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cobi.70088

    MIL OSI New Zealand News

  • MIL-OSI Australia: AUSTRAC orders external audit of Western Union Financial Services

    Source: Australian Department of Communications

    AUSTRAC has ordered the appointment of an external auditor to Western Union Financial Services Australia (Western Union) after raising concerns about the money remitter’s compliance with the AML/CTF Act.
    Among the concerns were core anti-money laundering issues such as poor customer due diligence, delayed or non-reporting of suspicious matters, non-compliant international funds transfer instruction reporting and concerns about whether Western Union’s AML/CTF program is functional.

    MIL OSI News

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Sporting organisations

    Source: New places to play in Gungahlin

    Your organisation will be exempt from income tax, and can self-assess its exemption, if it meets all of the following requirements:

    • it’s a not-for-profit society, association or club
    • it’s established for the purpose of encouragement of either of the following
      • a game or sport
      • animal racing
    • it’s not a charity
    • it meets one of the 3 following tests 
      • physical presence in Australia test
      • DGR test
      • prescribed by law test
    • it complies with all the substantive requirements in its governing rules
    • it applies its income and assets solely for the purpose for which it is established.

    Taxation Ruling TR 2022/2 Income tax: the games and sports exemption provides detailed guidance for organisations seeking additional information to determine whether they are entitled to self-assess as income tax exempt.

    If all of your organisation’s purposes are charitable purposes for the public benefit and you do not have any independent non-charitable purposes, your organisation cannot self-assess as income tax exempt under this category. Your organisation will need to be registered as a charity with the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission (ACNC) and receive our endorsement to access an income tax exemption.

    For more information on what is a charitable purpose, see the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission’s websiteExternal Link.

    Society, association or club

    A society, association or club is an entity made up of people who have come together to implement a common purpose.

    An individual, or an incorporated body that has only one member, is not a society, association or club. A fund which only holds money to support activities carried out by other entities is also not a society, association or club.

    The members of a society, association or club do not need to be natural persons. They can be an association of other entities.

    Main purpose

    The main purpose of the society, association or club must be encouragement of a game or sport, or animal racing. To work out your organisation’s main purpose, look at its:

    • constituent documents
    • activities
    • use of funds
    • history.

    Any other purpose of the organisation must be incidental, ancillary or secondary to encouragement of a game or sport, or animal racing.

    For example, if your organisation’s main purpose is providing social and recreational facilities and activities, it won’t be exempt. This is the case even if your organisation also gives money to encourage games, sports or animal racing.

    Example 1: not for the encouragement of a game or sport

    An NFP club’s main operations are providing dining, gaming and leisure facilities at its clubhouse. It gives a minor yearly grant to an associated rowing club but is not involved in rowing itself.

    The club doesn’t qualify for the exemption.

    End of example

    Example 2: car appreciation club (not encouraging a game or sport)

    Classic Car Club (the Club) is an NFP association that holds events for enthusiasts of a particular make of car. The Club’s events are focused on providing attendees with information on how to maintain their cars and opportunities to build networks with each other.

    The Club’s main purpose is to promote a common interest in a particular make of car, as opposed to encouraging a game or sport.

    The Club doesn’t qualify for the exemption.

    End of example

    Example 3: recreational fishing activities (not encouraging a game or sport)

    The One That Got Away Club (the Club) provides services and amenities for people who like to fish in the bay near the clubhouse and in surrounding watercourses. The services provided include weather and boating information, guest speakers and a bar and canteen which open daily. Members-only competitions are held once a month.

    While a fishing competition can be a sport, the Club’s main purpose is to provide services and amenities for members to do recreational fishing. The Club was not formed for the main purpose of encouraging a game or sport.

    The Club doesn’t qualify for the exemption.

    End of example

    Example 4: club with sporting facilities occasionally conducting sporting activities for members (not encouraging a game or sport)

    Our Community Club (the Club) is an NFP association which was initially established for networking purposes, but now also provides dining, entertainment, gym and sporting facilities for its members. Occasionally, the Club organises member-only sporting competitions using its sporting facilities.

    Whilst the Club occasionally organises sporting competitions for its members, the Club’s main purpose is to provide a broad variety of services and facilities to its members and encourage social and networking activities among its members.

    The Club doesn’t qualify for the exemption.

    End of example

    Example 5: services to members with incidental sporting activities – ski lodge (not encouraging a game or sport)

    Super Ski Club (the Club) is an NFP association which owns and operates a ski lodge. It was originally established to provide accommodation for its members to regularly participate in recreational skiing and snowboarding. When the Club’s lodging facilities are not fully used by its members, they are made available to the public on a commercial basis.

    The Club is affiliated with an association (the Association) which regularly holds snow sports competitions. The Club allows the Association to use its lodging facilities for meetings and equipment storage on an inconsistent basis. The Club also makes its lodging facilities available at discounted rates to individuals competing in the Association’s competitions, provided they are not already reserved by its members. The Club doesn’t enter any teams into any sporting competitions itself.

    The Club’s main purpose is the provision of accommodation to its members. The substantial and prioritised member usage of the Club’s lodging facilities, inconsistent support provided to the Association and lack of direct involvement in any sporting competitions indicates that the encouragement of a game or sport is not the Club’s main purpose.

    The Club doesn’t qualify for the exemption.

    End of example

    Game or sport

    The terms ‘game’ and ‘sport’ are not defined and take their ordinary meaning. Games and sports extend to athletic games or sports (such as football and swimming) and non-athletic games (such as chess and bridge).

    They don’t extend to:

    • stamp-collecting
    • keeping and showing pets
    • making model railways
    • maintaining vintage cars
    • various social and recreational pursuits.

    Encouragement of a game or sport extends to less direct means such as:

    • research or testing
    • developing referees
    • providing sporting facilities.

    Example 6: for the encouragement of a game or sport

    An NFP association’s purpose is to provide a sports ground for use by the local hockey, soccer and cricket clubs.

    The association will qualify for the exemption if it is not a charity and it also meets the other requirements.

    End of example

    Example 7: rallying and track racing club (encouraging a game or sport)

    Riverstone Rally Club (the Club) is an NFP association that holds rallying and track racing activities. It is managed by a committee of members that actively participate in competitive rallying and track racing.

    The Club owns and maintains a local motorsport circuit, which is available for public usage. It regularly hosts rallying and track racing contests on its circuit and participates in state and national-level competitions.

    The Club’s main purpose is to encourage a game or sport. It will qualify for the exemption.

    End of example

    Example 8: ski club (encouraging a game or sport)

    Aussie Alps Ski Club (the Club) is an NFP association. The Club’s governing document states it has been set up to promote snow sports. The Club’s management committee consists of former snow sports athletes.

    The Club owns and operates a snow sports lodge and training and conditioning facility, which are available to the public (at commercial rates) and to a development snow sports squad selected by a national snow sports body (at no cost).

    The Club also regularly hosts skiing competitions. The Club consistently uses most of its profits to cover the training, accommodation and travel fees of skiing athletes representing Australia in the Olympics.

    The Club’s main purpose is to encourage a game or sport. It will qualify for the exemption.

    End of example

    Animal racing

    The income tax exemption includes horse racing, trotting and greyhound racing, and the racing of other animals.

    If your organisation doesn’t meet all the requirements for exemption for this category, you should check the other exemption categories in Eligible types of income tax exempt organisations.

    Early self-review worksheet for sporting organisations with multiple purposes

    Sporting organisations with multiple purposes can use the Working out your club’s income tax status worksheet (PDF, 220KB) when conducting an early self-review of their income tax status. The worksheet includes a schedule to help sporting organisations with multiple purposes weigh up their features and work out their main purpose.

    Once completed, the worksheet should be kept for your records. It does not need to be sent to the ATO.

    It is important to note that non-charitable NFPs with an active ABN, including sporting organisations, must lodge an annual NFP self-review return to notify their eligibility to self-assess income tax exemption.

    The worksheet is not a substitute for the lodgment of the NFP self-review return. However, if your sporting organisation has multiple purposes, the worksheet may help your sporting organisation work out its main purpose, so that it may accurately complete its NFP self-review return.

    MIL OSI News

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Interview – The Today Show with Karl Stefanovic and Jayne Azzopardi

    Source: Murray Darling Basin Authority

    KARL STEFANOVIC: Well, the crisis gripping Australia’s child care sector is deepening, with a second man charged in connection to an abuse investigation that led to the arrest of a Melbourne worker.

    JAYNE AZZOPARDI: The Victorian Government has announced a major crackdown which will include a phone ban inside centres. But action is needed at a national level and it is needed now. So, for more on this, we’re bringing in Federal Education Minister Jason Clare. Minister, good morning to you. You revealed yesterday that you actually know a family that has been impacted by all of this. How are they doing?

    JASON CLARE, MINISTER FOR EDUCATION: One of my best friend’s daughters is caught up in this. Two of her little girls. She’s burning with rage, as you would expect her to be, and we’ve spoken a bit over the last 48 hours. She’s angry, she’s confused, she’s feeling all of the guilt and shame and anger that any mum or dad would be feeling when you get that notification. And she’s grappling with what she needs to do now to make sure that her girls are safe. 

    This is sickening and it’s serious. It’s not the sort of stuff we like to talk about on breakfast TV. But people can’t turn away. We’ve got to act here. There’s steps that we’ve already taken, but not enough and not fast enough. One of the things that I will do as the Minister for Education, is, when the Parliament returns later this month, introduce legislation that will cut off funding to child care centres that aren’t meeting our safety standards or our quality standards. If they’re repeat offenders, if they’re not meeting the sort of safety standards that we meet, that we need and we demand as a country, then we’ve got to cut off their funding. That’s the big weapon that the Commonwealth Government has to wield here.

    STEFANOVIC: I’ll circle back to some of those things in a second. This is such a difficult case, right, and it’s difficult too, because there’s a running narrative on the side of this and they’re just charges. But there are so many families affected and, you know, one. And I was just thinking about this the other day. Jayne has kids as well, and I was just going, if that was me, I don’t know what I’d do, but I’d be baying for blood. So, to try and wrestle all those emotions around this is incredibly difficult.

    CLARE: And she is. She is. Look, it’s impossible to put yourself in that position until you’re there. I’ve got a sense of it because of the fact that it’s one of my best friends. And these are allegations put aside this individual case. There was an individual that was arrested, charged and convicted with serious acts. Australia’s worst serial paedophile was arrested for actions in child care centres in Queensland a couple of years ago. It’s what prompted me to conduct a child safety review. It’s what’s prompted the actions on mobile phones in centres, as well as mandatory reporting. But it’s also the reason why we’ve got to go further, whether that’s a national register of workers in centres or the sort of action that’s now being taken in NSW and in Victoria around CCTV. Or for that matter, the action that I will take as Minister to introduce that legislation to cut funding to centres that aren’t up to scratch. The fact is that about 70 per cent of the funding that runs the centre comes from Australian taxpayers, comes from the Commonwealth Government through the child care subsidy. It’s what makes these centres work. And if they’re not working in the interest of our kids, then we’ve got to have the power to be able to cut that funding off.

    AZZOPARDI: Minister, as a dad yourself, who would be personally paying child care centres, as we do, to look after our children and to have the expectation that they are going to be not only safe, but nurtured and nourished, do you think your Government has done enough here?

    CLARE: The honest answer is no, of course we haven’t. We haven’t done enough and we haven’t done it fast enough. 

    You’re right. One of my little guys is in child care right now. Can I use this opportunity to say thank you to all of the extraordinary child care workers, early educators across the country. They’re as angry as I am, as my friend is right now. I remember the day that we told my big guy, my 8 year old, that Louise was pregnant with his little brother. The first thing he said when we told him that he was going to be a big brother is, “I can’t wait to tell Kelly.” And Kelly is the woman that looked after him when he was in early education and care. And that reminds me that that special bond and connection that our children have with our educators. This is an essential service for mums and dads to help them get back to work. But it’s much more than that for our kids. It helps them to get ready for school, it helps them to get ready for life. Every educator out there that’s seeing this is angry and furious as well. And the responsibility rests with me as well as every other educator in the country to make sure that we make our centres safer than they are today. Not enough’s been done, more needs to be done.

    STEFANOVIC: We had a lady on just about half an hour ago saying the men at these child care centres should be banned. There are going to be all sorts of people wanting certain reforms, some of them easily done, some of them not. So, is that something that you would consider?

    CLARE: I don’t think that’s going to be the solution here. Have a look at the Four Corners exposé from earlier this year that Adele Ferguson led on. That showed abuse in our child care centres and neglect in our centres, and they weren’t blokes. We’ve had a Royal Commission, we’ve had the child care safety review that I led. We’ve got recommendations there around registers and CCTV and legislation. We know what we need to do, Karl. Now, the obligation on us is to get busy and implement these recommendations.

    STEFANOVIC: So, what’s stopping you? And I know you’re a really hardworking guy. I know you deeply feel this story, you raised the Four Corners story. When that happened, we all said, let’s change it, let’s install these reforms and let’s protect our kids. Nothing happened. So, what’s it going to be?

    CLARE: People watching aren’t interested in bloody excuses, they’re interested in action. When we got the Four Corners Report, we said we’d introduce that legislation and that’s what I’ll do when Parliament returns. The New South Wales Government also commissioned the former Deputy Ombudsman to do a review. We got that report last week and the former Deputy Ombudsman briefed Education Ministers on Friday. That’s where CCTV reform’s coming from. That’s where increasing penalties and more information for parents is coming from. We’ve got to bring all of these recommendations together. That’s happening now and we’ve got to actually do the work, we’ve got to implement them.

    AZZOPARDI: So, when parents who are watching now, what can you tell them? When will this all be in place?

    CLARE: Number one, there’s already action being taken on mobile phones. But more action will happen in September when regulations come into effect. Legislation will be introduced into the Federal Parliament when Parliament returns in the first sitting fortnight. And as I said, that’s about cutting off funding to bad actors, to people that aren’t up to scratch when it comes to the safety of our kids. And Early Education Ministers will meet again next month on the next stage of reform. 

    There’s another part to this as well, Jane, and that’s the Working With Children Checks. Not enough has been done to make sure that they work in the interest of our kids. They’re not a silver bullet because a lot of these offenders haven’t got a criminal record. So, they’re not caught by the system. But the Attorney-General has said yesterday that Attorney-Generals across the country will meet next month to make sure they work better, that there’s exchange of information, but that they’re also updated in near real-time. And Victoria and New South Wales have also announced a package of reforms. I strongly back that. We want to see that rolled out right across the country.

    STEFANOVIC: I know your pain will help motivate you to get this done. It needs to be done, pronto. There’s so much, so much at stake. Jason, thank you. And a reminder, a dedicated advice line for parents impacted in Melbourne has been established. You can call 1800 791 241. Just still rattled by all that story.

    AZZOPARDI: Completely. Completely.
     

    MIL OSI News

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Consumers warned about ‘ghost stores’ imitating Australian businesses

    Source: Australian Ministers for Regional Development

    The ACCC is warning consumers about the operators of four websites allegedly misrepresenting themselves as local businesses, also known as ‘ghost stores’.

    It is alleged these four ghost store operators are harming consumers by making false representations that they are local Australian businesses, imminently closing down, and selling high-quality clothing and footwear products, when they are instead based overseas, not imminently closing down, and are drop-shipping low-quality products.

    The ACCC has issued Public Warning Notices to warn consumers about specific conduct by the operators of the following four websites: everly-melbourne.com, willowandgrace-adelaide.com, sophie-claire.com and doublebayboutique.com.

    “We are warning Australians about the risks of engaging with these four websites specifically, which we allege are not based in Melbourne, Adelaide or Double Bay, nor are they imminently closing down,” ACCC Deputy Chair Catriona Lowe said.

    “We further allege that the operators of these websites are supplying products which are not of the advertised quality.”

    The ACCC’s Public Warning Notices follow an increased number of consumer reports to the ACCC in recent months about online ghost stores. Since the start of 2025, the ACCC estimates it has received at least 360 reports about 60 online retailers, though media reports suggest many more may be in operation.

    The ACCC is concerned that, beyond these four websites, this type of conduct appears to be widespread, and that there are many other online ghost stores in operation that may also be falsely claiming to be local boutiques and supplying poor quality products.

    The ACCC is also aware of complaints about ghost stores refusing to provide refunds, or only offering partial refunds, to consumers who have complained about the inferior quality of the goods compared to the advertised descriptions, or not responding to complaints at all.

    Ghost stores have been known to target consumers through social media ads and also tend to close and rebrand under new names, often using different Australian suburbs, towns or cities in their names to appear ‘local’. 

    “We urge all Australians to think twice before clicking on ads they see on social media which claim to be from a boutique business based in a local town or city,” Ms Lowe said.

    “Often ghost stores will share an emotional story on their social media or website that they are a small, locally operated business, needing to close for financial reasons.”

    “They will claim they are having a ‘closing down sale’ as a result, with all stock heavily discounted and available on a very limited basis,” Ms Lowe said.

    “This conduct preys on the empathy of consumers who have a genuine desire to support local businesses, as well as creating a false sense of urgency.”

    “The websites often use a similar format to many other online stores, advertising high-quality boutique clothing at heavily discounted prices. However, when the product arrives in the mail, consumers report receiving cheap, mass-produced products that have been sold at an inflated price and do not fit their advertised quality or description,” Ms Lowe said.

    Ghost stores sometimes use a name that is similar to that of a genuine local boutique, leading to competitive and reputational harm for those businesses.

    The ACCC understands ghost stores use targeted paid advertisements on social media sites such as Facebook and Instagram and often appear to use the Shopify e-commerce platform to host and operate their webstores.

    “We have written to both Meta Platforms (as the owner of Facebook and Instagram) and Shopify to request they scrutinise and take appropriate action against the operators of ghost stores,” Ms Lowe said.

    “We want to increase public awareness of these dishonest businesses so that Australians know how to spot them and can avoid being deceived into buying an inferior product.”

    Signs that an online business could be a ghost store

    • The store may have an Australian place in its name or domain, but the website domain is ‘.com’ and not ‘.com.au’.
    • The website for the store often features a fake backstory relating to the owners and claims that, for financial or other reasons, the store is closing down. Advertisements on social media platforms, including Facebook or Instagram, will often claim that the closing down sale ‘ends tonight’.
    • Use of AI generated images of the owners or team. This can sometimes be indicated in the URL.
    • The returns policy on the website for the store will often suggest that items will need to be returned to a warehouse or general location overseas which is different from where the items are allegedly shipped from, for example, a store that claims to be based in Melbourne but requires returns to be sent to a warehouse in Asia.
    • The website does not provide a contact phone number or physical address for the store, or indeed any contact details beyond an email address or web form.
    • The website’s Privacy Policy or Terms of Service refers to international laws and regulations instead of Australian laws.
    • The website does not provide an ABN (Australian Business Number) or ACN (Australian Company Number) for the business.
    • Review platforms, like Trustpilot, often have negative reviews for the business, whereas the business’ website only features very positive reviews.
    • The business’ Facebook page was only created recently and has negative reviews or lots of negative emoji reactions to its posts.
    • The images of the products may be taken from other websites where the products are advertised under different descriptions and for much lower prices. 

    Tips to help determine if an online store is genuine or not

    The ACCC is urging consumers to check the business name on the Australian Business Register lookup and to use reverse image or ‘Google Lens’ searches of product photos on the website to see if they have been taken from another site.

    Consumers should also check if the store is listed in a local business directory for the location the store claims to be in, or to look for the business name in a search engine and read reviews from other consumers.

    Don’t just rely on the reviews on the business’ website as these may not be legitimate. Make further inquiries and if in doubt, do not purchase from the retailer.

    What to do if you have purchased something from a ghost store

    Consumers should contact their bank or payment provider immediately to see if you can stop the transaction or reverse the charge.

    Consumers can also leave a negative review on the business’ Facebook page or a review site like Trustpilot.

    Where consumers have accessed the websites via social media ads they can make a complaint directly to the relevant platform. For example, complaints can be made to Facebook, and should include a screenshot of the store ad and/or page, and if the website is hosted by Shopify, the merchant can be reported.  

    The website can be reported to Google to have it delisted, and a report can also be made to the ACCC. Consumers can also report websites to ScamWatch.

    Screenshots of the websites referred to in the Public Warning Notices

    Background

    Consumer and fair-trading concerns in the supermarket and retail sectors, with a focus on misleading pricing practices, are a compliance and enforcement priority for the ACCC in 2025-26.

    In addition to the conduct outlined above, consumer reports to the ACCC suggest that, when approached, ghost stores do not honour their returns policy and either stop responding to emails or offer only a partial refund.

    In some cases, a partial refund is offered but only if the item is shipped back to an overseas warehouse at the consumer’s expense.

    Note to editors

    The ACCC may issue a Public Warning Notice to warn consumers about the conduct of a person or business where it has reasonable grounds to suspect a breach of certain provisions of the Australian Consumer Law, and it is satisfied that one or more persons has suffered, or is likely to suffer, detriment as a result of the conduct, and that it is in the public interest to issue the notice.

    MIL OSI News

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Interview – Sunrise with Natalie Barr

    Source: Murray Darling Basin Authority

    NATALIE BARR: Australia has been dealt a horrific wake up call this morning that the rules and the regulations we thought were protecting our children are just not good enough. It follows revelations of horrific alleged crimes against children across several childcare centres in Victoria. 

    More than 2,000 families have been affected by this. Now our leaders are finally acting, but it follows years and years of experts, advocates and government bodies calling for change. 

    Education Minister Jason Clare joins us live in Sydney now. Our youngest, our most vulnerable Australians have been failed. What are you doing right now to fix this? 

    JASON CLARE, MINISTER FOR EDUCATION: The truth is, Nat, you’re right. This has taken too long for governments to act. This is sickening and it’s serious, it demands serious action. We’ve already taken action around mobile phones in child care centres and mandatory reporting, but there’s more that we have to do. There’s a lot more that we have to do. 

    When Parliament returns later this month I’ll introduce a piece of legislation in the first sitting fortnight that will cut off funding to child care centres that aren’t up to scratch when it comes to the safety of our children. 

    The big weapon that the Federal Government has to wield here is the funding that we provide to child care centres. It equates to about 70 per cent of the funding that runs a centre, and if they’re not keeping our kids safe then we need to cut off their funding. 

    There’s got to be consequences for this sort of bad behaviour when centres don’t look after our kids properly. 

    BARR: Yeah, there should be. We spent millions and millions of dollars on a Royal Commission in 2015. That recommended a national working with children scheme, it recommended a national Federal office, it recommended a national register for childcare workers. That was 10 years ago. Has the government failed these families? 

    CLARE: The system has failed these families. If the allegations are proved to be true then the system has failed these families. 

    BARR: But what is the system? Because there’s a Royal Commission, it outlines all this, it gets all the experts, our taxpayers’ money pays for it, Jason, and it gives it ‑ hands with a bow to the government. And says, “This is what you guys need to do”. 

    CLARE: Correct. 

    BARR: And look where we are today. 

    CLARE: Correct, and the implementation of those reforms has taken too bloody long, and they need to be accelerated. That’s why I’ve said we need to implement a register for educators in child care centres. It’s why we need to fix the working with children checks. That’s work that’s being led by Attorney‑Generals, but it needs to be sped up. 

    There’s no point in making excuses here, Nat. The families of these kids aren’t interested in excuses. One of these families is a friend of mine. I know how they’re feeling because they’ve rung me and told me, and I can’t repeat on television what they said to me because there’s kids watching. But this is serious, and I’m determined to act. 

    It’s a complicated system, but people watching aren’t interested in bloody excuses. They’re interested in action. And that’s what Education Ministers must take. 

    BARR: Okay. Two years ago under your Government the Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority, a national independent body, issued a warning. They said they were concerned over “the level of vetting being undertaken pre‑employment”. Why didn’t you act on that? 

    CLARE: I commissioned that agency to conduct a review of child safety and I did that after a paedophile was arrested and convicted in Queensland. You’ll remember that case. That’s what led to a number of reforms around mobile phones and mandatory reporting. But there’s a whole bunch of recommendations there that need to be implemented. 

    The key point here to make, Nat, whether we’re talking about that or whether we’re talking about working with children checks or anything else, is there’s no silver bullet here. This work will never be done. There will always be people that will try to break through the net and try to get into the system. And we’ve also always got to work on making sure that we find ways to keep them out and keep our kids safe. 

    Now not enough has been done, and not enough has been done fast enough here. But I can tell you that I’m determined to act. That’s why I put this on the agenda of Education Ministers last week and we agreed that because of what’s happening in Victoria, but also what’s happening in New South Wales after the Four Corners exposé earlier this year, and what’s happened in Queensland, that we need to bring together all of these recommendations and implement them. 

    BARR: Okay. The phone ban. You’re talking about the phone ban now, but this was brought in nationally last July, wasn’t it? Victoria is only getting centres to implement it from this September. It’s voluntary and there’ll be fines. That’s a long time between last July and this September. 

    CLARE: Too long. The short answer to that is too long. The ban was put in the National Code in last July. Most centres have implemented it. The tortuous nature of the system means it needs to be put into regulations that happen in a couple of months time, and Victoria is making sure that that happens sooner than that. 

    But all of the advice that we’ve received from ACECQA, and other experts is you’ve got to get the personal mobile phones and any digital devices that workers have out of the centre. The only photographs that you should receive of your children from the centre should be from the authorised centre owned camera or phone. That was the advice that we got. We got it for a reason, Nat, and we’re implementing it. 

    BARR: Yep, okay. Still a massive amount of work to be done. Expanding and strengthening those working with children checks, the registers. We’re going to keep on it. Thank you very much. Thanks Jason. 

    CLARE: Thanks Nat.

    MIL OSI News

  • Pakistan doesn’t impinge on India-US ties: EAM Jaishankar

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar on Wednesday dismissed suggestions that Pakistan has any bearing on India’s ties with the United States, asserting that the relationship stands on its own merit and is not defined by third countries.

    Addressing a press conference in Washington, Jaishankar said, “I would really urge you to get over the idea that we need to define ourselves regarding third countries in order to forge ahead in ties with Washington,” Jaishankar told reporters.

    “Big relationships are not forged in terms of third countries and where they fit,” he emphasised, responding to a question on whether Pakistan’s role has changed India-US ties.

    “The central factor in the relationship between India and the US is India and the US. It is our complementarity. In many ways, it is the benefits that we get from closer relationship that is actually driving it,” he said.

    Jaishankar underlined that India’s growing global stature demands greater self-assurance when engaging major partners. “We are a big country. We are among the top five economies of the world. We are the most populous country in the world. Our influence is growing,” he said. “We must have that confidence.”

    The foreign minister said that ties with the US have progressed on substantive issues that bring mutual benefit. “It’s about trade. It is about investment. It is about technology. It is about mobility. It is about energy,” he said.

    On former US President Donald Trump’s claim that he brokered the ceasefire between India and Pakistan after Operation Sindoor, Jaishankar said: “The record of what happened was very clear.”

    “The ceasefire was something that was negotiated between the DGMOs” — Directors General of Military Operations Lieutenant General Rajiv Ghai of India and Major General Kashif Abdullah of Pakistan — “I’d leave it at that,” he said.

    Jaishankar is in Washington for the Quad Ministerial meeting with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the Foreign Ministers of Australia and Japan. The Quad Ministers condemned the Pahalgam massacre carried out by The Resistance Front, linked to the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Toiba.

    On the sidelines, Jaishankar held separate meetings with Secretary Rubio, US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth and Energy Secretary Chris Wright.

    “We essentially did a stock-taking of the last six months. And, you know, what do we do to go, a look ahead,” Jaishankar said on his talks with Rubio. “This included a discussion on trade and investment, on technology, on defence and security, on energy and on mobility.”

    Defence and energy ties warranted dedicated meetings with Hegseth and Wright, the Minister added.

    IANS

  • Pakistan doesn’t impinge on India-US ties: EAM Jaishankar

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar on Wednesday dismissed suggestions that Pakistan has any bearing on India’s ties with the United States, asserting that the relationship stands on its own merit and is not defined by third countries.

    Addressing a press conference in Washington, Jaishankar said, “I would really urge you to get over the idea that we need to define ourselves regarding third countries in order to forge ahead in ties with Washington,” Jaishankar told reporters.

    “Big relationships are not forged in terms of third countries and where they fit,” he emphasised, responding to a question on whether Pakistan’s role has changed India-US ties.

    “The central factor in the relationship between India and the US is India and the US. It is our complementarity. In many ways, it is the benefits that we get from closer relationship that is actually driving it,” he said.

    Jaishankar underlined that India’s growing global stature demands greater self-assurance when engaging major partners. “We are a big country. We are among the top five economies of the world. We are the most populous country in the world. Our influence is growing,” he said. “We must have that confidence.”

    The foreign minister said that ties with the US have progressed on substantive issues that bring mutual benefit. “It’s about trade. It is about investment. It is about technology. It is about mobility. It is about energy,” he said.

    On former US President Donald Trump’s claim that he brokered the ceasefire between India and Pakistan after Operation Sindoor, Jaishankar said: “The record of what happened was very clear.”

    “The ceasefire was something that was negotiated between the DGMOs” — Directors General of Military Operations Lieutenant General Rajiv Ghai of India and Major General Kashif Abdullah of Pakistan — “I’d leave it at that,” he said.

    Jaishankar is in Washington for the Quad Ministerial meeting with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the Foreign Ministers of Australia and Japan. The Quad Ministers condemned the Pahalgam massacre carried out by The Resistance Front, linked to the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Toiba.

    On the sidelines, Jaishankar held separate meetings with Secretary Rubio, US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth and Energy Secretary Chris Wright.

    “We essentially did a stock-taking of the last six months. And, you know, what do we do to go, a look ahead,” Jaishankar said on his talks with Rubio. “This included a discussion on trade and investment, on technology, on defence and security, on energy and on mobility.”

    Defence and energy ties warranted dedicated meetings with Hegseth and Wright, the Minister added.

    IANS

  • Normality returns to Wimbledon as Alcaraz and Sabalenka ease through

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Carlos Alcaraz, Aryna Sabalenka and the end of London’s tropical heatwave ensured that a sense of normality returned to the lawns of Wimbledon on Wednesday after two sweat-soaked days of shocks, although Jasmine Paolini’s exit meant the surprises did not end.

    A stream of big names including Coco Gauff, Jessica Pegula, Alexander Zverev and Daniil Medvedev crashed and burned in the oven-like temperatures of the first round.

    So when Alcaraz walked on Centre Court to continue his bid for a third successive Wimbledon title against British qualifier Oliver Tarvet, the thought surely lurked somewhere in his mind that he could be the fall-guy in the event’s greatest upset.

    The 22-year-old second seed was not at his best but after saving three break points in a nervy first service game against a college student ranked 733rd in the world, he asserted his authority to win 6-1 6-4 6-4.

    Earlier on Centre Court, women’s top seed Sabalenka battled to a 7-6(4) 6-4 win against Czech Marie Bouzkova.

    “Honestly, it is sad to see so many upsets in the tournament, in both draws, women’s and men’s,” said Sabalenka, who is bidding for her first Wimbledon title.

    “I’m just trying to focus on myself… I hope there are no more upsets in this tournament.”

    That was not to be, as last year’s runner-up Paolini joined the mass exodus of fancied players when she crashed out 4-6 6-4 6-4 against Russian Kamilla Rakhimova.

    However, Australian Open champion Madison Keys, the sixth seed, made it safely into round three by beating Olga Danilovic 6-4 6-2 while unseeded four-time Grand Slam champion Naomi Osaka eased past Czech doubles specialist Katerina Siniakova 6-3 6-2.

    Lower temperatures did not necessarily mean more comfortable outings as world number 12 Frances Tiafoe became the 14th of the 32 men’s seeds to fall, losing 4-6 6-4 6-3 7-5 against Cameron Norrie, one of seven Britons in singles action on day three.

    The American was joined later on by Czech 23rd seed Jiri Lehecka, last month’s Queen’s Club Championships runner-up, who fell 7-6(4) 6-1 7-5 to Italian Mattia Bellucci.

    HOME CHARGE

    Ashlyn Krueger, the American 31st seed, was then beaten 7-6(4) 6-4 by Russian Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova, ensuring 15 of the 32 women’s seeds also went out of the tournament.

    Sonay Kartal led the home charge by defeating Bulgaria’s Viktoriya Tomova 6-2 6-2 to book her place in the last 32 for the second year in succession while the nation’s big hope Emma Raducanu got past 2023 champion Marketa Vondrousova 6-3 6-3.

    There was disappointment for Britain’s Katie Boulter, who served 14 double faults as she crashed 6-7(9) 6-2 6-1 to 101st-ranked Solana Sierra, the Argentine who lost in qualifying but has seized her lucky loser spot with both hands.

    Alcaraz, bidding to do the French Open-Wimbledon double for the second successive year, needed five sets to get past Italian veteran Fabio Fognini in the opening round and set up an intriguing clash with 21-year-old Tarvet.

    Tarvet, who plays on the U.S. collegiate circuit for the University of San Diego, said he believed he could beat anyone, even Alcaraz, after winning his Grand Slam debut match against fellow qualifier Leandro Riedi of Switzerland on Monday.

    He was clearly not overawed at sharing a court with a five-times major champion and had he taken any of the eight break points he earned in the first set it could have been closer.

    Alcaraz proved a step too far though as he moved through the gears when required to keep an eager Tarvet under control.

    Just as the Spaniard did in his first round when going to the aid of a female spectator suffering in the heat, Alcaraz again endeared himself to the Centre Court crowd.

    “First of all I have to give a big congratulations to Oliver, it’s his second match on the tour. I just loved his game to be honest, the level he played,” Alcaraz said.

    Play on courts without roofs was delayed for two hours by light morning rain but once the clouds rolled away the place to be for fans without showcourt tickets was Court 12 for Brazilian teenager Joao Fonseca’s match against American Jenson Brooksby.

    The 18-year-old is widely tipped as a future challenger to the domination of Alcaraz and Jannik Sinner and he showed why during a 6-2 5-7 6-2 6-4 win that was celebrated by a large contingent of exuberant Brazilians.

    Andrey Rublev, who suffered a bruising loss to Fonseca in the Australian Open first round earlier this year, battled past Lloyd Harris 6-7 6-4 7-6 6-3 before Taylor Fritz closed out the day with a 3-6 6-3 7-6(0) 4-6 6-3 win over Gabriel Diallo.

    -Reuters

  • Normality returns to Wimbledon as Alcaraz and Sabalenka ease through

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Carlos Alcaraz, Aryna Sabalenka and the end of London’s tropical heatwave ensured that a sense of normality returned to the lawns of Wimbledon on Wednesday after two sweat-soaked days of shocks, although Jasmine Paolini’s exit meant the surprises did not end.

    A stream of big names including Coco Gauff, Jessica Pegula, Alexander Zverev and Daniil Medvedev crashed and burned in the oven-like temperatures of the first round.

    So when Alcaraz walked on Centre Court to continue his bid for a third successive Wimbledon title against British qualifier Oliver Tarvet, the thought surely lurked somewhere in his mind that he could be the fall-guy in the event’s greatest upset.

    The 22-year-old second seed was not at his best but after saving three break points in a nervy first service game against a college student ranked 733rd in the world, he asserted his authority to win 6-1 6-4 6-4.

    Earlier on Centre Court, women’s top seed Sabalenka battled to a 7-6(4) 6-4 win against Czech Marie Bouzkova.

    “Honestly, it is sad to see so many upsets in the tournament, in both draws, women’s and men’s,” said Sabalenka, who is bidding for her first Wimbledon title.

    “I’m just trying to focus on myself… I hope there are no more upsets in this tournament.”

    That was not to be, as last year’s runner-up Paolini joined the mass exodus of fancied players when she crashed out 4-6 6-4 6-4 against Russian Kamilla Rakhimova.

    However, Australian Open champion Madison Keys, the sixth seed, made it safely into round three by beating Olga Danilovic 6-4 6-2 while unseeded four-time Grand Slam champion Naomi Osaka eased past Czech doubles specialist Katerina Siniakova 6-3 6-2.

    Lower temperatures did not necessarily mean more comfortable outings as world number 12 Frances Tiafoe became the 14th of the 32 men’s seeds to fall, losing 4-6 6-4 6-3 7-5 against Cameron Norrie, one of seven Britons in singles action on day three.

    The American was joined later on by Czech 23rd seed Jiri Lehecka, last month’s Queen’s Club Championships runner-up, who fell 7-6(4) 6-1 7-5 to Italian Mattia Bellucci.

    HOME CHARGE

    Ashlyn Krueger, the American 31st seed, was then beaten 7-6(4) 6-4 by Russian Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova, ensuring 15 of the 32 women’s seeds also went out of the tournament.

    Sonay Kartal led the home charge by defeating Bulgaria’s Viktoriya Tomova 6-2 6-2 to book her place in the last 32 for the second year in succession while the nation’s big hope Emma Raducanu got past 2023 champion Marketa Vondrousova 6-3 6-3.

    There was disappointment for Britain’s Katie Boulter, who served 14 double faults as she crashed 6-7(9) 6-2 6-1 to 101st-ranked Solana Sierra, the Argentine who lost in qualifying but has seized her lucky loser spot with both hands.

    Alcaraz, bidding to do the French Open-Wimbledon double for the second successive year, needed five sets to get past Italian veteran Fabio Fognini in the opening round and set up an intriguing clash with 21-year-old Tarvet.

    Tarvet, who plays on the U.S. collegiate circuit for the University of San Diego, said he believed he could beat anyone, even Alcaraz, after winning his Grand Slam debut match against fellow qualifier Leandro Riedi of Switzerland on Monday.

    He was clearly not overawed at sharing a court with a five-times major champion and had he taken any of the eight break points he earned in the first set it could have been closer.

    Alcaraz proved a step too far though as he moved through the gears when required to keep an eager Tarvet under control.

    Just as the Spaniard did in his first round when going to the aid of a female spectator suffering in the heat, Alcaraz again endeared himself to the Centre Court crowd.

    “First of all I have to give a big congratulations to Oliver, it’s his second match on the tour. I just loved his game to be honest, the level he played,” Alcaraz said.

    Play on courts without roofs was delayed for two hours by light morning rain but once the clouds rolled away the place to be for fans without showcourt tickets was Court 12 for Brazilian teenager Joao Fonseca’s match against American Jenson Brooksby.

    The 18-year-old is widely tipped as a future challenger to the domination of Alcaraz and Jannik Sinner and he showed why during a 6-2 5-7 6-2 6-4 win that was celebrated by a large contingent of exuberant Brazilians.

    Andrey Rublev, who suffered a bruising loss to Fonseca in the Australian Open first round earlier this year, battled past Lloyd Harris 6-7 6-4 7-6 6-3 before Taylor Fritz closed out the day with a 3-6 6-3 7-6(0) 4-6 6-3 win over Gabriel Diallo.

    -Reuters

  • Pakistan doesn’t impinge on India-US ties: Jaishankar

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar on Wednesday dismissed suggestions that Pakistan has any bearing on India’s ties with the United States, asserting that the relationship stands on its own merit and is not defined by third countries.

    Addressing a press conference in Washington, Jaishankar said, “I would really urge you to get over the idea that we need to define ourselves regarding third countries in order to forge ahead in ties with Washington,” Jaishankar told reporters.

    “Big relationships are not forged in terms of third countries and where they fit,” he emphasised, responding to a question on whether Pakistan’s role has changed India-US ties.

    “The central factor in the relationship between India and the US is India and the US. It is our complementarity. In many ways, it is the benefits that we get from closer relationship that is actually driving it,” he said.

    Jaishankar underlined that India’s growing global stature demands greater self-assurance when engaging major partners. “We are a big country. We are among the top five economies of the world. We are the most populous country in the world. Our influence is growing,” he said. “We must have that confidence.”

    The foreign minister said that ties with the US have progressed on substantive issues that bring mutual benefit. “It’s about trade. It is about investment. It is about technology. It is about mobility. It is about energy,” he said.

    On former US President Donald Trump’s claim that he brokered the ceasefire between India and Pakistan after Operation Sindoor, Jaishankar said: “The record of what happened was very clear.”

    “The ceasefire was something that was negotiated between the DGMOs” — Directors General of Military Operations Lieutenant General Rajiv Ghai of India and Major General Kashif Abdullah of Pakistan — “I’d leave it at that,” he said.

    Jaishankar is in Washington for the Quad Ministerial meeting with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the Foreign Ministers of Australia and Japan. The Quad Ministers condemned the Pahalgam massacre carried out by The Resistance Front, linked to the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Toiba.

    On the sidelines, Jaishankar held separate meetings with Secretary Rubio, US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth and Energy Secretary Chris Wright.

    “We essentially did a stock-taking of the last six months. And, you know, what do we do to go, a look ahead,” Jaishankar said on his talks with Rubio. “This included a discussion on trade and investment, on technology, on defence and security, on energy and on mobility.”

    Defence and energy ties warranted dedicated meetings with Hegseth and Wright, the Minister added.

    IANS