The Gaza Government Media Office has condemned “in the strongest terms” Israel’s storming of the Handala aid ship, calling it an act of “maritime piracy”, reports Al Jazeera.
“This blatant aggression represents a flagrant violation of international law and maritime navigation rules,” the office said in a statement.
“It reaffirms once again that the [illegal Israeli] occupation acts as a thuggish force outside the law, targeting every humanitarian initiative seeking to rescue more than 2.4 million besieged and starving Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.”
The office also called on the international community, including the United Nations and rights groups, “to take an urgent and firm stance against this aggression and to work to secure international protection for the convoys”.
Israel’s Foreign Ministry confirmed in a statement today that the Israeli navy had intercepted the Gaza-bound Handala, and it was now heading towards Israel.
“The Israeli navy has stopped the vessel Navarn from illegally entering the maritime zone of the coast of Gaza,” said the statement, using the aid ship’s original name.
“The vessel is safely making its way to the shores of Israel,” it added. “All passengers are safe.”
Freedom Flotilla slams ‘abductions’ A statement by the Freedom Flotilla Coalition accused Israel military of “abducting” the 21 crew members of the Handala, saying the ship had been “violently intercepted by the Israeli military in international waters about 40 nautical miles from Gaza.
“At 23:43 EEST Palestine time, the Occupation cut the cameras on board Handala and we have lost all communication with our ship.
“The unarmed boat was carrying life-saving supplies when it was boarded by Israeli forces, its passengers abducted, and its cargo seized.
“The interception occurred in international waters outside Palestinian territorial waters off Gaza, in violation of international maritime law.”
The Handala carried a shipment of critical humanitarian aid for Palestinians in Gaza, including baby formula, diapers, food, and medicine, the statement said.
“All cargo was non-military, civilian, and intended for direct distribution to a population facing deliberate starvation and medical collapse under Israel’s illegal blockade.”
The Handala carried 21 civilians representing 12 countries, including parliamentarians, lawyers, journalists, labour organisers, environmentalists, and other human rights defenders.
Seized crew members, journalists The seized crew includes:
United States: Christian Smalls — Amazon Labor Union founder; Huwaida Arraf — Human rights attorney (Palestine/US); Jacob Berger — Jewish-American activist; Bob Suberi — Jewish US war veteran; Braedon Peluso — sailor and direct action activist; Dr Frank Romano — International lawyer and actor (France/US).
France: Emma Fourreau — MEP and activist (France/Sweden); Gabrielle Cathala — Parliamentarian and former humanitarian worker; Justine Kempf — nurse, Médecins du Monde; Ange Sahuquet — engineer and human rights activist.
Italy: Antonio Mazzeo — teacher, peace researcher, journalist; Antonio “Tony” La Picirella — climate and social justice organiser.
Spain: Santiago González Vallejo — economist and activist; Sergio Toribio — engineer and environmentalist.
Australia: Robert Martin — human rights activist; Tania “Tan” Safi — Journalist and organiser of Lebanese descent.
United Kingdom/France: Chloé Fiona Ludden — former UN staff and scientist.
Tunisia: Hatem Aouini — Trade unionist and internationalist activist.
The two journalists on board:
Morocco: Mohamed El Bakkali — senior journalist with Al Jazeera (based in Paris).
Iraq/United States: Waad Al Musa — cameraman and field reporter with Al Jazeera.
The attack on Handala is the third violent act by Israeli forces against Freedom Flotilla missions this year alone, said the statement.
“It follows the drone bombing of the civilian aid ship Conscience in European waters in May, which injured four people and disabled the vessel, and the illegal seizure of the Madleen in June, where Israeli forces abducted 12 civilians, including a Member of the European Parliament.
“Shortly before their abduction, the Handala‘s crew affirmed that they would be hunger-striking if detained by Israeli forces and not accepting any food from the Israeli Occupation Forces.”
Israeli officials have ignored the International Court of Justice’s binding orders that require the facilitation of humanitarian access to Gaza.
The continued attacks on peaceful civilian missions represent a grave violation of international law, said the Freedom Flotilla Coalition.
“Kia Ora Gaza is a longtime member of the Freedom Flotilla Coalition and supports the current Handala civil mission to break Israel’s illegal siege of Gaza and end Israel’s campaign to wipe out the Palestinian population.
“All governments must urgently take strong effective action to stop the genocide and occupation and end all complicity with Israel. There are no Kiwis on the Handala which was intercepted under an enforced communications blackout today.”
Activists on board the Handala aid ship before leaving Italy’s Gallipoli Port on July 20, 2025. Image: Valeria Ferraro/Anadolu
ER Report: Here is a summary of significant articles published on EveningReport.nz on July 27, 2025.
Handala freedom ship loaded with Gaza aid bracing for Israeli forces Asia Pacific Report An activist on board the Handala, a Gaza Freedom Flotilla ship carrying aid to the besieged enclave in a bid to break Israel’s blockade, says the crew are preparing themselves for the possibility of Israeli forces storming the vessel. Jacob Berger, an actor from the US, made the comments to Al Jazeera
ER Report: Here is a summary of significant articles published on EveningReport.nz on July 26, 2025.
Gaza: Global community must act amid reports of starvation of journalists, says IPI By Jamie Wiseman The International Press Institute (IPI) has joined calls for urgent action to halt the unfolding humanitarian crisis in Gaza as global news organisations warn that their journalists there are experiencing starvation. Israel must immediately allow life-saving food aid to reach journalists and other civilians in Gaza, IPI said in a statement today.
Caitlin Johnstone: It’s a genocide, but it’s also so much more than that Report by Dr David Robie – Café Pacific. – COMMENTARY: By Caitlin Johnstone The mass atrocity in Gaza is a genocide, obviously, and is an undisguised ethnic cleansing operation. But it’s also a lot more than that. It’s an experiment — to see what kinds of abuses the public will accept without causing significant disruption
Leaked document reveals proposed law revisions in NZ, as Western defence of Zionist genocide threatens Pacific SPECIAL REPORT: By Mick Hall A leaked document has revealed secretive plans to revise terror laws in New Zealand so that people can be charged over statements deemed to constitute material support for a proscribed organisation. It shows the government also wants to widen the criteria for proscribing organisations to include groups that are judged
Ceasefire talks collapse – what does that mean for the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza? Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ali Mamouri, Research Fellow, Middle East Studies, Deakin University Efforts to end the relentless siege of Gaza have been set back by the abrupt end to peace talks in Qatar. Both the United States and Israel have withdrawn their negotiating teams, accusing Hamas of a “lack of
As oceans warm, tropical fish are moving south. New friendships may be helping them survive Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Angus Mitchell, Postdoctoral Researcher in Marine Ecology, University of Adelaide Angus Mitchell When you think about climate change in our oceans, you may picture coral bleaching, melting sea ice, or extreme weather events. But beneath the ocean’s surface, another quiet shift is underway. Australia’s tropical fish are
As oceans warm, tropical fish are moving south. New friendships may be helping them survive Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Angus Mitchell, Postdoctoral Researcher in Marine Ecology, University of Adelaide Angus Mitchell When you think about climate change in our oceans, you may picture coral bleaching, melting sea ice, or extreme weather events. But beneath the ocean’s surface, another quiet shift is underway. Australia’s tropical fish are
What is chikungunya virus, and should we be worried about it in Australia? Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jacqueline Stephens, Associate Professor in Public Health, Flinders University Noppharat05081977/Getty Images This week, the World Health Organization (WHO) raised concerns about a surge in the number of cases of a mosquito-borne viral infection called chikungunya. Diana Rojas Alvarez, a medical officer at the WHO, highlighted an outbreak
What makes a song ‘Australian’? Triple J’s Hottest 100 reignites a bigger question of national identity Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Catherine Strong, Associate Professor, Music Industry, RMIT University On July 26, Triple J will broadcast the Hottest 100 Australian Songs, as voted by the public. While predictions for winners and even preemptive complaining about the shortlist are taking up column space and social media posts, there is
ER Report: Here is a summary of significant articles published on EveningReport.nz on July 26, 2025.
Gaza: Global community must act amid reports of starvation of journalists, says IPI By Jamie Wiseman The International Press Institute (IPI) has joined calls for urgent action to halt the unfolding humanitarian crisis in Gaza as global news organisations warn that their journalists there are experiencing starvation. Israel must immediately allow life-saving food aid to reach journalists and other civilians in Gaza, IPI said in a statement today.
Caitlin Johnstone: It’s a genocide, but it’s also so much more than that Report by Dr David Robie – Café Pacific. – COMMENTARY: By Caitlin Johnstone The mass atrocity in Gaza is a genocide, obviously, and is an undisguised ethnic cleansing operation. But it’s also a lot more than that. It’s an experiment — to see what kinds of abuses the public will accept without causing significant disruption
Leaked document reveals proposed law revisions in NZ, as Western defence of Zionist genocide threatens Pacific SPECIAL REPORT: By Mick Hall A leaked document has revealed secretive plans to revise terror laws in New Zealand so that people can be charged over statements deemed to constitute material support for a proscribed organisation. It shows the government also wants to widen the criteria for proscribing organisations to include groups that are judged
Ceasefire talks collapse – what does that mean for the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza? Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ali Mamouri, Research Fellow, Middle East Studies, Deakin University Efforts to end the relentless siege of Gaza have been set back by the abrupt end to peace talks in Qatar. Both the United States and Israel have withdrawn their negotiating teams, accusing Hamas of a “lack of
As oceans warm, tropical fish are moving south. New friendships may be helping them survive Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Angus Mitchell, Postdoctoral Researcher in Marine Ecology, University of Adelaide Angus Mitchell When you think about climate change in our oceans, you may picture coral bleaching, melting sea ice, or extreme weather events. But beneath the ocean’s surface, another quiet shift is underway. Australia’s tropical fish are
As oceans warm, tropical fish are moving south. New friendships may be helping them survive Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Angus Mitchell, Postdoctoral Researcher in Marine Ecology, University of Adelaide Angus Mitchell When you think about climate change in our oceans, you may picture coral bleaching, melting sea ice, or extreme weather events. But beneath the ocean’s surface, another quiet shift is underway. Australia’s tropical fish are
What is chikungunya virus, and should we be worried about it in Australia? Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jacqueline Stephens, Associate Professor in Public Health, Flinders University Noppharat05081977/Getty Images This week, the World Health Organization (WHO) raised concerns about a surge in the number of cases of a mosquito-borne viral infection called chikungunya. Diana Rojas Alvarez, a medical officer at the WHO, highlighted an outbreak
What makes a song ‘Australian’? Triple J’s Hottest 100 reignites a bigger question of national identity Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Catherine Strong, Associate Professor, Music Industry, RMIT University On July 26, Triple J will broadcast the Hottest 100 Australian Songs, as voted by the public. While predictions for winners and even preemptive complaining about the shortlist are taking up column space and social media posts, there is
The International Press Institute (IPI) has joined calls for urgent action to halt the unfolding humanitarian crisis in Gaza as global news organisations warn that their journalists there are experiencing starvation.
Israel must immediately allow life-saving food aid to reach journalists and other civilians in Gaza, IPI said in a statement today.
“The international community must also put effective pressure on Israel to allow all journalists to enter and exit the territory and to document the ongoing catastrophe,”it said.
In an unprecedented joint statement this week, the Associated Press, Agence France-Presse, BBC News, and Reuters — four of the world’s leading news agencies — said their journalists on the ground “are increasingly unable to feed themselves and their families”.
The news outlets added: “Journalists endure many deprivations and hardships in warzones. We are deeply alarmed that the threat of starvation is now one of them.”
Separately, Al Jazeera Media Network said in a statement that journalists on the ground “now find themselves fighting for their own survival” due to mass starvation.
Harrowing accounts AFP and Al Jazeera journalists shared harrowing accounts of conditions on the ground.
One AFP photographer was quoted as saying, “I no longer have the strength to work for the media. My body is thin and I can’t work anymore.”
Al Jazeera Arabic’s Gaza correspondent said he was “drowning in hunger”.
In an interview with NPR, AFP global news director Phil Chetwynd said that the news agency had been working to evacuate its remaining contributors from Gaza, which requires Israeli permission.
The dramatic warnings come as more than 100 international humanitarian organisations said that mass starvation in Gaza was now threatening the lives of humanitarian aid workers themselves, while the civilian death toll continues to rise.
Gaza under siege — a journalist reports on daily survival Video: Al Jazeera
Meanwhile, Israel continues to refuse to allow international reporters into Gaza to report and cover the war and humanitarian situation independently, obstructing the free flow of news and limiting coverage of the humanitarian crisis.
The ongoing conflict has taken a devastating toll on journalists and media outlets in Gaza.
Highest media death toll Since October 2023, at least 186 journalists and media workers have been killed in Gaza — Al Jazeera puts the figure as at least 230 — the West Bank, Israel, and Lebanon, according to monitoring by the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ).
This is the largest number of journalists to be killed in any armed conflict in this span of time.
Independent investigations such as those conducted by Forbidden Storieshave found more than a dozen cases in which journalists were intentionally targeted and killed by the Israeli military — which constitutes a war crime under international law.
IPI has made repeated calls, in conjunction with its partners, urging the international community to take immediate measures to protect journalists and allow unimpeded access to the strip from international media.
Today, IPI has strongly and urgently reiterated these calls, as humanitarian conditions in Gaza rapidly deteriorate and as journalists and other civilians face man-made starvation.
The international community must use all diplomatic means at its disposal to pressure Israel to ensure the safe flow of food aid to journalists and other civilians, said IPI in a statement.
“The response by the international community in this critical moment could be the difference between life and death. There is no more time to lose,” IPI said.
Jamie Wiseman is a journalist of the Vienna-based International Press Institute.
The International Press Institute (IPI) has joined calls for urgent action to halt the unfolding humanitarian crisis in Gaza as global news organisations warn that their journalists there are experiencing starvation.
Israel must immediately allow life-saving food aid to reach journalists and other civilians in Gaza, IPI said in a statement today.
“The international community must also put effective pressure on Israel to allow all journalists to enter and exit the territory and to document the ongoing catastrophe,”it said.
In an unprecedented joint statement this week, the Associated Press, Agence France-Presse, BBC News, and Reuters — four of the world’s leading news agencies — said their journalists on the ground “are increasingly unable to feed themselves and their families”.
The news outlets added: “Journalists endure many deprivations and hardships in warzones. We are deeply alarmed that the threat of starvation is now one of them.”
Separately, Al Jazeera Media Network said in a statement that journalists on the ground “now find themselves fighting for their own survival” due to mass starvation.
Harrowing accounts AFP and Al Jazeera journalists shared harrowing accounts of conditions on the ground.
One AFP photographer was quoted as saying, “I no longer have the strength to work for the media. My body is thin and I can’t work anymore.”
Al Jazeera Arabic’s Gaza correspondent said he was “drowning in hunger”.
In an interview with NPR, AFP global news director Phil Chetwynd said that the news agency had been working to evacuate its remaining contributors from Gaza, which requires Israeli permission.
The dramatic warnings come as more than 100 international humanitarian organisations said that mass starvation in Gaza was now threatening the lives of humanitarian aid workers themselves, while the civilian death toll continues to rise.
Gaza under siege — a journalist reports on daily survival Video: Al Jazeera
Meanwhile, Israel continues to refuse to allow international reporters into Gaza to report and cover the war and humanitarian situation independently, obstructing the free flow of news and limiting coverage of the humanitarian crisis.
The ongoing conflict has taken a devastating toll on journalists and media outlets in Gaza.
Highest media death toll Since October 2023, at least 186 journalists and media workers have been killed in Gaza — Al Jazeera puts the figure as at least 230 — the West Bank, Israel, and Lebanon, according to monitoring by the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ).
This is the largest number of journalists to be killed in any armed conflict in this span of time.
Independent investigations such as those conducted by Forbidden Storieshave found more than a dozen cases in which journalists were intentionally targeted and killed by the Israeli military — which constitutes a war crime under international law.
IPI has made repeated calls, in conjunction with its partners, urging the international community to take immediate measures to protect journalists and allow unimpeded access to the strip from international media.
Today, IPI has strongly and urgently reiterated these calls, as humanitarian conditions in Gaza rapidly deteriorate and as journalists and other civilians face man-made starvation.
The international community must use all diplomatic means at its disposal to pressure Israel to ensure the safe flow of food aid to journalists and other civilians, said IPI in a statement.
“The response by the international community in this critical moment could be the difference between life and death. There is no more time to lose,” IPI said.
Jamie Wiseman is a journalist of the Vienna-based International Press Institute.
It’s an experiment — to see what kinds of abuses the public will accept without causing significant disruption to the imperial status quo.
It’s a psychological operation – to push out the boundaries of what’s normal and acceptable in our minds so that we will consent to even more horrific abuses in the future.
It’s a symptom — of Zionism, of colonialism, of militarism, of capitalism, of Western supremacism, of empire-building, of propaganda, of ignorance, of apathy, of delusion, of ego.
It’s a manifestation — of violent racist, supremacist and xenophobic belief systems that have always been there but were previously restrained, meeting with the unwholesome nature of alliances that have long been in place but have been aggressively normalised.
It’s a mirror —– showing us accurately and impartially who we currently are as a civilisation.
It’s a genocide … Video: Caitlin Johnstone
It’s a disclosure — showing us what the Western empire we live under really is underneath its fake plastic mask of liberal democracy and righteous humanitarianism.
It’s a revelation – showing us who among us really stands for truth and justice and who has been deceiving us about themselves and their motives this entire time.
It’s a catalyst – a galvanising force and a rallying cry for all who realise that the murderous power structures we live under can no longer be allowed to stand, and a blaring alarm clock opening more and more snoozing eyes to the need for revolutionary change.
It’s a test – of who we are as a species and what we are made of, and of whether we can transcend the destructive patterning that is driving humanity to its doom.
It’s a question — asking us what kind of world we want to live in going forward, and what kind of people we want to be.
It’s an invitation — to become something better than what we are now.
It’s an experiment — to see what kinds of abuses the public will accept without causing significant disruption to the imperial status quo.
It’s a psychological operation – to push out the boundaries of what’s normal and acceptable in our minds so that we will consent to even more horrific abuses in the future.
It’s a symptom — of Zionism, of colonialism, of militarism, of capitalism, of Western supremacism, of empire-building, of propaganda, of ignorance, of apathy, of delusion, of ego.
It’s a manifestation — of violent racist, supremacist and xenophobic belief systems that have always been there but were previously restrained, meeting with the unwholesome nature of alliances that have long been in place but have been aggressively normalised.
It’s a mirror —– showing us accurately and impartially who we currently are as a civilisation.
It’s a genocide … Video: Caitlin Johnstone
It’s a disclosure — showing us what the Western empire we live under really is underneath its fake plastic mask of liberal democracy and righteous humanitarianism.
It’s a revelation – showing us who among us really stands for truth and justice and who has been deceiving us about themselves and their motives this entire time.
It’s a catalyst – a galvanising force and a rallying cry for all who realise that the murderous power structures we live under can no longer be allowed to stand, and a blaring alarm clock opening more and more snoozing eyes to the need for revolutionary change.
It’s a test – of who we are as a species and what we are made of, and of whether we can transcend the destructive patterning that is driving humanity to its doom.
It’s a question — asking us what kind of world we want to live in going forward, and what kind of people we want to be.
It’s an invitation — to become something better than what we are now.
A leaked document has revealed secretive plans to revise terror laws in New Zealand so that people can be charged over statements deemed to constitute material support for a proscribed organisation.
It shows the government also wants to widen the criteria for proscribing organisations to include groups that are judged to “facilitate” or “promote and encourage” terrorist acts.
The changes would see the South Pacific nation falling in line with increasingly repressive Western countries like the UK, where scores of independent journalists and anti-genocide protesters have been arrested and charged under terrorism laws in recent months.
The consultation document, handed over to the New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties (NZCCL), reveals the government has been in contact with a small number of unnamed groups this year over plans to legally redefine what material support involves, so that public statements or gestures involving insignia like flags can lead to charges if construed as support for proscribed groups.
As part of a proposal to revise the Terrorism Suppression Act, the document suggests the process for designating organisations as terror groups should be changed by “expanding the threshold to enable more modern types of entities to be designated, such as those that ‘facilitate’ or ‘promote and encourage’ terrorist acts”.
The Ministry of Justice has been contacted in an attempt to ascertain which groups it has been consulting with and why it believed the changes were necessary.
NZCCL chairman Thomas Beagle told Mick Hall In Context his group was concerned the proposed changes were a further attempt to limit the rights of New Zealanders to engage in political protest.
‘What’s going on?’ “When you look at the proposal to expand the Terrorism Suppression Act, alongside the Police and IPCA conspiring to propose a law change to ban political protest without government permission, you really have to wonder what’s going on,” he said.
A report by the Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) in February proposed to give police the right to ban protests if they believed there was a high chance of public disorder and threats to public safety.
That would potentially mean bans on Palestinian solidarity protests if far right counter protestErs posed a threat of violent confrontation.
The stand-alone legislation would put New Zealand in line with other Five Eyes and NATO-aligned security jurisdictions such as Australia, the United Kingdom, and Canada.
Beagle points out proposed changes to terror laws would suppress freedom of speech and further undermine freedom of assembly and the right to protest.
“We’ve seen what’s happening with the state’s abuse of terrorism suppression laws in the UK and are horrified that they have sunk so far and so quickly,” he said.
More than 100 people were arrested across the UK on suspicion of supporting Palestine Action, a non-violent protest group proscribed as a terrorist organisation by the British government earlier this month.
Arrests in social media clips Social media clips showed pensioners aggressively arrested while attending rallies in Liverpool, London, Manchester, Edinburgh, Bristol and Truro over the weekend.
Independent journalists and academics have also faced state repression under the UK’s Terrorism Act.
Among those targeted was Electronic Intifada journalist Asa Winstanley, who had his home raided and devices seized in October last year as part of the opaque counter-terror drive “Operation Incessantness”.
Independent journalist Asa Winstanley . . . his home was raided and devices seized in October last year as part of “Operation Incessantness”. Image: R Witts Photography/mickhall.substack.com
Journalist Richard Medhurst has had a terror investigation hanging over his head since being detained at Heathrow Airport in August last year and charged under section 8 of the Terrorism Act. Activist and independent journalist Sarah Wilkinson had her house raided in the same month.
Others have faced similar intimidation and threats of jail. In November 2024, Jewish academic Haim Bresheeth was charged after police alleged he had expressed support for a “proscribed organisation” during a speech outside the London residence of the Israeli ambassador to the UK.
Meanwhile, dozens of members of Palestine Action are in jail facing terror charges. The vast majority are being held on remand where they may wait two years before going to trial — a common state tactic to take activists off the street and incarcerate them, knowing the chances of conviction are slim when they eventually go to court.
‘Targeted amendments’ The document says the New Zealand government wants to progress “targeted amendments” to the Act, creating or amending offences “to capture contemporary behaviours and activities of concern” like “public expressions of support for a terrorist act or designated entities, for example by showing insignia or distributing propaganda or instructional material.”
Protesters highlight the proscription of Palestine Action outside the British Embassy at The Hague on July 20. No arrests were made following 80 arrests by Dutch police the week before. Image: Defend Our Juries/mickhall.substack.com
It suggests that the existing process for proscribing an organisation is slow and cumbersome, noting that: “Specific provisions need to be followed to designate entities not on a UN list, but the decision-making process is lengthy and the designation period is short. This impacts timely decision-making and the usefulness of designation as a tool to prevent terrorism.”
It proposes to improve “the timeliness of the process, by considering changes to who the decision-maker is” and extending the renewal period from three to five years.
The document suggests consulting the Attorney-General over designation-related decisions to ensure legal requirements are met may not be required and questions whether the designation process requiring the Prime Minister to review decisions twice is necessary. It asks whether others, like the Foreign Minister, should be involved in the decision-making process.
Beagle believes the secretive proposals pose a threat to New Zealand’s liberal democracy.
“Political protest is an important part of New Zealand’s history,” he said.
“Whether it’s the environment, worker’s rights, feminism, Māori issues, homosexual law reform or any number of other issues, political protest has had a big part in forming what Aotearoa New Zealand is today.
Protected under Bill of Rights “It’s a right protected by New Zealand’s Bill of Rights and is a critical part of being a functioning democracy.”
The terror laws revision forms part of a wider trend of legislating to close down dissent over New Zealand’s foreign policy, now closely aligned with NATO and US interests.
The government is also widening the definition of foreign interference in a way that could see people who “should have known” that they were being used by a foreign state to undermine New Zealand’s interests prosecuted.
The Crimes (Countering Foreign Interference) Amendment Bill, which passed its first reading in Parliament on November 19, would criminalise the act of foreign interference, while also increasing powers of unwarranted searches by authorities.
The Bill is effectively a reintroduction of the country’s old colonial sedition laws inherited from Britain, the broadness of the law having allowed it to be used against communists, trade unionists and indigenous rights activists.
A leaked document has revealed secretive plans to revise terror laws in New Zealand so that people can be charged over statements deemed to constitute material support for a proscribed organisation.
It shows the government also wants to widen the criteria for proscribing organisations to include groups that are judged to “facilitate” or “promote and encourage” terrorist acts.
The changes would see the South Pacific nation falling in line with increasingly repressive Western countries like the UK, where scores of independent journalists and anti-genocide protesters have been arrested and charged under terrorism laws in recent months.
The consultation document, handed over to the New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties (NZCCL), reveals the government has been in contact with a small number of unnamed groups this year over plans to legally redefine what material support involves, so that public statements or gestures involving insignia like flags can lead to charges if construed as support for proscribed groups.
As part of a proposal to revise the Terrorism Suppression Act, the document suggests the process for designating organisations as terror groups should be changed by “expanding the threshold to enable more modern types of entities to be designated, such as those that ‘facilitate’ or ‘promote and encourage’ terrorist acts”.
The Ministry of Justice has been contacted in an attempt to ascertain which groups it has been consulting with and why it believed the changes were necessary.
NZCCL chairman Thomas Beagle told Mick Hall In Context his group was concerned the proposed changes were a further attempt to limit the rights of New Zealanders to engage in political protest.
‘What’s going on?’ “When you look at the proposal to expand the Terrorism Suppression Act, alongside the Police and IPCA conspiring to propose a law change to ban political protest without government permission, you really have to wonder what’s going on,” he said.
A report by the Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) in February proposed to give police the right to ban protests if they believed there was a high chance of public disorder and threats to public safety.
That would potentially mean bans on Palestinian solidarity protests if far right counter protestErs posed a threat of violent confrontation.
The stand-alone legislation would put New Zealand in line with other Five Eyes and NATO-aligned security jurisdictions such as Australia, the United Kingdom, and Canada.
Beagle points out proposed changes to terror laws would suppress freedom of speech and further undermine freedom of assembly and the right to protest.
“We’ve seen what’s happening with the state’s abuse of terrorism suppression laws in the UK and are horrified that they have sunk so far and so quickly,” he said.
More than 100 people were arrested across the UK on suspicion of supporting Palestine Action, a non-violent protest group proscribed as a terrorist organisation by the British government earlier this month.
Arrests in social media clips Social media clips showed pensioners aggressively arrested while attending rallies in Liverpool, London, Manchester, Edinburgh, Bristol and Truro over the weekend.
Independent journalists and academics have also faced state repression under the UK’s Terrorism Act.
Among those targeted was Electronic Intifada journalist Asa Winstanley, who had his home raided and devices seized in October last year as part of the opaque counter-terror drive “Operation Incessantness”.
Independent journalist Asa Winstanley . . . his home was raided and devices seized in October last year as part of “Operation Incessantness”. Image: R Witts Photography/mickhall.substack.com
Journalist Richard Medhurst has had a terror investigation hanging over his head since being detained at Heathrow Airport in August last year and charged under section 8 of the Terrorism Act. Activist and independent journalist Sarah Wilkinson had her house raided in the same month.
Others have faced similar intimidation and threats of jail. In November 2024, Jewish academic Haim Bresheeth was charged after police alleged he had expressed support for a “proscribed organisation” during a speech outside the London residence of the Israeli ambassador to the UK.
Meanwhile, dozens of members of Palestine Action are in jail facing terror charges. The vast majority are being held on remand where they may wait two years before going to trial — a common state tactic to take activists off the street and incarcerate them, knowing the chances of conviction are slim when they eventually go to court.
‘Targeted amendments’ The document says the New Zealand government wants to progress “targeted amendments” to the Act, creating or amending offences “to capture contemporary behaviours and activities of concern” like “public expressions of support for a terrorist act or designated entities, for example by showing insignia or distributing propaganda or instructional material.”
Protesters highlight the proscription of Palestine Action outside the British Embassy at The Hague on July 20. No arrests were made following 80 arrests by Dutch police the week before. Image: Defend Our Juries/mickhall.substack.com
It suggests that the existing process for proscribing an organisation is slow and cumbersome, noting that: “Specific provisions need to be followed to designate entities not on a UN list, but the decision-making process is lengthy and the designation period is short. This impacts timely decision-making and the usefulness of designation as a tool to prevent terrorism.”
It proposes to improve “the timeliness of the process, by considering changes to who the decision-maker is” and extending the renewal period from three to five years.
The document suggests consulting the Attorney-General over designation-related decisions to ensure legal requirements are met may not be required and questions whether the designation process requiring the Prime Minister to review decisions twice is necessary. It asks whether others, like the Foreign Minister, should be involved in the decision-making process.
Beagle believes the secretive proposals pose a threat to New Zealand’s liberal democracy.
“Political protest is an important part of New Zealand’s history,” he said.
“Whether it’s the environment, worker’s rights, feminism, Māori issues, homosexual law reform or any number of other issues, political protest has had a big part in forming what Aotearoa New Zealand is today.
Protected under Bill of Rights “It’s a right protected by New Zealand’s Bill of Rights and is a critical part of being a functioning democracy.”
The terror laws revision forms part of a wider trend of legislating to close down dissent over New Zealand’s foreign policy, now closely aligned with NATO and US interests.
The government is also widening the definition of foreign interference in a way that could see people who “should have known” that they were being used by a foreign state to undermine New Zealand’s interests prosecuted.
The Crimes (Countering Foreign Interference) Amendment Bill, which passed its first reading in Parliament on November 19, would criminalise the act of foreign interference, while also increasing powers of unwarranted searches by authorities.
The Bill is effectively a reintroduction of the country’s old colonial sedition laws inherited from Britain, the broadness of the law having allowed it to be used against communists, trade unionists and indigenous rights activists.
A leaked document has revealed secretive plans to revise terror laws in New Zealand so that people can be charged over statements deemed to constitute material support for a proscribed organisation.
It shows the government also wants to widen the criteria for proscribing organisations to include groups that are judged to “facilitate” or “promote and encourage” terrorist acts.
The changes would see the South Pacific nation falling in line with increasingly repressive Western countries like the UK, where scores of independent journalists and anti-genocide protesters have been arrested and charged under terrorism laws in recent months.
The consultation document, handed over to the New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties (NZCCL), reveals the government has been in contact with a small number of unnamed groups this year over plans to legally redefine what material support involves, so that public statements or gestures involving insignia like flags can lead to charges if construed as support for proscribed groups.
As part of a proposal to revise the Terrorism Suppression Act, the document suggests the process for designating organisations as terror groups should be changed by “expanding the threshold to enable more modern types of entities to be designated, such as those that ‘facilitate’ or ‘promote and encourage’ terrorist acts”.
The Ministry of Justice has been contacted in an attempt to ascertain which groups it has been consulting with and why it believed the changes were necessary.
NZCCL chairman Thomas Beagle told Mick Hall In Context his group was concerned the proposed changes were a further attempt to limit the rights of New Zealanders to engage in political protest.
‘What’s going on?’ “When you look at the proposal to expand the Terrorism Suppression Act, alongside the Police and IPCA conspiring to propose a law change to ban political protest without government permission, you really have to wonder what’s going on,” he said.
A report by the Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) in February proposed to give police the right to ban protests if they believed there was a high chance of public disorder and threats to public safety.
That would potentially mean bans on Palestinian solidarity protests if far right counter protestErs posed a threat of violent confrontation.
The stand-alone legislation would put New Zealand in line with other Five Eyes and NATO-aligned security jurisdictions such as Australia, the United Kingdom, and Canada.
Beagle points out proposed changes to terror laws would suppress freedom of speech and further undermine freedom of assembly and the right to protest.
“We’ve seen what’s happening with the state’s abuse of terrorism suppression laws in the UK and are horrified that they have sunk so far and so quickly,” he said.
More than 100 people were arrested across the UK on suspicion of supporting Palestine Action, a non-violent protest group proscribed as a terrorist organisation by the British government earlier this month.
Arrests in social media clips Social media clips showed pensioners aggressively arrested while attending rallies in Liverpool, London, Manchester, Edinburgh, Bristol and Truro over the weekend.
Independent journalists and academics have also faced state repression under the UK’s Terrorism Act.
Among those targeted was Electronic Intifada journalist Asa Winstanley, who had his home raided and devices seized in October last year as part of the opaque counter-terror drive “Operation Incessantness”.
Independent journalist Asa Winstanley . . . his home was raided and devices seized in October last year as part of “Operation Incessantness”. Image: R Witts Photography/mickhall.substack.com
Journalist Richard Medhurst has had a terror investigation hanging over his head since being detained at Heathrow Airport in August last year and charged under section 8 of the Terrorism Act. Activist and independent journalist Sarah Wilkinson had her house raided in the same month.
Others have faced similar intimidation and threats of jail. In November 2024, Jewish academic Haim Bresheeth was charged after police alleged he had expressed support for a “proscribed organisation” during a speech outside the London residence of the Israeli ambassador to the UK.
Meanwhile, dozens of members of Palestine Action are in jail facing terror charges. The vast majority are being held on remand where they may wait two years before going to trial — a common state tactic to take activists off the street and incarcerate them, knowing the chances of conviction are slim when they eventually go to court.
‘Targeted amendments’ The document says the New Zealand government wants to progress “targeted amendments” to the Act, creating or amending offences “to capture contemporary behaviours and activities of concern” like “public expressions of support for a terrorist act or designated entities, for example by showing insignia or distributing propaganda or instructional material.”
Protesters highlight the proscription of Palestine Action outside the British Embassy at The Hague on July 20. No arrests were made following 80 arrests by Dutch police the week before. Image: Defend Our Juries/mickhall.substack.com
It suggests that the existing process for proscribing an organisation is slow and cumbersome, noting that: “Specific provisions need to be followed to designate entities not on a UN list, but the decision-making process is lengthy and the designation period is short. This impacts timely decision-making and the usefulness of designation as a tool to prevent terrorism.”
It proposes to improve “the timeliness of the process, by considering changes to who the decision-maker is” and extending the renewal period from three to five years.
The document suggests consulting the Attorney-General over designation-related decisions to ensure legal requirements are met may not be required and questions whether the designation process requiring the Prime Minister to review decisions twice is necessary. It asks whether others, like the Foreign Minister, should be involved in the decision-making process.
Beagle believes the secretive proposals pose a threat to New Zealand’s liberal democracy.
“Political protest is an important part of New Zealand’s history,” he said.
“Whether it’s the environment, worker’s rights, feminism, Māori issues, homosexual law reform or any number of other issues, political protest has had a big part in forming what Aotearoa New Zealand is today.
Protected under Bill of Rights “It’s a right protected by New Zealand’s Bill of Rights and is a critical part of being a functioning democracy.”
The terror laws revision forms part of a wider trend of legislating to close down dissent over New Zealand’s foreign policy, now closely aligned with NATO and US interests.
The government is also widening the definition of foreign interference in a way that could see people who “should have known” that they were being used by a foreign state to undermine New Zealand’s interests prosecuted.
The Crimes (Countering Foreign Interference) Amendment Bill, which passed its first reading in Parliament on November 19, would criminalise the act of foreign interference, while also increasing powers of unwarranted searches by authorities.
The Bill is effectively a reintroduction of the country’s old colonial sedition laws inherited from Britain, the broadness of the law having allowed it to be used against communists, trade unionists and indigenous rights activists.
Efforts to end the relentless siege of Gaza have been set back by the abrupt end to peace talks in Qatar.
Both the United States and Israel have withdrawn their negotiating teams, accusing Hamas of a “lack of desire to reach a ceasefire”.
US President Donald Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff says it would appear Hamas never wanted a deal:
While the mediators have made a great effort, Hamas does not appear to be coordinated or acting in good faith. We will now consider alternative options to bring the hostages home and try to create a more stable environment for the people in Gaza
State Department spokesman Tommy Piggott reads Steve Witkoff’s statement on the collapse of the Gaza peace talks.
The disappointing development coincides with mounting fears of a widespread famine in Gaza and a historic decision by France to formally recognise a Palestinian state.
French President Emmanuel Macron says there is no alternative for the sake of security of the Middle East:
True to its historic commitment to a just and lasting peace in the Middle East, I have decided that France will recognise the State of Palestine
What will these developments mean for the conflict in Gaza and the broader security of the Middle East?
‘Humanitarian catastrophe’
The failure to reach a truce means there is no end in sight to the Israeli siege of Gaza which has devastated the territory for more than 21 months.
Amid mounting fears of mass starvation, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese says Gaza is in the grip of a “humanitarian catastrophe”. He is urging Israel to comply immediately with its obligations under international law:
Israel’s denial of aid and the killing of civilians, including children, seeking access to water and food cannot be defended or ignored.
According to the United Nations Palestinian refugee agency UNRWA, more than 100 people – most of them children – have died of hunger. One in five children in Gaza City is malnourished, with the number of cases rising every day.
Commissioner-General Philippe Lazzarini says with little food aid entering Gaza, people are
neither dead nor alive, they are walking corpses […] most children our teams are seeing are emaciated, weak and at high risk of dying if they don’t get the treatment they urgently need.
The UN and more than 100 aid groups blame Israel’s blockade of almost all aid into the territory for the lack of food.
Lazzarini says UNRWA has 6,000 trucks of emergency supplies waiting in Jordan and Egypt. He is urging Israel – which continues to blame Hamas for cases of malnutrition – to allow the humanitarian assistance into Gaza.
It included a 60-day truce, during which time Hamas would release ten living Israeli hostages and the remains of 18 others. In exchange, Israel would release a number of Palestinian prisoners, and humanitarian aid to Gaza would be significantly increased.
During the ceasefire, both sides would engage in negotiations toward a lasting truce.
While specific details of the current sticking points remain unclear, previous statements from both parties suggest the disagreement centres on what would follow any temporary ceasefire.
Israel is reportedly seeking to maintain a permanent military presence in Gaza to allow for a rapid resumption of operations if needed. In contrast, Hamas is demanding a pathway toward a complete end to hostilities.
A lack of mutual trust has dramatically clouded the negotiations.
From Israel’s perspective, any ceasefire must not result in Hamas regaining control of Gaza, as this would allow the group to rebuild its power and potentially launch another cross-border attack.
However, Hamas has repeatedly said it is willing to hand over power to any other Palestinian group in pursuit of a Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders. This could include the Palestinian National Authority (PNA), which governs the West Bank and has long recognised Israel.
Support for a Palestinian state
Israeli leaders have occasionally paid lip service to a Palestinian state. But they have described such an entity as “less than a state” or a “state-minus” – a formulation that falls short of both Palestinian aspirations and international legal standards.
In response to the worsening humanitarian situation, some Western countries have moved to fully recognise a Palestinian state, viewing it as a step toward a permanent resolution of one of the longest-running conflicts in the Middle East.
Macron’s announcement France will officially recognise a full Palestinian state in September is a major development.
France is now the most prominent Western power to take this position. It follows more than 140 countries – including more than a dozen in Europe – that have already recognised statehood.
While largely symbolic, the move adds diplomatic pressure on Israel amid the ongoing war and aid crisis in Gaza.
However, the announcement was immediately condemned by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who claimed recognition “rewards terror” and
risks creating another Iranian proxy, just as Gaza became. A Palestinian state in these conditions would be a launch pad to annihilate Israel – not to live in peace beside it.
Annexing Gaza?
A Palestinian state is unacceptable to Israel.
Further evidence was recently presented in a revealing TV interview by former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak who stated Netanyahu had deliberately empowered Hamas in order to block a two-state solution.
Instead there is mounting evidence Israel is seeking to annex the entirety of Palestinian land and relocate Palestinians to neighbouring countries.
Given the current uncertainty, it appears unlikely a new ceasefire will be reached in the near future, especially as it remains unclear whether the US withdrawal from the negotiations was a genuine policy shift or merely a strategic negotiating tactic.
Ali Mamouri 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.
When you think about climate change in our oceans, you may picture coral bleaching, melting sea ice, or extreme weather events. But beneath the ocean’s surface, another quiet shift is underway. Australia’s tropical fish are heading south into cooler waters.
These fish are not just visiting. They are settling into the milder “temperate” reefs that used to be too cold for them. As they do, they encounter new environments, new challenges and new neighbours.
In our new research we studied the behaviour of these new migrants. We found some tropical fish are not just surviving in their new homes, they’re thriving. And, surprisingly, much of that success comes down to who they’re hanging out with.
On Australia’s east coast, the fish typically hitch a ride on the strengthening East Australian Current as it pushes warm water and the tropical species further south.
But life at the edge of your range is risky. These fish encounter colder water temperatures, unfamiliar predators and a reef full of competitors. So, how do they cope?
As waters warm, temperate reefs of kelp and seaweed are becoming home to tropical fish as they venture southward. Angus Mitchell
Risky business: but some fish can adapt
We studied five tropical fish species and two temperate species across a 2,000km stretch of Australia’s east coast, from the tropics to the cold temperate south. We observed how these fish fed, sheltered and reacted to threats, using underwater video cameras.
Analysis of the footage revealed tropical fish behaved differently in the colder waters. They spent more time hiding and less time feeding. They were also more wary of predators, displaying a cognitive shift in “lateralisation” — a preference to consistently turn left or right, which can help fish make faster escape decisions when threatened.
Such risk-averse behaviour is likely to help fish stay alive in unfamiliar reefs by avoiding predators. But it also reduces food intake and growth, unless these fish find new friends.
New school mates, better outcomes
Previous research has shown when tropical fish gather or “shoal” with temperate fish, they grow bigger and survive longer into winter than fish in tropical-only shoals.
We wanted to understand the mechanism for this phenomenon. Could tropical fish be learning from temperate shoal mates? And how might their behaviour change when shoaling with temperate fishes?
Using underwater videos, we found three tropical damselfish species spent more time feeding and less time sheltering when they formed mixed shoals with temperate fish. They also appeared bolder and were more successful at finding food.
We think these mixed shoals offer key advantages: safety in numbers, more eyes watching for predators, and perhaps most importantly, social learning. By shoaling with local temperate species such as the Australian Mado, tropical fish may learn where and when it’s safe to feed, and how to behave in these foreign temperate ecosystems.
This kind of behavioural “plasticity” is a powerful tool in a changing climate. Fish that can adjust their behaviours in ways that boost their fitness are more likely to survive as climatic conditions rapidly shift in our oceans.
Tropical and temperate fish species form a mixed-species group or shoal at Little Manly in southeastern Australia. Angus Mitchell
Not all fish benefit
These interactions were not always beneficial. Two herbivorous tropical fish species, the convict tang and brown tang, did not show the same benefits, likely because their specialised diets made it harder to learn from omnivorous temperate species.
And for the temperate fish, the presence of tropical fish in shoals were often problematic. At the northern, warmer edge of their range, temperate fish fled more often and fed less when tropical fish were present. That’s worrying, because warming alone is already pushing many temperate species toward their biological limits. Adding new competitors might push them over the edge.
Herbivorous convict tangs (Acanthurus triostegus) shoal tightly near shelter on a temperate oyster reef. At the edge of their range, these tropical fish adopt more cautious behaviours, seeking refuge and foraging less. Angus Mitchell
A changing reef community
All this comes amid dire news of the Earth’s oceans. Research published today shows 2023 set new records for the duration, extent and intensity of marine heatwaves.
Fish migration to temperate reefs is a glimpse of the future: even warmer waters, shifting species ranges and new species interactions.
Our results suggest these new species interactions and relationships, particularly mixed-species shoaling, can help tropical fish survive longer in temperate ecosystems. But they may also disrupt existing ecosystems and place extra stress on local temperate species.
In this way, climate-driven range shifts are more than just a temperature driven story. They’re stories about behaviour, relationships, and resilience.
Understanding how fish respond to their new neighbours and how those responses shape who stays and who goes, will be key to managing reefs in a rapidly warming ocean.
Ivan Nagelkerken receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC).
Angus Mitchell and Chloe Hayes 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.
This week, the World Health Organization (WHO) raised concerns about a surge in the number of cases of a mosquito-borne viral infection called chikungunya.
Diana Rojas Alvarez, a medical officer at the WHO, highlighted an outbreak occurring across La Réunion and Mayotte. These small islands in the Indian Ocean were previously hit during an epidemic of the virus in 2004–05.
Between August 2024 and May 2025, more than 47,500 confirmed cases and 12 deaths from chikungunya were reported in La Réunion. Some 116 cases were reported in Mayotte between March and May this year.
So, what is chikungunya, how does it spread, and should we be worried here in Australia?
What are the symptoms?
The main symptoms of chikungunya include fever, joint pain and joint swelling. However, other symptoms may include headache, rash, muscle pain, nausea and tiredness. On rare occasions, chikungunya can be fatal.
Some people are more prone to having worse symptoms, including infants, older adults, and people with pre-existing medical conditions.
There’s no specific treatment for chikungunya other than managing the pain with medications, such as paracetamol.
Most people recover after a few weeks, but some people can experience ongoing tiredness and joint pains for many months, or even years.
How does it spread?
Infected female mosquitoes spread chikungunya. The mosquitoes become infected when they feed on a person carrying the virus in their blood. Once infected, the virus reproduces in the mosquito, and then they can transmit it to other people when the mosquitoes bite them.
A. aegypti and A. albopictus look similar and can be easily confused. Both are about 4–7 millimetres in size and have similar black and white markings on their thorax and legs.
Both are day-time biters, unlike other mosquitoes that typically bite at dawn or dusk. They’re known as “ankle biters” because they mainly bite exposed legs and ankles. These aggressive mosquitoes bite multiple times and are known to follow people indoors to get their meal of human blood.
Chikungunya was first documented in Tanzania in 1952. While outbreaks initially occurred across Africa and Asia, over time the virus has spread around the world. As of December 2024, local transmission of chikungunya had been reported in 119 countries and territories.
A key contributor to the proliferation of chikungunya is climate change. Warmer temperatures, altered rainfall patterns, and increased humidity are creating ideal conditions for mosquito breeding. This allows the mosquitoes to adapt to new environments and therefore expand into new habitats.
The increase is also partly because chikungunya has evolved and been introduced into new populations, whose immune systems have not previously been exposed to the virus.
A. aegypti mosquitoes are now found in areas across north, central and southern Queensland, while A. albopictus is currently still only found in the Torres Strait.
Nonetheless, to date, there have been no recorded cases of chikungunya transmission within Australia.
But cases do occur in people who have recently travelled overseas, most often to South and Southeast Asia, or the Pacific Islands.
In 2023 there were 42 cases of chikungunya recorded in Australia, 70 in 2024, and 90 so far in 2025. Previous years have seen figures above 100, however numbers in recent years may have been lower due to COVID impacting travel.
As climate change continues to support the spread of A. aegypti and A. albopictus, the risk of transmission within Australia increases.
Two vaccines are approved for use in the United States against chikungunya, but there’s currently no vaccine approved in Australia. The only way to reduce your risk of infection is to avoid being bitten by mosquitoes.
People travelling to places where chikungunya is known to occur should wear loose-fitting and light-coloured clothing with enclosed shoes, use insect repellent, close windows and consider using mosquito bed nets. Taking these steps also reduces the risk of other mosquito-borne infections, such as dengue fever.
If you travel to a place where chikungunya occurs and you get bitten by mosquitoes, monitor yourself for signs and symptoms.
If you become unwell, see a doctor immediately.
Jacqueline Stephens is affiliated with the Australasian Epidemiological Association and the International Network for Epidemiology in Policy.
Jill Carr is affiliated with the Australasian Virology Society and receives funding from The National Health and Medical Research Council to study viral diseases.
New Zealand is far from immune. According to official advice in late March to Minister of Customs and Associate Minister of Police Casey Costello:
The threat posed by organised crime in New Zealand has increased substantially in the last five years. Even with the best of will, New Zealand is losing the fight.
New criminal groups are becoming active here – from Burma via Malaysia, to the Comancheros and Mongols gangs. Each brings new networks, violent tactics and the potential to corrupt institutions in New Zealand and throughout the Pacific.
The one relative bright spot is that New Zealand hasn’t yet seen the levels of firearms-related violence driven by organised crime overseas. For example, European research shows the illegal trade in guns and drugs becoming increasingly intertwined.
But waiting to catch up with those trends should not be an option. New Zealand already has a lot firearms. In the past six years, police conducting routine patrols have reportedly encountered 17,000 guns, or nearly ten every day, nationwide.
The risk had become apparent much earlier, in 2016, with the discovery of fourteen military assault-grade AK47s and M16s in an Auckland house being used to manufacture methamphetamine. This year, another firearms cache, including assault rifles and semiautomatics, was found in Auckland.
Progress and problems
On the legal front, the main avenues New Zealand gangs use to obtain illegal firearms are being closed off. Under the Arms Act, members or close affiliates of a gang or an organised criminal group cannot be considered “fit and proper” to lawfully possess a firearm.
These people may have specific firearms prohibition orders added against them, which allow the police additional powers to ensure firearms don’t fall into the wrong hands.
The firearms registry is key to this. There are now more than 400,000 firearms fully accounted for, making it harder for so-called “straw buyers” to onsell them to gangs.
Despite the progress, several challenges remain. In particular, the nature of the gun registry has been politicised, with the ACT and National parties disagreeing over a review of the system’s scope.
Arguments over the types of firearms covered and which agency looks after the registry risk undermining its central purpose of preventing criminals getting guns.
Theft of firearms from lawful owners needs more attention, too. Making it a specific offence – not just illegal possession – would be an added deterrent.
Tighter and targeted policy
Accounting for all the estimated 1.5 million firearms in New Zealand will be very difficult – especially with the buy-back and amnesty for prohibited firearms after the Christchurch terror attack likely being far from complete.
There are also tens of thousands of non-prohibited firearms in the hands of unlicensed but not necessarily criminal owners.
Given all firearms must be registered by the end of August 2028, there should be another buy-back (at market rates) of all guns that should be on the register. This might be expensive, but the cost of opening a large pipeline to criminals would be worse.
There needs to be greater investment in staff, education and technology within intelligence services and customs. This will help inform evidence-based policy, and support targeted law enforcement. A recent European Union initiative to track gun violence in real time is an example of how data can help in this way.
New Zealand is a party to the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organised Crime (and its two protocols on people trafficking and migrant smuggling). But it is not a party to a supplementary protocol covering the illicit manufacturing and trafficking of firearms and ammunition.
That should change. Amendments to the Arms Act since 2019 mean New Zealand law and policy fit the protocol perfectly. By joining, New Zealand could strengthen regional cooperation and increase public safety, given the scale of the problem and its potential to get worse.
Alexander Gillespie is a member of the Ministerial Arms Advisory Group (MAAG). He is also the 2024 recipient of the Borrin Justice Fellowship, and is researching revision of the NZ Arms Act. His views and opinions here are independent of both the MAAG and the Borrin Foundation.
ER Report: Here is a summary of significant articles published on EveningReport.nz on July 25, 2025.
Gangs are going global and so is the illegal gun trade – NZ can do more to fight it Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alexander Gillespie, Professor of Law, University of Waikato According to the Global Organised Crime Index, international criminal activity has increased over the past two years. And the politically fractured post-pandemic world has made this even harder for nations to combat. New Zealand is far from immune. According
Historic ICJ climate ruling ‘just the beginning’, says Vanuatu’s Regenvanu By Ezra Toara in Port Vila Vanuatu’s Minister of Climate Change Adaptation, Ralph Regenvanu, has welcomed the historic International Court of Justice (ICJ) climate ruling, calling it a “milestone in the fight for climate justice”. The ICJ has delivered a landmark advisory opinion on states’ obligations under international law to act on climate change. The
3 reasons young people are more likely to believe conspiracy theories – and how we can help them discover the truth Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jean-Nicolas Bordeleau, Research Fellow, Jeff Bleich Centre for Democracy and Disruptive Technologies, Flinders University Conspiracy theories are a widespread occurrence in today’s hyper connected and polarised world. Events such as Brexit, the 2016 and 2020 United States presidential elections, and the COVID pandemic serve as potent reminders
Waiting too long for public dental care? Here’s why the system is struggling – and how to fix it Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Santosh Tadakamadla, Professor and Head of Dentistry and Oral Health, La Trobe University Just over one-third of Australians are eligible for public dental services, which provide free or low cost dental treatment. Yet demand for these services continues to exceed supply. As a result, many Australian adults
Butter wars: ‘nothing cures high prices like high prices’ – but will market forces be enough? Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alan Renwick, Professor of Agricultural Economics, Lincoln University, New Zealand RobynRoper/Getty Images The alarming rise of butter prices has become a real source of frustration for New Zealand consumers, as well as a topic of political recrimination. The issue has become so serious that Miles Hurrell, chief
Ultrafast fashion brand Princess Polly has been certified as ‘sustainable’. Is that an oxymoron? Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Harriette Richards, Senior Lecturer, School of Fashion and Textiles, RMIT University Carol Yepes/Getty Images Last week, the ultrafast fashion brand Princess Polly received B Corp certification. This certification is designed to accredit for-profit businesses that provide social impact and environmental benefit. Established on the Gold Coast in
AI will soon be able to audit all published research – what will that mean for public trust in science? Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alexander Kaurov, PhD Candidate in Science and Society, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington Jamillah Knowles & Digit/Better Images of AI, CC BY-SA Self-correction is fundamental to science. One of its most important forms is peer review, when anonymous experts scrutinise research before it is
Miles Franklin 2025: Siang Lu’s Ghost Cities is a haunting comedy about tyranny. Is it the funniest winner ever? Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Joseph Steinberg, Forrest Foundation Postdoctoral Fellow, English & Literary Studies, The University of Western Australia Siang Lu David Kelly/UQP The Miles Franklin judges described Siang Lu’s Ghost Cities, winner of the 2025 award, as “a grand farce and a haunting meditation on diaspora”. To my mind, it
Keep fighting for a nuclear-free Pacific, Helen Clark warns Greenpeace over global storm clouds Asia Pacific Report Former New Zealand prime minister Helen Clark warned activists and campaigners in a speech on the deck of the Greenpeace environmental flagship Rainbow Warrior III last night to be wary of global “storm clouds” and the renewed existential threat of nuclear weapons. Speaking on her reflections on four decades after the bombing
Business coalition calls for 25% cut in the cost of red tape by 2030 Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra Business, universities, and investors have jointly urged the federal government to commit to cutting the cost of red tape by 25% by 2030, in a submission for next month’s Economic Reform Roundtable. The push to reduce regulation is in line
Grattan on Friday: net zero battle has net zero positives for Sussan Ley Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra There’s no other way of looking at it: Sussan Ley faces a diabolical situation with the debate over whether the Coalition should abandon the 2050 net zero emissions target. The issue is a microcosm of her wider problems. The Nationals,
The Murray–Darling Basin Plan Evaluation is out. The next step is to fix the land, not just the flows Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michael Stewardson, CEO One Basin CRC, The University of Melbourne Yarramalong Weir is one of many barriers to the passage of fish in the Murray-Darling Basin. Geoff Reid, One Basin CRC A report card into the A$13 billion Murray–Darling Basin Plan has found much work is needed
The Murray–Darling Basin Plan Evaluation is out. The next step is to fix the land, not just the flows Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michael Stewardson, CEO One Basin CRC, The University of Melbourne Yarramalong Weir is one of many barriers to the passage of fish in the Murray-Darling Basin. Geoff Reid, One Basin CRC A report card into the A$13 billion Murray–Darling Basin Plan has found much work is needed
Reserve Bank says unemployment rise was not a shock, inflation on track Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Hawkins, Head, Canberra School of Government, University of Canberra Reserve Bank Governor Michele Bullock has fleshed out the central bank’s thinking behind its surprise decision to keep interest rates on hold this month. In a speech today to the Anika Foundation, Bullock said there has been:
Reserve Bank says unemployment rise was not a shock, inflation on track Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Hawkins, Head, Canberra School of Government, University of Canberra Reserve Bank Governor Michele Bullock has fleshed out the central bank’s thinking behind its surprise decision to keep interest rates on hold this month. In a speech today to the Anika Foundation, Bullock said there has been:
Israel waging ‘horror show’ starvation campaign in Gaza, says UN chief This is Democracy Now!. I’m Amy Goodman. More than 100 humanitarian groups are demanding action to end Israel’s siege of Gaza, warning mass starvation is spreading across the Palestinian territory. The NGOs, including Amnesty International, Oxfam, Doctors Without Borders, warn, “illnesses like acute watery diarrhea are spreading, markets are empty, waste is piling up, and
Israel waging ‘horror show’ starvation campaign in Gaza, says UN chief This is Democracy Now!. I’m Amy Goodman. More than 100 humanitarian groups are demanding action to end Israel’s siege of Gaza, warning mass starvation is spreading across the Palestinian territory. The NGOs, including Amnesty International, Oxfam, Doctors Without Borders, warn, “illnesses like acute watery diarrhea are spreading, markets are empty, waste is piling up, and
Historic ruling finds climate change ‘imperils all forms of life’ and puts laggard nations on notice Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jacqueline Peel, Professor of Law and Director, Melbourne Climate Futures, The University of Melbourne Hilaire Bule/Getty Climate change “imperils all forms of life” and countries must tackle the problem or face consequences under international law, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has found. The court delivered its
Jet ski accidents are tragic but preventable. Here’s how to reduce the risk Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Milad Haghani, Associate Professor & Principal Fellow in Urban Risk & Resilience, The University of Melbourne Richard Hamilton Smith/Getty Two teenage boys were thrown from a jet ski during a ride on the Georges River in Sydney’s south this week. One died at the scene. The other
On July 26, Triple J will broadcast the Hottest 100 Australian Songs, as voted by the public. While predictions for winners and even preemptive complaining about the shortlist are taking up column space and social media posts, there is an underlying question: what we mean when we talk about “Australian songs”?
Do these songs sound a particular way? Do they express something about what it means to be Australian? Or is it purely about where the artist was born?
Importantly, how will each of these factors influence voting?
Can a song sound Australian?
Musical cultures with their own unique sounds have existed on this continent for tens of thousands of years. The sound of the didgeridoo is often used as a shorthand to signify Australianness in films, television and, to a lesser extent, popular songs.
However, the history of dispossession and genocidal practices that have accompanied settlement in Australia means much has been lost from these musical traditions. Indigenous performers have been actively excluded from the same music-making spaces where other songs we think of as “Australian” have been created.
Since British colonisation in the late 18th century, Australian music has also been part of global music flows. Settlers arrived with songs and musical influences from their own cultures. Jazz, country, rock and pop inspired local versions of these genres.
But is there anything truly Australian about such music, or is it just imitation? And this conundrum connects to wider issues of Australia’s identity debated during the 20th century: was it a country, or still just a colony?
Back in the 1970s, this question was also on then prime minister Gough Whitlams’s mind. After his election in 1972, Whitlam gave a huge boost to funding for cultural and creative activities to “help establish and express an Australian identity through the arts”, as part of a suite of nation-building activities.
Building the pub rock canon
The dirty guitar sounds of the pub rock scene of the 1970s, with its associated subcultures, are sometimes said to be Australia’s first distinct offering in post-rock ‘n’ roll music.
This was followed by the rise of bands such as Midnight Oil and Cold Chisel, who found success not just by drawing on more local sounds, but also by referencing Australian places, politics and cultures.
The Whitlam government’s broadcasting reforms meant this music had homes on community radio and the new youth station 2JJ (now Triple J).
The bands from this era have come to make up what might be described as the Oz rock canon – a collection of works seen to make up the “best” of the art form. Canons exert a strong influence over how we assess music, meaning these bands will probably appear in the tomorrow’s countdown.
This idea of the rock canon is almost perfectly reflected in the ten entries by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to tomorrow’s countdown. His selection of almost 100% white male musicians encapsulates the exclusionary nature rock of this period.
The fact that our last two prime ministers, despite being from opposite sides of politics, produced very similar lists, gives us insight into the persistence of this canon, and what ideas about “Australian culture” circulate in the halls of power.
It’s questionable whether any of the bands or songs on Albanese’s list could be said to have a coherent “Australian” sound, yet they have come to hold a place in the national imagination.
Changing canons and new sounds
Triple J’s Hottest 100 of All Time in 2009 was seen as a surprising recapitulation of the (male) rock canon, especially given the station’s otherwise diverse playlists.
However, the highest-placed Australian song on the list was The Nosebleed Section by Hilltop Hoods, representing the recent and rapid rise of Aussie hip-hop.
The 2011 Hottest 100 Australian Albums of All Time (the closest forerunner to the current poll) further updated the canon, with Powderfinger’s Odyssey Number Five (2000) in the top spot, and other top ten entries by electronic groups The Presets and The Avalanches.
Nonetheless, the canon remained male dominated, with the highest woman-fronted album being Missy Higgins’s The Sound of White (2004) at number 29.
These artists use a range of genres and styles to express pride in their Indigeneity, and critique Australian identity. A.B. Original’s song January 26 was number 17 in 2016’s Hottest 100 countdown. This was also the last year Triple J chose this date for its annual broadcast, speaking to the power of music to reflect – and even inform – popular sentiment.
Given recent national debates, a strong contender for the upcoming poll is Treaty (Radio Mix) by Yothu Yindi (which ranked number 11 of all time in 1991). These shifts show how canons can be unsettled over time.
What if we don’t all agree?
Recently, Creative Australia came under fire for trying to stifle Khaled Sabsabi’s politically-informed art in the interests of “social cohesion”.
But others pointed out art provides crucial space for challenging prevailing ideas, and that social cohesion in a democracy is not about reaching complete agreement, but being able to handle disagreement.
A Hottest 100 that reflects the diversity and even the tensions in Australian society may provoke arguments, but it is in these spaces that we can reflect on what it means to live on these lands.
Ben Green receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Australasian Performing Right Association.
Catherine Strong 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.
Vanuatu’s Minister of Climate Change Adaptation, Ralph Regenvanu, has welcomed the historic International Court of Justice (ICJ) climate ruling, calling it a “milestone in the fight for climate justice”.
The ICJ has delivered a landmark advisory opinion on states’ obligations under international law to act on climate change.
The ruling marks a major shift in the global push for climate justice.
Vanuatu — one of the nations behind the campaign — has pledged to take the decision back to the UN General Assembly (UNGA) to seek a resolution supporting its full implementation.
Climate Change Minister Regenvanu said in a statement: “We now have a common foundation based on the rule of law, releasing us from the limitations of individual nations’ political interests that have dominated climate action.
“This moment will drive stronger action and accountability to protect our planet and peoples.”
The ICJ confirmed that state responsibilities extend beyond voluntary commitments under the UNFCCC and Paris Agreement.
It ruled that customary international law also requires states to prevent environmental and transboundary harm, protect human rights, and cooperate to address climate change impacts.
Duties apply to all states These duties apply to all states, whether or not they have ratified specific climate treaties.
Violations of these obligations carry legal consequences. The ICJ clarified that climate damage can be scientifically traced to specific polluter states whose actions or inaction cause harm.
As a result, those states could be required to stop harmful activities, regulate private sector emissions, end fossil fuel subsidies, and provide reparations to affected states and individuals.
“The implementation of this decision will set a new status quo and the structural change required to give our current and future generations hope for a healthy planet and sustainable future,” Minister Regenvanu added.
He said high-emitting nations, especially those with a history of emissions, must be held accountable.
Despite continued fossil fuel expansion and weakening global ambition — compounded by the United States’ withdrawal from the Paris Agreement — Regenvanu said the ICJ ruling was a powerful tool for campaigners, lawyers, and governments.
“Vanuatu is proud and honoured to have spearheaded this initiative,” he said.
‘Powerful testament’ “The number of states and civil society actors that have joined this cause is a powerful testament to the leadership of Small Island Developing States (SIDS) and youth activists.”
The court’s decision follows a resolution adopted by consensus at the UNGA on 29 March 2023. That campaign was initiated by the Pacific Island Students Fighting Climate Change and backed by the Vanuatu government, calling for greater accountability from high-emitting countries.
The ruling will now be taken to the UNGA in September and is expected to be a central topic at COP30 in Brazil this November.
Vanuatu has committed to working with other nations to turn this legal outcome into coordinated action through diplomacy, policy, litigation, and international cooperation.
“This is just the beginning,” Regenvanu said. “Success will depend on what happens next. We look forward to working with global partners to ensure this becomes a true turning point for climate justice.”
Republished from the Vanuatu Daily Post with permission.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) delivers its historic climate ruling in The Hague on Tuesday. Image: VDP
Last week, the ultrafast fashion brand Princess Polly received B Corp certification. This certification is designed to accredit for-profit businesses that provide social impact and environmental benefit.
Established on the Gold Coast in 2010, a 50% stake in Princess Polly was acquired by United States-based A.K.A. Brands in 2018.
Since then, it has grown its global reach as a low-cost, high-turnover online retailer.
So can ultrafast fashion ever be sustainable?
Who is Princess Polly?
Princess Polly distinguishes itself from other fast fashion retailers through a mission to “make on-trend, sustainable fashion accessible to everyone”.
Yet, on the sustainability rating website Good On You, Princess Polly receives a “Not Good Enough” grade, due to their lack of action on reducing plastic and textile waste or protecting biodiversity in their supply chains, and the absence of evidence that they pay their workers a living wage.
Regardless of how they make their clothes, Princess Polly produces a lot. At the time of writing, the brand has 3,920 different styles available on their website (excluding shoes and accessories).
Of those, 34% (1,355 styles) are listed as “lower impact,” which means items are made using materials such as organic cotton and linen, recycled polyester and cellulose fabrics. There are also 720 items on the website currently listed as “new”: their daily new arrivals means they are constantly adding fresh items for sale.
Overproduction, no matter what the garments are made from, is inherently wasteful. Even when clothes are purchased (and 10–40% of the clothing produced each year is not sold), the poor quality of fast fashion items means that they end up in landfill faster and stay there for longer, contributing to the ongoing environmental disaster.
Sustainability communication
In Australia, 1,096 companies are accredited with B Corp status, including 152 fashion businesses.
B Corp assesses the practices of a company as a whole, rather than focusing on one single social or environmental issue. Businesses must score at least 80 out of a possible 250+ points in the B Impact Assessment to achieve accreditation.
Organisations are assessed in five key areas – community, customers, environment, governance and workers – and must meet high standards of social and environmental performance, transparency and accountability.
These certifications can enhance consumer trust without the need for detailed explanations. For fashion brands, accreditation can help them stand out in a crowded market. They can provide legitimacy, attract ethical fashion consumers and reduce consumer scepticism.
While B Corp aims to provide assurance to consumers, activists have accused it of greenwashing. In 2022, the organisation came under fire for accrediting Nespresso, a brand owned by Nestlé, which has a reputation for poor worker rights and sourcing policies.
B Corp is now facing renewed condemnation for issuing certification to Princess Polly.
Who needs certification?
Other B Corp certified Australian fashion brands such as Clothing the Gaps and Outland Denim have built their reputations on their ethical credentials. For values-driven fashion-based social enterprises such as these, accreditations can provide valuable guarantees regarding ethical processes.
According to our research, however, there are several barriers fashion-based social enterprises face when pursuing ethical accreditation.
The cost of accreditation, both financial and in terms of time, skills and resourcing, is a significant challenge. And there is no certification that covers all aspects of environmental sustainability and ethical production. As a result, fashion-based social enterprises often require multiple accreditations to fully communicate the breadth of their ethical commitments.
Despite the costs involved, if fashion-based social enterprises don’t acquire certain certifications they risk being ineligible for government grants and tenders, such as social procurement contracts.
Differences between fashion-based social enterprises and fast fashion brands are stark. While Clothing the Gaps, Outland Denim and Princess Polly now all hold B Corp certification, the former score much more highly on the B Impact Assessment.
The value and credibility of the certification is diminished when it extends to unsustainable ultrafast fashion.
Is it possible for fast fashion to ever be sustainable?
The question of whether fast fashion can ever be sustainable has become increasingly heated since the advent of ultrafast fashion, where brands produce on demand and sell directly online.
Fast fashion took seasonal trends from high fashion runways and made them available to consumers at low costs within weeks. Ultrafast fashion takes trends from social media and reproduces them extremely cheaply for mass consumption within days.
Both fast and ultrafast fashion’s low-cost, high-volume models encourage consumers to value quantity over quality. Using permanent sales and discounts, these brands incentivise multiple purchases of items that may never actually be worn. Online “micro trends” and “haul” videos further spur this overconsumption.
The overconsumption of fast fashion means lots of it ends up in landfill. Dipanjan Pal/Unsplash
Princess Polly may be using more sustainable textiles and engaging in more ethical forms of production than some of its ultrafast fashion counterparts. But this is not enough when the business model itself is unsustainable. Accreditations such as B Corp are unable to account for this nuance.
Princess Polly claims to make sustainable fashion, yet it is also proudly trend driven. As an ultrafast fashion brand, it relies on overproduction and overconsumption. The idea that this can ever be “sustainable” is simply an oxymoron.
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.
After meeting Hurrell, Finance Minister Nicola Willis appeared to place some of the blame for the high price of butter on supermarkets rather than on the dairy giant.
According to Stats NZ, butter prices rose by 46.5% in the year to June and are now 120% higher than a decade ago. The average price for a 500g block is NZ$8.60, with some local brands costing over $10.
But solving the problem is not a matter of waving a magic economic wand. Several factors influence butter prices, few of which can be altered directly by government policy.
And the question remains – would we want to? Proposals such as reducing exports to boost domestic supply, or cutting goods and services tax (GST) on dairy products, all carry consequences.
Limited domestic supply and strong global demand have pushed up prices for a range of commodities – not just milk, but beef as well. These increases are reflected in local retail prices.
Another contributing factor is rising costs along the supply chain. At the farm level, producers are receiving record prices for dairy. But this comes at a time when input costs have also increased significantly. It is not all profit.
Weighing the options
Before changing rules around dairy exports, the government must weigh the broader consequences.
On the one hand, high milk prices benefit “NZ Inc”. The dairy sector accounts for 25% of exports and employs 55,000 New Zealanders. When farmers do well, the wider rural economy benefits – with flow-on effects for the country as a whole.
On the other hand, there is the ongoing challenge of domestic food security. Many people cannot afford basic groceries and foodbank use is rising.
So how can New Zealand maintain a food system that benefits from exports while also supporting struggling domestic consumers?
One option is to remove GST from food. Other countries exempt dairy products from such taxes in an effort to make staples more affordable.
Another route would be to examine Fonterra’s dominance in the supply chain. There are advantages to having a strong global player. And it is not in the national interest for the company to incur losses on domestic sales.
Still, the structure of the market may warrant scrutiny. For a long time there were just two main suppliers of processed dairy products – Fonterra and Goodman Fielder – and two main retailers – Foodstuffs and Woolworths. This set up reduced the need to compete on prices.
The opaque nature of the profit margins across the supply chain also fuels suspicion. Consumers know what they pay at the checkout and what farmers receive. But the rest is less clear. This lack of transparency invites speculation about who benefits from soaring prices.
In the end, though, the government may not need to act at all.
As economists like to say: “Nothing cures high prices like high prices.” While demand for butter is relatively inelastic, there comes a point at which consumers reduce their purchases or seek alternatives. International buyers will also push back – and falling global demand may redirect more supply to domestic markets.
High prices also act as a signal to producers across the globe to increase production, which could happen relatively quickly if there are favourable climatic and other conditions.
Alan Renwick 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.
Just over one-third of Australians are eligible for public dental services, which provide free or low cost dental treatment.
Yet demand for these services continues to exceed supply. As a result, many Australian adults face long waits for access, which can be up to three years in some states.
So what’s going wrong with public dental care in Australia? And how can it be fixed?
Who funds public dental care?
Both the federal government and state and territory governments fund public dental services. These are primarily targeted at low-income Australians, including children, and hard-to-reach populations, known as priority groups.
Individuals and families bear a majority of the costs for dental services. They paid around 81% (A$10.1 billion) of the cost for dental services in 2022–23, either directly through out-of-pocket expenses, or through private health insurance premiums.
The Commonwealth contributed 11% to the cost of dental care, while the states and territories paid the remaining 8% in 2022–23.
While children from low-income families tend to benefit from this scheme, critics have raised concerns about the low uptake. Only one-third use the dental program in any given year.
Some children access free or low-cost dental care from state and territory based services, such as the Victorian Smile Squad school dental program or the NSW Health Primary School Mobile Dental Program.
Others use their private health insurance to pay for some of the costs of private dental care.
What if you’re low-income but aren’t eligible?
Some Australians aren’t eligible for public dental services but can’t afford private dental care. In 2022–23, around one in six people (18%) delayed or didn’t see a dental professional when they needed to because of the cost.
Some Australians are accessing their superannuation funds under compassionate grounds for dental treatment. The amount people have accessed has grown eight-fold from 2018–19 to 2023–24, from $66.4 million to $526.4 million.
However, concerns have been raised about the exploitation of this provision. Some people have accessed their super for dental treatment costing more than $20,000. This more than what would typically be required for urgent dental care, impacting their future financial security.
Why are the waits so long in the public dental care system?
The long waits are due to a combination of factors, alongside high levels need:
systemic under-funding by Australian governments. This is exacerbated by federal government funding for public dental services remaining fixed rather than being indexed annually
workforce shortages in rural and remote areas, with dental practitioners concentrated in wealthy, metro areas
poor incentives for the oral health workforce in public dental services
too few public clinics, in part because the initial outlay and ongoing equipment costs are so great.
What is the government planning in the long term?
The federal government is taking action to improve the affordability of dental services through long-term funding reforms only targeting priority populations to bring some dental services into Medicare.
An initial focus is for older Australians and First Nations people.
Cost estimates for a universal dental scheme vary significantly, depending on the population coverage and the number of dental benefits individuals are eligible for, and whether services are capped (as in the case of the Child Dental Benefits Schedule) or uncapped.
The Grattan Institute estimates a capped scheme would cost $5.6 billion annually.
When increasing government funding for public dental service, it’s important policymakers ensure the services included are evidence-based and represent value for money.
What needs to be done in the meantime
Meaningful long-term funding reform towards a universal dental scheme requires some foundational policy work.
First, there should be an agreed understanding of what dental services should be government subsidised and provide annual limits for reimbursement to prevent overtreatment. This would avoid some people getting a lot of dental treatment they don’t need, while others could miss out.
Second, resource allocation is best done when we focus on prevention and governments fund cost-effective dental services. Priority-setting is best done using economic evaluation tools.
Third, the federal government should extend its existing decision-making frameworks to include dental services. This would bring dental care in line with medicine and service listings on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) and the Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS), ensuring that safety, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness inform public funding decisions.
Fourth, the government needs to reform the workforce. This should include funding to support recruitment and training of students from regional, rural and remote areas. These students are more likely to return to their communities to work, balancing the unequal distribution of the workforce.
We also urgently need to attract and retain more people to work in public dental services.
Finally, we need a coordinated national approach to oral health policy and funding. The federal government has an opportunity to do this now as consultations continue through 2025 to develop and implement the National Oral Health Plan 2025–2034.
Santosh Tadakamadla received National Health and Medical Research Council Early Career Fellowship (APP1161659) from 2019-2023. He is Head of Dentistry and Oral Health at La Trobe Rural Health School in Bendigo.
Tan Nguyen receives funding from National Health and Medical Research Council (Postgraduate Scholarship Scheme APP1189802). He is affiliated with Deakin University, Monash University, Oral Health Victoria, Public Association of Australia, National Oral Health Alliance and Dental Board of Australia.
Just over one-third of Australians are eligible for public dental services, which provide free or low cost dental treatment.
Yet demand for these services continues to exceed supply. As a result, many Australian adults face long waits for access, which can be up to three years in some states.
So what’s going wrong with public dental care in Australia? And how can it be fixed?
Who funds public dental care?
Both the federal government and state and territory governments fund public dental services. These are primarily targeted at low-income Australians, including children, and hard-to-reach populations, known as priority groups.
Individuals and families bear a majority of the costs for dental services. They paid around 81% (A$10.1 billion) of the cost for dental services in 2022–23, either directly through out-of-pocket expenses, or through private health insurance premiums.
The Commonwealth contributed 11% to the cost of dental care, while the states and territories paid the remaining 8% in 2022–23.
While children from low-income families tend to benefit from this scheme, critics have raised concerns about the low uptake. Only one-third use the dental program in any given year.
Some children access free or low-cost dental care from state and territory based services, such as the Victorian Smile Squad school dental program or the NSW Health Primary School Mobile Dental Program.
Others use their private health insurance to pay for some of the costs of private dental care.
What if you’re low-income but aren’t eligible?
Some Australians aren’t eligible for public dental services but can’t afford private dental care. In 2022–23, around one in six people (18%) delayed or didn’t see a dental professional when they needed to because of the cost.
Some Australians are accessing their superannuation funds under compassionate grounds for dental treatment. The amount people have accessed has grown eight-fold from 2018–19 to 2023–24, from $66.4 million to $526.4 million.
However, concerns have been raised about the exploitation of this provision. Some people have accessed their super for dental treatment costing more than $20,000. This more than what would typically be required for urgent dental care, impacting their future financial security.
Why are the waits so long in the public dental care system?
The long waits are due to a combination of factors, alongside high levels need:
systemic under-funding by Australian governments. This is exacerbated by federal government funding for public dental services remaining fixed rather than being indexed annually
workforce shortages in rural and remote areas, with dental practitioners concentrated in wealthy, metro areas
poor incentives for the oral health workforce in public dental services
too few public clinics, in part because the initial outlay and ongoing equipment costs are so great.
What is the government planning in the long term?
The federal government is taking action to improve the affordability of dental services through long-term funding reforms only targeting priority populations to bring some dental services into Medicare.
An initial focus is for older Australians and First Nations people.
Cost estimates for a universal dental scheme vary significantly, depending on the population coverage and the number of dental benefits individuals are eligible for, and whether services are capped (as in the case of the Child Dental Benefits Schedule) or uncapped.
The Grattan Institute estimates a capped scheme would cost $5.6 billion annually.
When increasing government funding for public dental service, it’s important policymakers ensure the services included are evidence-based and represent value for money.
What needs to be done in the meantime
Meaningful long-term funding reform towards a universal dental scheme requires some foundational policy work.
First, there should be an agreed understanding of what dental services should be government subsidised and provide annual limits for reimbursement to prevent overtreatment. This would avoid some people getting a lot of dental treatment they don’t need, while others could miss out.
Second, resource allocation is best done when we focus on prevention and governments fund cost-effective dental services. Priority-setting is best done using economic evaluation tools.
Third, the federal government should extend its existing decision-making frameworks to include dental services. This would bring dental care in line with medicine and service listings on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) and the Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS), ensuring that safety, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness inform public funding decisions.
Fourth, the government needs to reform the workforce. This should include funding to support recruitment and training of students from regional, rural and remote areas. These students are more likely to return to their communities to work, balancing the unequal distribution of the workforce.
We also urgently need to attract and retain more people to work in public dental services.
Finally, we need a coordinated national approach to oral health policy and funding. The federal government has an opportunity to do this now as consultations continue through 2025 to develop and implement the National Oral Health Plan 2025–2034.
Santosh Tadakamadla received National Health and Medical Research Council Early Career Fellowship (APP1161659) from 2019-2023. He is Head of Dentistry and Oral Health at La Trobe Rural Health School in Bendigo.
Tan Nguyen receives funding from National Health and Medical Research Council (Postgraduate Scholarship Scheme APP1189802). He is affiliated with Deakin University, Monash University, Oral Health Victoria, Public Association of Australia, National Oral Health Alliance and Dental Board of Australia.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jean-Nicolas Bordeleau, Research Fellow, Jeff Bleich Centre for Democracy and Disruptive Technologies, Flinders University
Conspiracy theories are a widespread occurrence in today’s hyper connected and polarised world.
Events such as Brexit, the 2016 and 2020 United States presidential elections, and the COVID pandemic serve as potent reminders of how easily these narratives can infiltrate public discourse.
The consequences for society are significant, given a devotion to conspiracy theories can undermine key democratic norms and weaken citizens’ trust in critical institutions. As we know from the January 6 riot at the US Capitol, it can also motivate political violence.
But who is most likely to believe these conspiracies?
My new study with Daniel Stockemer of the University of Ottawa provides a clear and perhaps surprising answer. Published in Political Psychology, our research shows age is one of the most significant predictors of conspiracy beliefs, but not in the way many might assume.
People under 35 are consistently more likely to endorse conspiratorial ideas.
This conclusion is built on a solid foundation of evidence. First, we conducted a meta analysis, a “study of studies”, which synthesised the results of 191 peer-reviewed articles published between 2014 and 2024.
This massive dataset, which included over 374,000 participants, revealed a robust association between young age and belief in conspiracies.
To confirm this, we ran our own original multinational survey of more than 6,000 people across six diverse countries: Australia, Brazil, Canada, Germany, the US and South Africa.
The results were the same. In fact, age proved to be a more powerful predictor of conspiracy beliefs than any other demographic factor we measured, including a person’s gender, income, or level of education.
Why are young people more conspiratorial?
Having established conspiracy beliefs are more prevalent among younger people, we set out to understand why.
Our project tested several potential factors and found three key reasons why younger generations are more susceptible to conspiracy theories.
1. Political alienation
One of the most powerful drivers we identified is a deep sense of political disaffection among young people.
A majority of young people feel alienated from political systems run by politicians who are two or three generations older than them.
This under representation can lead to frustration and the feeling democracy isn’t working for them. In this context, conspiracy theories provide a simple, compelling explanation for this disconnect: the system isn’t just failing, it’s being secretly controlled and manipulated by nefarious actors.
2. Activist style of participation
The way young people choose to take part in politics also plays a significant role.
While they may be less likely to engage in traditional practices such as voting, they are often highly engaged in unconventional forms of participation, such as protests, boycotts and online campaigns.
These activist environments, particularly online, can become fertile ground for conspiracy theories to germinate and spread. They often rely on similar “us versus them” narratives that pit a “righteous” in-group against a “corrupt” establishment.
3. Low self-esteem
Finally, our research confirmed a crucial psychological link to self-esteem.
For individuals with lower perceptions of self worth, believing in a conspiracy theory – blaming external, hidden forces for their problems – can be a way of coping with feelings of powerlessness.
Understanding these root causes is essential because it shows simply debunking false claims is not a sufficient solution.
To truly address the rise of conspiracy theories and limit their consequences, we must tackle the underlying issues that make these narratives so appealing in the first place.
Given the role played by political alienation, a critical step forward is to make our democracies more representative. This is best illustrated by the recent election of Labor Senator Charlotte Walker, who is barely 21.
By actively working to increase the presence of young people in our political institutions, we can help give them faith that the system can work for them, reducing the appeal of theories which claim it is hopelessly corrupt.
More inclusive democracy
This does not mean discouraging the passion of youth activism. Rather, it is about empowering young people with the tools to navigate today’s complex information landscape.
Promoting robust media and digital literacy education could help individuals critically evaluate the information they encounter in all circles, including online activist spaces.
The link to self-esteem also points to a broader societal responsibility.
By investing in the mental health and wellbeing of young people, we can help boost the psychological resilience and sense of agency that makes them less vulnerable to the simplistic blame games offered by conspiracy theories.
Ultimately, building a society that is resistant to misinformation is not about finding fault with a particular generation.
It is about creating a stronger, more inclusive democracy where all citizens, especially the young, feel represented, empowered, and secure.
Jean-Nicolas Bordeleau receives funding from Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Joseph Steinberg, Forrest Foundation Postdoctoral Fellow, English & Literary Studies, The University of Western Australia
Siang LuDavid Kelly/UQP
The Miles Franklin judges described Siang Lu’s Ghost Cities, winner of the 2025 award, as “a grand farce and a haunting meditation on diaspora”. To my mind, it is perhaps the funniest novel ever to have won the Miles Franklin. In the last decade, its closest competitor would be Melissa Lucashenko’s boisterous, brilliant Too Much Lip.
Turn the clock back a few more years, and it’d square off against the puerile humour of Tim Winton’s Cloudstreet, the zany folly of Peter Carey’s Oscar and Lucinda, and Thea Astley’s biting satire The Acolyte. It’d remain a strong contender even in such company.
Lu earned a reputation for satire with his first novel, The Whitewash, in which he lampooned the racial politics of the film industry. Ghost Cities extends this skit, while dialling it up to 11.
“Sitting within a tradition in Australian writing that explores failed expatriation and cultural fraud, Lu’s novel is also something strikingly new,” the judges said, praising its “absurdist bravura”.
A comedy of tyranny
Lu’s sense of humour relies on hyperbole. Over some 300 pages, the characters in Ghost Cities tie themselves in knots over a ludicrous series of edicts, demands and directives issued by a pair of dictators who grow crueller and more capricious with every chapter.
Ghost Cities is a comedy of tyranny in two plots, told via alternating chapters. One begins in a semi-recognisable Sydney, then relocates to the fictitious ghost city of Port Man Tou; the other is a fable set in China’s Imperial City and its labyrinths millennia ago.
Ghost Cities begins in the latter timeline, with the mock-heroic tale of Emperor Lu Huang Du’s ascension to the imperial throne and the beginning of his dictatorial rule. What defines his character, from the very first page, is his yawning ego; he yearns for an exceptional origin myth, a tale of patricide and regicide. The failure to fabricate myths of this kind later leads him to banish a trio of scholars to the Sixth Level of Hell and burn every book in the Imperial Library. What he wants is a hymn to his own “cunning, ruthless strategy and force of will”. But the truth is ignoble.
Emperors should not come to power through inaction. They should not do so by “gawping as their purple-faced fathers clawed and sputtered on what would later be determined to be an awkwardly lodged chicken bone”. They should not “wait, in lacklustre fealty, for that final breathless minute to expire”. They should certainly not then proceed to order the death of every chicken in the land, because of the deranged belief “their traitorous bones were conspiring against His Imperial bloodline”. And they would be well advised not then to issue an edict forbidding the “breeding, eating and harbouring of poultry”, which leads the sons of “a hundred fallen agrarians” to swear vengeance.
Perverse as he is, there is real pleasure to be found in tracking the consequences of Lu Huang Du’s whims. From his banishment of his brother, Lu Dong Pu, for the crime of intercepting an assassin’s blade, to his attempt to elude his prophesied death by conscripting a thousand lookalikes from among his citizens, the emperor is a character governed at every turn by an unspeakable fear of his own mortality.
Through him, and the chapters that recount the consequences of his wildly temperamental rule in the form of an absurd fable, Lu offers a sharp yet entertaining study in the abuse of state power by the narcissistic and incompetent.
Ghost Cities’ second dictator is a director named Baby Bao, who embarks on an egotistical undertaking of his own. His ambition is to create a “historical biopic of the infamous Indomitable Emperor Lu Huang Hu”, a self-styled piece of “cinematic history, a twenty-seven hour extravaganza – no intermission – in simultaneous worldwide release!”. Such a biopic would work primarily to reinforce his delusion that he is biologically “destined for greatness”, by illustrating his belief that his lineage can be traced to the emperor. The conceit makes gleefully explicit the egotism buried in so many artistic projects.
The emperor is later opposed by his brother, Lu Dong Pu, and his nephew, Lu Shan Liang; his counterpart, Xiang Lu (note the resemblance of both their names to their author’s), is a phoney translator hired by the director after he goes viral for his ignorance of Chinese.
Indecencies on indignities
Siang Lu shares an interest in anagrams (and chess) with Russian-American writer Vladimir Nabokov, who appears in his own fiction under names such as Vivian Darkbloom and Adam von Librikov.
Ghost Cities also includes a long, loosely iambic poem titled “Six Levels of Hell”, which narrates Lu Dong Pu’s escape from labyrinthine imprisonment beneath the Imperial City. Lu’s allusions to other texts are too various to properly discuss here. They include John Milton’s Paradise Lost, Dante’s Divine Comedy, Jorge Luis Borges’ Labyrinths, Nabokov’s Pale Fire and Italo Calvino’s Invisible Cities. These references extend Ghost Cities’ concern with the relationship between dictators, architects and artisans, rampaging gods and those humbler deities behind smaller creations.
Women play an important role in Lu’s twin fables, albeit a comparatively subtle one. Wuer, first Lu Dong Pu’s wife and later (against her will) the Imperial Consort, records her husband’s torment in the poem Six Levels of Hell and mourns the death of Lu Shan Liang’s twin brother in a moving parenthetical aside. Yuan (who shares a name with Siang Lu’s wife), a translator and eventually Xiang Lu’s lover, is an intelligent interlocutor.
But Ghost Cities is at its best when it piles indecencies on indignities – when it all goes totally wrong. When piglets are appointed to office. When the swine sits in the chair, and rules as it sees fit.
Joseph Steinberg 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.
Columbia University agreed on July 23, 2025, to pay a US$200 million fine to the federal government and to settle allegations that it did not create a safe environment for Jewish students during Palestinian rights protests in 2024.
The deal will restore the vast majority of the $400 million in federal grants and contracts that Columbia was previously awarded, before the administration withdrew the funding in March 2025.
It marks the first financial and political agreement a university has reached with the Trump administration in its push for more control over higher education – and stands to have significant ripple effects for how other universities and colleges carry out their basic operations.
Amy Lieberman, the education editor at The Conversation U.S., spoke with Brendan Cantwell, a scholar of higher education at Michigan State University, to understand what’s exactly in this agreement – and the lasting precedent it may set on government intervention in higher education.
Palestinian rights demonstrators march through Columbia University on Oct. 7, 2024, marking one year of the war between Hamas and Israel. Kena Betancur/AFP via Getty Images
What’s in the deal Columbia made with the Trump administration?
The agreement requires Columbia to make a $200 million payment to the federal government. Columbia will also pay $21 million to settle investigations brought by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
Columbia will need to keep detailed statistics about student applicants – including their race and ethnicity, grades and SAT scores – as well as information about faculty and staff hiring decisions. Columbia will then have to share this data with the federal government.
In exchange, the federal government will release most of the $400 million in frozen grant money previously awarded to Columbia and allow faculty at the university to compete for future federal grants.
How does this deal address antisemitism?
The Trump administration has cited antisemitism against students and faculty on campuses to justify its broad incursion into the business of universities around the country.
But the federal complaint the administration made against Columbia was not actually about antisemitism. The administration made a formal accusation of antisemitism at Columbia in May of this year but suspended grants to the university in March. The federal government had initially acknowledged that cutting federal research grants did nothing to address the climate for Jewish students on campus, for example.
When the federal government investigates civil rights violations, it usually conducts site visits and does very thorough investigations. We never saw such a government report about antisemitism at Columbia or other universities.
The settlement that Columbia has entered into with the administration also doesn’t do much about antisemitism.
The agreement includes Columbia redefining antisemitism with a broader definition that is also used by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance. The definition now includes “a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews” – a description that is also used by the U.S. State Department and several European governments but some critics say conflates antisemitism with anti-Zionism.
Instead, the agreement primarily has to do with faculty hiring and admissions decisions. The federal government alleges that Columbia is discriminating against white and Asian applicants, and that this will allow the government to ensure that everybody who is admitted is considered only on the basis of merit.
The administration could argue that changing hiring practices to get faculty who are less hostile to Jewish students could change the campus climate, but the agreement doesn’t really identify ways in which the university contributed to or ignored antisemitic conduct.
Is this a new issue?
There has been a long-running issue that conservatives and members of the Trump administration – dating back to his first term – have with higher education. The Trump administration and other conservatives have said for years that higher education is too liberal.
The administration’s complaints aren’t limited to Columbia. Harvard is in a protracted conflict with the administration, and the administration has launched investigations into dozens of other schools around the country. These universities are butting heads with the administration over the same grievance that higher education is too liberal. There are also specific claims about antisemitism on university campuses and the privileges given to nonwhite students in admissions or campus life.
While the administration has a common set of complaints about a range of universities, there is a mix of schools that the administration is taking issue with. Some of them, such as Harvard, are very high profile. The Department of Justice forced out the president at the University of Virginia in January 2025 on the grounds that he had not done enough to root out diversity, equity and inclusion programs at the public university. The University of Virginia may have been a target for the administration because a Republican governor appointed most members of its governance board and agreed with Trump’s complaints.
How could this change the makeup of Columbia’s student population?
Now, with the Columbia deal, the government could say that it would expect to see a proportion of students who are white increase and students who are Black and Latino to decrease at Columbia. That’s a legal approach that America First Legal, a conservative legal advocacy group founded by Stephen Miller, a Trump administration official, has already tried.
Back in February 2025, America First Legal alleged in a federal lawsuit that the University of California, Los Angeles, was using illegal admissions criteria, because of the number of Black and Latino students that were admitted by the school. That lawsuit is ongoing.
Claire Shipman, Columbia University’s acting president, speaks during the school’s May 2025 commencement ceremony. Jeenah Moon/Pool/AFP via Getty Images
What does this agreement mean for US higher education as a whole?
It is an enormous, unprecedented shift in how the federal government works with higher education. Since the McCarthy era in the 1940s and ’50s, when professors were blacklisted and fired because of their alleged communism, Americans have not seen the federal government interrogate education.
The federal government does have a role in securing people’s civil rights, including in the context of higher education, but this is very, very different from how the federal government has done civil rights investigations and entered into agreements with universities in the past.
This agreement is very broad and gives the federal government oversight of things that have long been under universities’ control, such as whom they hire to teach and which students they admit.
The federal government is now saying it has the right to look over universities’ shoulders and guide them in this work that has long been considered independent. And the government is willing to be extremely coercive to get universities to comply.
What signal does this agreement send to other universities?
This agreement sets a precedent for the government to direct colleges and universities to comply with its political agenda. This violates the long tradition of academic independence that had helped to make the U.S. higher education system the envy of the world.
Columbia can afford paying $200 million to the federal government. Most universities can’t afford to pay $200 million.
And most campuses cannot survive without federal resources, whether that comes in the form of student financial aid or research grants. This agreement sets a standard for other universities that, if they don’t immediately do what the federal government wants them to do, the government could impose penalties that are so high it could end their ability to operate.
Brendan Cantwell is a Professor in the Department of Educational Administration at Michigan State University.
Self-correction is fundamental to science. One of its most important forms is peer review, when anonymous experts scrutinise research before it is published. This helps safeguard the accuracy of the written record.
Yet problems slip through. A range of grassroots and institutional initiatives work to identify problematic papers, strengthen the peer-review process, and clean up the scientific record through retractions or journal closures. But these efforts are imperfect and resource intensive.
Soon, artificial intelligence (AI) will be able to supercharge these efforts. What might that mean for public trust in science?
Peer review isn’t catching everything
In recent decades, the digital age and disciplinary diversification have sparked an explosion in the number of scientific papers being published, the number of journals in existence, and the influence of for-profit publishing.
This has opened the doors for exploitation. Opportunistic “paper mills” sell quick publication with minimal review to academics desperate for credentials, while publishers generate substantial profits through huge article-processing fees.
Corporations have also seized the opportunity to fund low-quality research and ghostwrite papers intended to distort the weight of evidence, influence public policy and alter public opinion in favour of their products.
These ongoing challenges highlight the insufficiency of peer review as the primary guardian of scientific reliability. In response, efforts have sprung up to bolster the integrity of the scientific enterprise.
Retraction Watch actively tracks withdrawn papers and other academic misconduct. Academic sleuths and initiatives such as Data Collada identify manipulated data and figures.
Investigative journalists expose corporate influence. A new field of meta-science (science of science) attempts to measure the processes of science and to uncover biases and flaws.
Not all bad science has a major impact, but some certainly does. It doesn’t just stay within academia; it often seeps into public understanding and policy.
Scientists know that a lot of scientific work is inconsequential, but the public may interpret this differently. Jamillah Knowles & We and AI, CC BY-SA
AI is already helping police the literature
Until recently, technological assistance in self-correction was mostly limited to plagiarism detectors. But things are changing. Machine-learning services such as ImageTwin and Proofig now scan millions of figures for signs of duplication, manipulation and AI generation.
Natural language processing tools flag “tortured phrases” – the telltale word salads of paper mills. Bibliometric dashboards such as one by Semantic Scholar trace whether papers are cited in support or contradiction.
AI – especially agentic, reasoning-capable models increasingly proficient in mathematics and logic – will soon uncover more subtle flaws.
For example, the Black Spatula Project explores the ability of the latest AI models to check published mathematical proofs at scale, automatically identifying algebraic inconsistencies that eluded human reviewers. Our own work mentioned above also substantially relies on large language models to process large volumes of text.
Given full-text access and sufficient computing power, these systems could soon enable a global audit of the scholarly record. A comprehensive audit will likely find some outright fraud and a much larger mass of routine, journeyman work with garden-variety errors.
We do not know yet how prevalent fraud is, but what we do know is that an awful lot of scientific work is inconsequential. Scientists know this; it’s much discussed that a good deal of published work is never or very rarely cited.
To outsiders, this revelation may be as jarring as uncovering fraud, because it collides with the image of dramatic, heroic scientific discovery that populates university press releases and trade press treatments.
What might give this audit added weight is its AI author, which may be seen as (and may in fact be) impartial and competent, and therefore reliable.
As a result, these findings will be vulnerable to exploitation in disinformation campaigns, particularly since AI is already being used to that end.
Reframing the scientific ideal
Safeguarding public trust requires redefining the scientist’s role in more transparent, realistic terms. Much of today’s research is incremental, career‑sustaining work rooted in education, mentorship and public engagement.
If we are to be honest with ourselves and with the public, we must abandon the incentives that pressure universities and scientific publishers, as well as scientists themselves, to exaggerate the significance of their work. Truly ground-breaking work is rare. But that does not render the rest of scientific work useless.
A more humble and honest portrayal of the scientist as a contributor to a collective, evolving understanding will be more robust to AI-driven scrutiny than the myth of science as a parade of individual breakthroughs.
A sweeping, cross-disciplinary audit is on the horizon. It could come from a government watchdog, a think tank, an anti-science group or a corporation seeking to undermine public trust in science.
Scientists can already anticipate what it will reveal. If the scientific community prepares for the findings – or better still, takes the lead – the audit could inspire a disciplined renewal. But if we delay, the cracks it uncovers may be misinterpreted as fractures in the scientific enterprise itself.
Science has never derived its strength from infallibility. Its credibility lies in the willingness to correct and repair. We must now demonstrate that willingness publicly, before trust is broken.
Naomi Oreskes has received funding from various academic and philanthropic organisations. Currently, her research is partly funded by the Rockefeller Family Fund and the Maine Community Fund. She also receives royalties from her publications and honoraria for speaking events.
Alexander Kaurov 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.
Former New Zealand prime minister Helen Clark warned activists and campaigners in a speech on the deck of the Greenpeace environmental flagship Rainbow WarriorIII last night to be wary of global “storm clouds” and the renewed existential threat of nuclear weapons.
Speaking on her reflections on four decades after the bombing of the original Rainbow Warrior on 10 July 1985, she said that New Zealand had a lot to be proud of but the world was now in a “precarious” state.
Clark praised Greenpeace over its long struggle, challenging the global campaigners to keep up the fight for a nuclear-free Pacific.
“For New Zealand, having been proudly nuclear-free since the mid-1980s, life has got a lot more complicated for us as well, and I have done a lot of campaigning against New Zealand signing up to any aspect of the AUKUS arrangement because it seems to me that being associated with any agreement that supplies nuclear ship technology to Australia is more or less encouraging the development of nuclear threats in the South Pacific,” she said.
“While I am not suggesting that Australians are about to put nuclear weapons on them, we know that others do. This is not the Pacific that we want.
“It is not the Pacific that we fought for going back all those years.
“So we need to be very concerned about these storm clouds gathering.”
Lessons for humanity Clark was prime minister 1999-2008 and served as a minister in David Lange’s Labour government that passed New Zealand’s nuclear-free legislation in 1987 – two years after the Rainbow Warrior bombing by French secret agents.
She was also head of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) in 2009-2017.
“When you think 40 years on, humanity might have learned some lessons. But it seems we have to repeat the lessons over and over again, or we will be dragged on the path of re-engagement with those who use nuclear weapons as their ultimate defence,” Clark told the Greenpeace activists, crew and guests.
“Forty years on, we look back with a lot of pride, actually, at how New Zealand responded to the bombing of the Rainbow Warrior. We stood up with the passage of the nuclear-free legislation in 1987, we stood up with a lot of things.
“All of this is under threat; the international scene now is quite precarious with respect to nuclear weapons. This is an existential threat.”
Nuclear-free Pacific reflections with Helen Clark Video: Greenpeace
In response to Tahitian researcher and advocate Ena Manuireva who spoke earlier about the legacy of a health crisis as a result of 30 years of French nuclear tests at Moruroa and Fangataufa, she recalled her own thoughts.
“It reminds us of why we were so motivated to fight for a nuclear-free Pacific because we remember the history of what happened in French Polynesia, in the Marshall Islands, in the South Australian desert, at Maralinga, to the New Zealand servicemen who were sent up in the navy ships, the Rotoiti and the Pukaki, in the late 1950s, to stand on deck while the British exploded their bombs [at Christmas Island in what is today Kiribati].
“These poor guys were still seeking compensation when I was PM with the illnesses you [Ena] described in French Polynesia.
Former NZ prime minister Helen Clark . . . “I remember one of the slogans in the 1970s and 1980s was ‘if it is so safe, test them in France’.” Image: Asia Pacific Report
Testing ground for ‘others’ “So the Pacific was a testing ground for ‘others’ far away and I remember one of the slogans in the 1970s and 1980s was ‘if it is so safe, test them in France’. Right? It wasn’t so safe.
“Mind you, they regarded French Polynesia as France.
“David Robie asked me to write the foreword to the new edition of his book, Eyes of Fire: The Last Voyage and Legacy of the Rainbow Warrior, and it brought back so many memories of those times because those of you who are my age will remember that the 1980s were the peak of the Cold War.
“We had the Reagan administration [in the US] that was actively preparing for war. It was a terrifying time. It was before the demise of the Soviet Union. And nuclear testing was just part of that big picture where people were preparing for war.
“I think that the wonderful development in New Zealand was that people knew enough to know that we didn’t want to be defended by nuclear weapons because that was not mutually assured survival — it was mutually assured destruction.”
New Zealand took a stand, Clark said, but taking that stand led to the attack on the Rainbow Warrior in Auckland harbour by French state-backed terrorism where tragically Greenpeace photographer Fernando Pereira lost his life.
“I remember I was on my way to Nairobi for a conference for women, and I was in Zimbabwe, when the news came through about the bombing of a boat in Auckland harbour.
‘Absolutely shocking’ “It was absolutely shocking, we had never experienced such a thing. I recall when I returned to New Zealand, [Prime Minister] David Lange one morning striding down to the party caucus room and telling us before it went public that it was without question that French spies had planted the bombs and the rest was history.
“It was a very tense time. Full marks to Greenpeace for keeping up the struggle for so long — long before it was a mainstream issue Greenpeace was out there in the Pacific taking on nuclear testing.
“Different times from today, but when I wrote the foreword for David’s book I noted that storm clouds were gathering again around nuclear weapons and issues. I suppose that there is so much else going on in a tragic 24 news cycle — catastrophe day in and day out in Gaza, severe technology and lethal weapons in Ukraine killing people, wherever you look there are so many conflicts.
“The international agreements that we have relied are falling into disrepair. For example, if I were in Europe I would be extremely worried about the demise of the intermediate range missile weapons pact which has now been abandoned by the Americans and the Russians.
“And that governs the deployment of medium range missiles in Europe.
“The New Start Treaty, which was a nuclear arms control treaty between what was the Soviet Union and the US expires next year. Will it be renegotiated in the current circumstances? Who knows?”
With the Non-proliferation Treaty, there are acknowledged nuclear powers who had not signed the treaty — “and those that do make very little effort to live up to the aspiration, which is to negotiate an end to nuclear weapons”.
Developments with Iran “We have seen recently the latest developments with Iran, and for all of Iran’s many sins let us acknowledge that it is a party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty,” she said.
“It did subject itself, for the most part, to the inspections regime. Israel, which bombed it, is not a party to the treaty, and doesn’t accept inspections.
“There are so many double standards that people have long complained about the Non-Proliferation Treaty where the original five nuclear powers are deemed okay to have them, somehow, whereas there are others who don’t join at all.
“And then over the Ukraine conflict we have seen worrying threats of the use of nuclear weapons.”
Clark warned that we the use of artificial intelligence it would not be long before asking it: “How do I make a nuclear weapon?”
“It’s not so difficult to make a dirty bomb. So we should be extremely worried about all these developments.”
Then Clark spoke about the “complications” facing New Zealand.
Mangareva researcher and advocate Ena Manuireva . . . “My mum died of lung cancer and the doctors said that she was a ‘passive smoker’. My mum had not smoked for the last 65 years.” Image: Asia Pacific Report
Teariki’s message to De Gaulle In his address, Ena Manuireva started off by quoting the late Tahitian parliamentarian John Teariki who had courageously appealed to General Charles De Gaulle in 1966 after France had already tested three nuclear devices:
“No government has ever had the honesty or the cynical frankness to admit that its nuclear tests might be dangerous. No government has ever hesitated to make other peoples — preferably small, defenceless ones — bear the burden.”
“May you, Mr President, take back your troops, your bombs, and your planes.
“Then, later, our leukemia and cancer patients would not be able to accuse you of being the cause of their illness.
“Then, our future generations would not be able to blame you for the birth of monsters and deformed children.
“Then, you would give the world an example worthy of France . . .
“Then, Polynesia, united, would be proud and happy to be French, and, as in the early days of Free France, we would all once again become your best and most loyal friends.”
‘Emotional moment’ Manuireva said that 10 days earlier, he had been on board Rainbow Warrior III for the ceremony to mark the bombing in 1985 that cost the life of Fernando Pereira – “and the lives of a lot of Mā’ohi people”.
“It was a very emotional moment for me. It reminded me of my mother and father as I am a descendant of those on Mangareva atoll who were contaminated by those nuclear tests.
“My mum died of lung cancer and the doctors said that she was a ‘passive smoker’. My mum had not smoked for the last 65 years.
“French nuclear testing started on 2 July 1966 with Aldebaran and lasted 30 years.”
He spoke about how the military “top brass fled the island” when winds start blowing towards Mangareva. “Food was ready but they didn’t stay”.
“By the time I was born in December 1967 in Mangareva, France had already exploded 9 atmospheric nuclear tests on Moruroa and Fangataufa atolls, about 400km from Mangareva.”
France’s most powerful explosion was Canopus with 2.6 megatonnes in August 1968. It was a thermonuclear hydrogen bomb — 150 times more powerful than Hiroshima.
Greenpeace Aotearoa executive director Russel Norman . . . a positive of the campaign future. Image: Asia Pacific Report
‘Poisoned gift’ Manuireva said that by France “gifting us the bomb”, Tahitians had been left “with all the ongoing consequences on the people’s health costs that the Ma’ohi Nui government is paying for”.
He described how the compensation programme was inadequate, lengthy and complicated.
Manuireva also spoke about the consequences for the environment. Both Moruroa and Fangataufa were condemned as “no go” zones and islanders had lost their lands forever.
He also noted that while France had gifted the former headquarters of the Atomic Energy Commission (CEP) as a “form of reconciliation” plans to turn it into a museum were thwarted because the building was “rife with asbestos”.
“It is a poisonous gift that will cost millions for the local government to fix.”
Greenpeace Aotearoa executive director Russel Norman spoke of the impact on the Greenpeace organisation of the French secret service bombing of their ship and also introduced the guest speakers and responded to their statements.
A Q and A session was also held to round off the stimulating evening.
A question during the open mike session on board the Rainbow Warrior. Image: Asia Pacific Report
Former New Zealand prime minister Helen Clark warned activists and campaigners in a speech on the deck of the Greenpeace environmental flagship Rainbow WarriorIII last night to be wary of global “storm clouds” and the renewed existential threat of nuclear weapons.
Speaking on her reflections on four decades after the bombing of the original Rainbow Warrior on 10 July 1985, she said that New Zealand had a lot to be proud of but the world was now in a “precarious” state.
Clark praised Greenpeace over its long struggle, challenging the global campaigners to keep up the fight for a nuclear-free Pacific.
“For New Zealand, having been proudly nuclear-free since the mid-1980s, life has got a lot more complicated for us as well, and I have done a lot of campaigning against New Zealand signing up to any aspect of the AUKUS arrangement because it seems to me that being associated with any agreement that supplies nuclear ship technology to Australia is more or less encouraging the development of nuclear threats in the South Pacific,” she said.
“While I am not suggesting that Australians are about to put nuclear weapons on them, we know that others do. This is not the Pacific that we want.
“It is not the Pacific that we fought for going back all those years.
“So we need to be very concerned about these storm clouds gathering.”
Lessons for humanity Clark was prime minister 1999-2008 and served as a minister in David Lange’s Labour government that passed New Zealand’s nuclear-free legislation in 1987 – two years after the Rainbow Warrior bombing by French secret agents.
She was also head of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) in 2009-2017.
“When you think 40 years on, humanity might have learned some lessons. But it seems we have to repeat the lessons over and over again, or we will be dragged on the path of re-engagement with those who use nuclear weapons as their ultimate defence,” Clark told the Greenpeace activists, crew and guests.
“Forty years on, we look back with a lot of pride, actually, at how New Zealand responded to the bombing of the Rainbow Warrior. We stood up with the passage of the nuclear-free legislation in 1987, we stood up with a lot of things.
“All of this is under threat; the international scene now is quite precarious with respect to nuclear weapons. This is an existential threat.”
Nuclear-free Pacific reflections with Helen Clark Video: Greenpeace
In response to Tahitian researcher and advocate Ena Manuireva who spoke earlier about the legacy of a health crisis as a result of 30 years of French nuclear tests at Moruroa and Fangataufa, she recalled her own thoughts.
“It reminds us of why we were so motivated to fight for a nuclear-free Pacific because we remember the history of what happened in French Polynesia, in the Marshall Islands, in the South Australian desert, at Maralinga, to the New Zealand servicemen who were sent up in the navy ships, the Rotoiti and the Pukaki, in the late 1950s, to stand on deck while the British exploded their bombs [at Christmas Island in what is today Kiribati].
“These poor guys were still seeking compensation when I was PM with the illnesses you [Ena] described in French Polynesia.
Former NZ prime minister Helen Clark . . . “I remember one of the slogans in the 1970s and 1980s was ‘if it is so safe, test them in France’.” Image: Asia Pacific Report
Testing ground for ‘others’ “So the Pacific was a testing ground for ‘others’ far away and I remember one of the slogans in the 1970s and 1980s was ‘if it is so safe, test them in France’. Right? It wasn’t so safe.
“Mind you, they regarded French Polynesia as France.
“David Robie asked me to write the foreword to the new edition of his book, Eyes of Fire: The Last Voyage and Legacy of the Rainbow Warrior, and it brought back so many memories of those times because those of you who are my age will remember that the 1980s were the peak of the Cold War.
“We had the Reagan administration [in the US] that was actively preparing for war. It was a terrifying time. It was before the demise of the Soviet Union. And nuclear testing was just part of that big picture where people were preparing for war.
“I think that the wonderful development in New Zealand was that people knew enough to know that we didn’t want to be defended by nuclear weapons because that was not mutually assured survival — it was mutually assured destruction.”
New Zealand took a stand, Clark said, but taking that stand led to the attack on the Rainbow Warrior in Auckland harbour by French state-backed terrorism where tragically Greenpeace photographer Fernando Pereira lost his life.
“I remember I was on my way to Nairobi for a conference for women, and I was in Zimbabwe, when the news came through about the bombing of a boat in Auckland harbour.
‘Absolutely shocking’ “It was absolutely shocking, we had never experienced such a thing. I recall when I returned to New Zealand, [Prime Minister] David Lange one morning striding down to the party caucus room and telling us before it went public that it was without question that French spies had planted the bombs and the rest was history.
“It was a very tense time. Full marks to Greenpeace for keeping up the struggle for so long — long before it was a mainstream issue Greenpeace was out there in the Pacific taking on nuclear testing.
“Different times from today, but when I wrote the foreword for David’s book I noted that storm clouds were gathering again around nuclear weapons and issues. I suppose that there is so much else going on in a tragic 24 news cycle — catastrophe day in and day out in Gaza, severe technology and lethal weapons in Ukraine killing people, wherever you look there are so many conflicts.
“The international agreements that we have relied are falling into disrepair. For example, if I were in Europe I would be extremely worried about the demise of the intermediate range missile weapons pact which has now been abandoned by the Americans and the Russians.
“And that governs the deployment of medium range missiles in Europe.
“The New Start Treaty, which was a nuclear arms control treaty between what was the Soviet Union and the US expires next year. Will it be renegotiated in the current circumstances? Who knows?”
With the Non-proliferation Treaty, there are acknowledged nuclear powers who had not signed the treaty — “and those that do make very little effort to live up to the aspiration, which is to negotiate an end to nuclear weapons”.
Developments with Iran “We have seen recently the latest developments with Iran, and for all of Iran’s many sins let us acknowledge that it is a party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty,” she said.
“It did subject itself, for the most part, to the inspections regime. Israel, which bombed it, is not a party to the treaty, and doesn’t accept inspections.
“There are so many double standards that people have long complained about the Non-Proliferation Treaty where the original five nuclear powers are deemed okay to have them, somehow, whereas there are others who don’t join at all.
“And then over the Ukraine conflict we have seen worrying threats of the use of nuclear weapons.”
Clark warned that we the use of artificial intelligence it would not be long before asking it: “How do I make a nuclear weapon?”
“It’s not so difficult to make a dirty bomb. So we should be extremely worried about all these developments.”
Then Clark spoke about the “complications” facing New Zealand.
Mangareva researcher and advocate Ena Manuireva . . . “My mum died of lung cancer and the doctors said that she was a ‘passive smoker’. My mum had not smoked for the last 65 years.” Image: Asia Pacific Report
Teariki’s message to De Gaulle In his address, Ena Manuireva started off by quoting the late Tahitian parliamentarian John Teariki who had courageously appealed to General Charles De Gaulle in 1966 after France had already tested three nuclear devices:
“No government has ever had the honesty or the cynical frankness to admit that its nuclear tests might be dangerous. No government has ever hesitated to make other peoples — preferably small, defenceless ones — bear the burden.”
“May you, Mr President, take back your troops, your bombs, and your planes.
“Then, later, our leukemia and cancer patients would not be able to accuse you of being the cause of their illness.
“Then, our future generations would not be able to blame you for the birth of monsters and deformed children.
“Then, you would give the world an example worthy of France . . .
“Then, Polynesia, united, would be proud and happy to be French, and, as in the early days of Free France, we would all once again become your best and most loyal friends.”
‘Emotional moment’ Manuireva said that 10 days earlier, he had been on board Rainbow Warrior III for the ceremony to mark the bombing in 1985 that cost the life of Fernando Pereira – “and the lives of a lot of Mā’ohi people”.
“It was a very emotional moment for me. It reminded me of my mother and father as I am a descendant of those on Mangareva atoll who were contaminated by those nuclear tests.
“My mum died of lung cancer and the doctors said that she was a ‘passive smoker’. My mum had not smoked for the last 65 years.
“French nuclear testing started on 2 July 1966 with Aldebaran and lasted 30 years.”
He spoke about how the military “top brass fled the island” when winds start blowing towards Mangareva. “Food was ready but they didn’t stay”.
“By the time I was born in December 1967 in Mangareva, France had already exploded 9 atmospheric nuclear tests on Moruroa and Fangataufa atolls, about 400km from Mangareva.”
France’s most powerful explosion was Canopus with 2.6 megatonnes in August 1968. It was a thermonuclear hydrogen bomb — 150 times more powerful than Hiroshima.
Greenpeace Aotearoa executive director Russel Norman . . . a positive of the campaign future. Image: Asia Pacific Report
‘Poisoned gift’ Manuireva said that by France “gifting us the bomb”, Tahitians had been left “with all the ongoing consequences on the people’s health costs that the Ma’ohi Nui government is paying for”.
He described how the compensation programme was inadequate, lengthy and complicated.
Manuireva also spoke about the consequences for the environment. Both Moruroa and Fangataufa were condemned as “no go” zones and islanders had lost their lands forever.
He also noted that while France had gifted the former headquarters of the Atomic Energy Commission (CEP) as a “form of reconciliation” plans to turn it into a museum were thwarted because the building was “rife with asbestos”.
“It is a poisonous gift that will cost millions for the local government to fix.”
Greenpeace Aotearoa executive director Russel Norman spoke of the impact on the Greenpeace organisation of the French secret service bombing of their ship and also introduced the guest speakers and responded to their statements.
A Q and A session was also held to round off the stimulating evening.
A question during the open mike session on board the Rainbow Warrior. Image: Asia Pacific Report
Business, universities, and investors have jointly urged the federal government to commit to cutting the cost of red tape by 25% by 2030, in a submission for next month’s Economic Reform Roundtable.
The push to reduce regulation is in line with action by the EU and the United Kingdom’s Labour government, the submission says.
“Cutting red tape means faster home builds, quicker loan approvals, and lower prices at the checkout,” it says.
“For Australians, it’s the difference between waiting months or days for a service, and it ensures growth isn’t choked by unnecessary or outdated processes that haven’t kept up with the modern world.”
The need to push against red tape is highlighted in the recently-published book Abundance by Derek Thompson and Ezra Klein. The book has impressed Treasurer Jim Chalmers, who has urged his colleagues to read it.
The coalition of 27 groups includes small, medium and large businesses, universities and the investment community. The united approach is an attempt by business to avoid being divided and trapped at the roundtable, as business felt it was at the 2022 Jobs and Skills summit.
On taxation, the submission proposes a three-month review, supported by Treasury, the Productivity Commission, business representatives and other stakeholders to “kick start” comprehensive tax reform.
The exercise would be underpinned by principles that encouraged investment and economic growth.
Business has become concerned the roundtable could be a way of seeking support for tax increases rather than comprehensive tax reform.
The submission says tax reform and the trade offs involved, should not be pursued separately from measures to promote efficiency and spending restraint to “ensure government lives within its means”.
Tax reform should support the dynamism and productivity of Australian individuals and businesses”, the submission says.
Revenue should be raised with the least possible cost to society, and there should be minimum distortions to work, savings and investment.
Among other proposals, the coalition urges a boost to investment and innovation by reforming the handling of R&D.
It says there should be a national strategy to boost Australia’s investment competitiveness.
The submission backs reforming the framework for environmental and planning approvals. It says there should be a “single, predictable, and transparent approval pathway that provides timely and certain decisions.”
“Our economic rule book is out of date. If we don’t fix it, not only will Australians struggle to get ahead in life, but future generations are at risk of missing out on the quality of life we enjoy today,” the joint group of industry associations says.
Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
There’s no other way of looking at it: Sussan Ley faces a diabolical situation with the debate over whether the Coalition should abandon the 2050 net zero emissions target.
The issue is a microcosm of her wider problems. The Nationals, the minor party in the Coalition, are determined to run their own race on most things. The Liberals have become akin to two parties, split between those eyeing urban seats and younger voters, and right-wingers reflecting the party’s conservative grassroots.
Nobody misses the contrast. The Albanese government is beset by a host of actual issues around the transition to a clean energy economy. The renewables rollout is not going as fast as desirable and is meeting with resistance in some communities. Energy costs are high. But such problems are not putting any pressure on Labor’s unity.
At the same time, the opposition is fractured over an argument about a target that’s a quarter of a century away, when who knows what the technological or political landscape will look like. For the opposition, the internal debate about net zero is about symbols and signals, rather than substance.
The net zero debate exploded within the opposition this week with Barnaby Joyce’s private member’s bill to scrap Australia’s commitment to it. The timing, in parliament’s first week, was extraordinarily inconvenient for Ley. But if not now, it would have erupted later.
On present indications, the Nationals appear likely to ditch the net zero commitment. David Littleproud, anxious to avoid the issue becoming a threat to his leadership, is reading the party room and positioning himself to be in the anticipated majority.
Asked on Thursday whether he supported net zero, Littleproud told the ABC, “well, I have real concerns about it, to be candid. What net zero has become is about trying to achieve the impossible, rather than doing what’s sensible.” But, he insisted, “we’re not climate deniers”.
It is less clear how the debate will pan out in the Liberal Party, once the group under Shadow Energy Minister Dan Tehan produces its report on energy and emissions-reduction policy.
Liberal sources say the issue is now being driven by the party’s grassroots, rather than the parliamentary party. Branches are throwing up motions to get rid of the 2050 target.
The Western Australian Liberal state council will debate a motion this weekend to drop the net zero commitment. The Queensland LNP organisation will consider its position next month. A few weeks ago, the South Australian Liberal state council rejected net zero.
With a policy review underway, Ley and the parliamentary Liberals have left a vacuum on the issue. Some Liberals warn the parliamentarians risk being run over by the party outside parliament. Others point out that on policy, the parliamentarians are independent of the organisation, which often comes up with right-wing motions.
How should Ley best handle the situation? By filling the vacuum with a position sooner rather than later. That means accelerating the Tehan report. Beyond that, ideally she should be taking leadership on the issue herself. But is she in a strong enough position to do that?
One idea being floated would be for the Liberals to retain the net zero target but extend the time frame. This wouldn’t stop the criticism about the shift.
Whether the Coalition could stay as one if its two parties had different positions on net zero may be an open question but it certainly would be messy.
On the other side of politics, the government is rapidly approaching a decision on another key target – the one Australia will put up internationally for cutting emissions by 2035. Inevitably, this will be contentious.
This target must be submitted by September (it was conveniently delayed beyond the election). Minister for Climate Change and Energy Chris Bowen has yet to receive advice on the target from the Climate Change Authority (advice that will be published). The target is expected to be between 65% and 75%.
The challenge will be to strike a target with sufficient ambition that doesn’t alienate business and the regions.
Next week the executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Simon Stiell, will be in Canberra for talks. His comments will be carefully watched.
Last year he told the Sydney Morning Herald, “the world needs countries like Australia to take climate action and ambition to the next level, and it’s firmly in the interests of every Australian that they do so”.
Climate and energy issues will have a place at next month’s economic reform roundtable. Bowen is organising two preliminary roundtables – on electricity, with energy user stakeholders, and on climate adaptation. He told The Conversation’s podcast that adaptation will “be an increasing focus of this government and future governments because, tragically, the world has left it too late to avoid the impacts of climate change”.
The government is waiting, somewhat impatiently, for the decision on whether Australia will be given the nod to host next year’s UN climate conference. The COP meeting, which would be in Adelaide in November 2026, is an enormous event to put on, so the decision is becoming urgent.
Bowen says Australia already has the numbers over Turkey, the other contender. But “one of the things about the process to decide COPs, I’ve learnt, is it’s quite opaque and there’s no particular timeline and no particular rules to the ballot.
“It’s meant to work on a consensus, sort of an old world, sort of gentlemanly sort of approach to say whoever loses will withdraw. That’s not the way it’s panning out. I’ve had multiple meetings with my Turkish counterpart to try to find a ‘win-win’ solution. We haven’t been able to find that yet.”
Stiell’s trip includes Turkey as well as Australia. Bowen will be hoping he may provide some clarity, when they meet, about how the “opaque” process of assigning the COP meeting is going. Bowen will be emphasising how important the proposed co-hosting COP with the Pacific is to the region, with climate change already an existential issue for many Pacific countries.
Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
