NewzIntel.com

Category: Evening Report

  • MIL-Evening Report: Newly discovered tropical oyster reefs are thriving across northern Australia – they deserve protection

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Marina Richardson, Research Fellow in Marine Science, Griffith University

    Marina Richardson

    Oysters are so much more than a seafood delicacy. They’re ecosystem engineers, capable of building remarkably complex reefs. These structures act as the kidneys of the sea, cleaning the water and keeping the coast healthy, while providing homes for millions of other animals.

    Oyster reefs were once thought to be restricted to southern, cooler coastal waters where they’re the temperate equivalent of tropical coral reefs. But now, oyster reefs are being found right across Australia’s tropical north as well.

    These tropical oyster reefs are bigger and more widespread than anyone expected. In fact, they are some of the largest known intertidal oyster reefs (exposed at low tide) left in Australia. And they’re everywhere – from the southern limit of the Queensland tropics across to the northern coast of Western Australia – yet we know almost nothing about them.

    In our recent research, my colleagues and I completed the first detailed study of Australian tropical oyster reefs. These reefs are so new to science that until now, the species responsible for building them remained a mystery.

    Using DNA, we identified the main reef-building oyster species in tropical Australia as “Saccostrea Lineage B”, making it a new addition to our national list of known reef-builders.

    Lineage B is a close relative of the commercially important Sydney rock oyster (Saccostrea glomerata), but so little is known about this tropical reef-building species that it is yet to be assigned a scientific name.

    The Saccostrea Lineage B oysters we found in Australia’s tropical north are related to Sydney rock oysters.
    Marina Richardson

    Hiding in plain sight

    So why are we only learning about tropical oyster reefs now?

    Across the globe, oyster reefs have been decimated by human activity. These reefs declined in most tropical regions long ago, even as far back as 1,000 years ago. Most oyster reefs disappeared without a trace before scientists even knew they were there.

    However, Australia’s tropical oyster reefs haven’t just survived, in some cases they have thrived.

    Despite being delicious to many, the species we now know as Lineage B was not very attractive to the aquaculture industry, due to its small size. And while oyster reefs near Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne were dredged and burned to produce lime for mortar, used in the early construction of roads and buildings, this practice was not widespread in tropical regions. This lack of commercial interest is probably the reason why tropical oyster reefs have persisted unnoticed for so long in northern Australia.

    Here the tropical oyster reefs were found growing on a combination of both rock and muddy sediment.
    Marina Richardson

    What we did and what we found

    We assessed three tropical oyster reefs in Queensland, Australia. At Wilson Beach, near Proserpine and Turkey Beach, near Gladstone, reefs were surveyed in late winter 2022. The reef at Mapoon in the Gulf of Carpentaria was surveyed in early spring 2023.

    Using drone footage, we measured reef area and structure. We then collected oysters for genetic analysis.

    Oysters are notoriously difficult to identify, because their shape, size and colour varies so much. Oysters from the same species can look completely different, while oysters from different species can look identical. That’s why it’s necessary to extract DNA.

    We found almost all reef-building oysters across the three locations were Saccostrea Lineage B.

    At Gladstone reefs, several other reef-building species were also present, including leaf oysters, pearl oysters and hairy mussels.

    We compared three tropical oyster reefs in Queensland.
    Richardson, M., et al (2025) Marine Environmental Research

    An ecosystem worthy of protection

    In southern Australia, oyster reefs are critically endangered. But we don’t really know how threatened their tropical counterparts are, although there is some evidence of decline. Further research is underway.

    A new project has begun to map oyster reefs across tropical Australia. Since the project launched in June 2024, more than 60 new reefs have been found across Queensland, the Northern Territory and Western Australia – including some as large as 5 hectares.

    These unexpected discoveries provide a beacon of hope in a world currently overwhelmed by habitat decline and ecological collapse. But tropical oyster reefs are not yet protected. It’s crucial we include them in assessments of threatened ecosystems, to understand how much trouble they’re in and what we can do to protect them into the future.

    By locating and understanding these overlooked ecosystems, we can ensure they’re not left behind in the global oyster reef restoration movement.

    Scientists and others involved in reef restoration are now inviting everyday people across Australia to get involved as citizen scientists in The Great Shellfish Hunt. Anyone can upload tropical oyster reef sightings to this mapping project. It’s more important than ever to work together and ensure tropical oyster reefs receive the protection they deserve, so they continue to thrive for generations to come.

    Marina Richardson currently receives funding from the National Environmental Science Program (NESP) and the Queensland Government Department of Environment, Tourism, Science and Innovation.

    – ref. Newly discovered tropical oyster reefs are thriving across northern Australia – they deserve protection – https://theconversation.com/newly-discovered-tropical-oyster-reefs-are-thriving-across-northern-australia-they-deserve-protection-254612

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: We talk a lot about being ‘resilient’. But what does it actually mean?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter McEvoy, Professor of Clinical Psychology, Curtin University

    Kinga Howard/Unsplash

    In a world with political polarisation, war, extreme weather events and increasing costs of living, we need to be able to cope as individuals and communities.

    Our capacity to cope with very real stressors in our lives – our resilience – can determine whether we thrive, just survive, or are deprived of a reasonable quality of life.

    Stress vs resilience

    Resilience means having the ability to cope with, and rebound from, life’s challenges and still achieve our goals.

    Stress isn’s something to be avoided. We need to feel some stress to achieve our best. Exposure to manageable levels of stress and adversity develops our coping skills and resilience.

    But if we feel too much stress, we can flounder or become overwhelmed.

    The ability to re-activate ourselves when we feel down, fatigued or disengaged helps to optimise our focus and motivation. Sportspeople, for example, might listen to high intensity music just before a competition to increase their energy levels.

    Conversely, the ability to dampen down emotional intensity can make use feel less stressed or anxious. Exercising, listening to relaxing music, or patting a much-loved pet can prevent high arousal from interfering with completing a task.

    Effective emotion regulation is crucial for adapting to life’s ups and downs, and keeping us on a relatively even keel.

    How does resilience develop?

    Resilience emerges from interactions between personal and environmental factors.

    In addition to emotion regulation skills, personal factors that can bolster resilience include academic achievement, developing a range of skills and abilities (such as sport and music) and problem-solving skills. Many of these skills can be fostered in childhood. And if one area of life isn’t going well, we can still experience confidence, joy and meaning in others.

    Sometimes we need to increase our energy levels, other times we need to lower anxiety.
    Ilias Chebbi/Unsplash

    People who reflect on traumatic experience and develop new positive meanings about themselves (getting through it means I’m strong!) and life (a greater appreciation) can also have higher levels of resilience.

    Genetic factors and temperament also play an important role. Some of us are born with nervous systems that respond with more anxiety than others in novel, uncertain, or potentially threatening situations. And some of us are more likely to avoid rather than approach these situations. These traits tend to be associated with lower levels of resilience. But we can all learn skills to build our resilience.

    Environmental factors that promote resilience include:

    • a nurturing home environment
    • supportive family and peer relationships
    • cultural identity, belonging and rituals
    • modelling from others overcoming hardship
    • community cohesion
    • government policies that provide social safety nets, strong education, anti-discrimination and inclusion
    • investment in facilities, spaces, services and networks that support the quality of life and wellbeing of communities.

    Can resilience be taught?

    Many factors associated with resilience are modifiable, so it stands to reason that interventions that aim to bolster them should be helpful.

    There is evidence that interventions that promote optimism, flexibility, active coping and social support-seeking can have small yet meaningful positive effects on resilience and emotional wellbeing in children and adults.

    However, school-based programs give us reason to be cautious.

    A trial across 84 schools in the United Kingdom evaluated the effectiveness of school-based mindfulness programs. More than 3,500 students aged between 11 and 13 years received ten lessons of mindfulness and a similar number did not.

    There was no evidence that mindfulness had any benefit on risk for depression, social, emotional and behavioural functioning, or wellbeing after one year. Teaching school children mindfulness at scale did not appear to bolster resilience.

    In fact, there was some evidence it did harm – and it was most harmful for students at the highest risk of depression. The intervention was not deemed to be effective or cost-effective and was not recommended by the authors.

    In another recent trial, researchers found an emotion regulation intervention with Year 8 and 9 school children was unhelpful and even harmful, although children who engaged in more home practice tended to do better.

    The evidence doesn’t support school-based resilience programs.
    Mitchell Luo/Unsplash

    These interventions may have failed for a number of reasons. The content may not have been delivered in a way that was sufficiently engaging, comprehensive, age-appropriate, frequent, individually tailored, or relevant to the school context. Teachers may also not be sufficiently trained in delivering these interventions for them to be effective. And students didn’t co-design the interventions.

    Regardless of the reasons, these findings suggest we need to be cautious when delivering universal interventions to all children. It may be more helpful to wait until there are early signs of excessive stress and intervening in an individualised way.

    What does this mean for resilience-building?

    Parents and schools have a role in providing children with the sense of security that gives them confidence to explore their environments and make mistakes in age-appropriate ways, and providing support when needed.

    Parents and teachers can encourage children to try to solve problems themselves before getting involved. Problem-solving attempts should be celebrated even more than success.

    Schools need to allocate their scarce resources to children most in need of practical and emotional support in non-stigmatising ways, rather than universal approaches. Most children will develop resilience without intervention programs.

    To promote resilience, schools can foster positive peer relationships, cultural identity and involvement in creative, sporting and academic pursuits. They can also highlight others’ recovery and resilience stories to demonstrate how growth can occur from adversity.

    More broadly in the community, people can work on developing their own emotion regulation skills to bolster their confidence in their ability to manage adversity.

    Think about how you can:

    • approach challenges in constructive ways
    • actively problem-solve rather than avoid challenges
    • genuinely accept failure as part of being human
    • establish healthy boundaries
    • align your behaviour with your values
    • receive social and professional support when needed.

    This will help you navigate the ebbs and flows of life in ways that support recovery and growth.



    Read more:
    People’s mental health goes downhill after repeated climate disasters – it’s an issue of social equity

    Peter McEvoy is a Professor of clinical psychology at the Curtin enAble Institute and School of Population Health. He is also a Senior Clinical Psychologist at The Centre for Clinical Interventions, Perth, and a Board Member of the Australian Association of Cognitive Behaviour Therapy. He does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article. The opinions and perspectives in this article are his own.

    – ref. We talk a lot about being ‘resilient’. But what does it actually mean? – https://theconversation.com/we-talk-a-lot-about-being-resilient-but-what-does-it-actually-mean-245256

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: New deal for journalism – RSF’s 11 steps to ‘reconstruct’ global media

    Australia (ranked 29th) and New Zealand (ranked 16th) are cited as positive examples by Reporters Without Borders in the 2025 World Press Freedom Index of commitment to public media development aid, showing support through regional media development such as in the Pacific Islands.

    Reporters Without Borders

    The 2025 World Press Freedom Index by Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has revealed the dire state of the news economy and how it severely threatens newsrooms’ editorial independence and media pluralism.

    In light of this alarming situation, RSF has called on public authorities, private actors and regional institutions to commit to a “New Deal for Journalism” by following 11 key recommendations.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: In its soul-searching, the Coalition should examine its relationship with the media

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Matthew Ricketson, Professor of Communication, Deakin University

    Among the many lessons to be learnt by the Liberal-National Coalition parties from the election is that they should stop getting into bed with News Corporation Australia.

    Why would a political party outsource its policy platform and strategy to people with plenty of opinions, but no experience in actually running a government?

    The result of the federal election suggests that unlike the Coalition, many Australians are ignoring the opinions of News Corp Australia’s leading journalists such as Andrew Bolt and Sharri Markson.

    Last Thursday, in her eponymous program on Sky News Australia, Markson said:

    For the first time in my journalistic career I’m going to also offer a pre-election editorial, endorsing one side of politics […] A Dutton prime ministership would give our great nation the fresh start we deserve.

    After a vote count that sees the Labor government returned with an increased majority, Bolt wrote a piece for the Herald Sun admonishing voters:

    No, the voters aren’t always right. This time they were wrong, and this gutless and incoherent Coalition should be ashamed. Australians just voted for three more years of a Labor government that’s left this country poorer, weaker, more divided and deeper in debt, and which won only by telling astonishing lies. That’s staggering. If that’s what voters really like, then this country is going to get more of it, good and hard.

    The Australian and most of News’ tabloid newspapers endorsed the Coalition in their election eve editorials.

    The election result was a repudiation of the minor culture war Dutton reprised during the campaign when he advised voters to steer clear of the ABC and “other hate media”. It may have felt good alluding to “leftie-woke” tropes about the ABC, but it was a tactical error. The message probably resonated only with rusted-on hardline Coalition voters and supporters of right-wing minor parties.



    Read more:
    Peter Dutton calling the ABC and the Guardian ‘hate media’ rings alarm bells for democracy

    But they were either voting for the Coalition, or sending them their preferences, anyway. Instead, attacking the ABC sent a signal to the people the Coalition desperately needed to keep onside – the moderates who already felt disappointed by the Coalition’s drift to the right and who were considering voting Teal or for another independent.

    Attacking just about the most trusted media outlet in the country simply gave those voters another reason to believe the Coalition no longer represented their values.

    Reporting from the campaign bus is often derided as shallow form of election coverage. Reporters tend to be captive to a party’s agenda and don’t get to look much beyond a leader’s message. But there was real value in covering Dutton’s daily stunts and doorstops, often in the outer suburbs that his electoral strategy relied on winning over.

    What was revealed by having journalists on the bus was the paucity of policy substance. Details about housing affordability and petrol pricing – which voters desperately wanted to hear – were little more than sound bites.

    This was obvious by Dutton’s second visit to a petrol station, and yet there were another 15 to come. The fact that the campaign bus steered clear of the sites for proposed nuclear plants was also telling.

    The grind of daily coverage helped expose the lateness of policy releases, the paucity of detail and the lack of preparation for the campaign, let alone for government.

    On ABC TV’s Insiders, the Nine Newspapers’ political editor, David Crowe, wondered whether the media has been too soft on Dutton, rather than too hard as some Coalition supporters might assume.

    He reckoned that if the media had asked more difficult questions months ago, Dutton might have been stress-tested and better prepared before the campaign began.

    Instead, the Coalition went into the election believing it would be enough to attack Labor without presenting a fully considered alternative vision. Similarly, it would suffice to appear on friendly media outlets such as News Corp, and avoid more searching questions from the Canberra press gallery or on the ABC.

    Reporters and commentators across the media did a reasonable job of exposing this and holding the opposition to account. The scrutiny also exposed its increasingly desperate tactics late in the campaign, such as turning on Welcome to Country ceremonies.

    If many Australians appear more interested in what their prospective political leaders have to say about housing policy or climate change than the endless culture wars being waged by the coalition, that message did not appear to have been heard by Peta Credlin.

    The Sky News Australia presenter and former chief of staff to prime minister Tony Abbott said during Saturday night’s election coverage “I’d argue we didn’t do enough of a culture war”.

    Andrew Dodd has been the recipient of Australian Research Council funding

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

    – ref. In its soul-searching, the Coalition should examine its relationship with the media – https://theconversation.com/in-its-soul-searching-the-coalition-should-examine-its-relationship-with-the-media-255846

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Blaming Donald Trump for conservative losses in both Canada and Australia is being too kind to Peter Dutton

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Smith, Associate Professor in American Politics and Foreign Policy, US Studies Centre, University of Sydney

    Australia’s federal election, held less than a week after Canada’s, has produced a shockingly similar outcome. Commentators all over the world have pointed out the parallels.

    In both countries, centre-left governments looked like they were in serious trouble not long ago.

    On February 23, a Resolve Strategic poll found the Coalition leading Labor 55-45% on a two-party-preferred basis. An Angus Reid poll in December found voting intention for Canada’s Liberals dropping to just 16%, compared to 45% for the Conservatives.

    Yet, both governments are now celebrating historic victories. And in both countries, the conservative opposition leaders, Pierre Poilievre and Peter Dutton, lost their own seats.

    US President Donald Trump was undoubtedly a factor in both elections. Even Trump’s most ardent Australian fans admit the reversal of the Coalition’s fortunes in the polls seems to have been precipitated by Trump’s actions, particularly his chaotic tariff announcements and his White House humiliation of Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky.

    In Canada, Trump cheerfully presented himself as an existential threat to the country.

    But if anything, Labor’s landslide win in the Australian election on Saturday highlights just how poorly the Coalition fared under Dutton compared to Canada’s Conservatives. The Coalition bottomed out, while the Tories fared reasonably well in the face of difficult circumstances.

    A painful but respectable loss for Conservatives in Canada

    So, why the huge difference between the two parties? This is largely because of the differences between the Canadian and Australian electoral systems.

    Unlike Australia, Canada does not have preferential voting – a vote for one party is a vote against another. The Liberals’ rise in the polls came mostly at the expense of the left-wing New Democratic Party (NDP) rather than the Conservatives.

    Back in December, 21% of voters preferred the NDP, compared to 16% for Justin Trudeau’s deeply unpopular Liberals. But when Trudeau stepped down and Mark Carney became the party’s new leader, the threat posed by Trump unified centre-left Canadian voters behind the Liberals, who had the best chance of winning.

    This is the strategic voting that is necessary in winner-take-all systems. The NDP has never won the largest share of seats in a national election, and it never had a chance of winning this one.

    The NDP was left with seven seats in last week’s election and under 7% of the vote, losing their party status in parliament and their leader. This was the most significant “Trump effect” on the Canadian election.

    Canada’s Conservatives ended up with 41.3% of the vote. This was only a few points down from their December high of 45% in the Angus Reid poll. They also won the greatest share of the national vote by any centre-right party since 1988, and expanded their share of seats in the parliament.

    The Liberals, meanwhile, barely won the popular vote and fell three seats short of a majority.

    Poilievre was rightly criticised for failing to respond effectively to the challenge posed by Trump’s bullying, instead continuing to campaign as if the election were still a referendum on Trudeau.

    That may have cost him a victory that seemed certain months earlier, especially considering Carney made his campaign all about standing up to Trump.

    Yet, the Conservatives still performed well enough for Poilievre to retain his position as opposition leader despite losing his seat. Another Conservative sacrificed his own seat to let Poilievre back into parliament.

    Dutton’s mistakes were bigger

    It’s hard to imagine any member of Dutton’s party doing the same. Dutton handed Labor a staggeringly high two-party-preferred vote and (likely) the most seats it has ever had. Labor won 86 seats in 1987, while Anthony Albanese’s party will have at least 86, with the count continuing.

    Dutton’s campaign has been widely described as “shambolic”. But it wasn’t just the last five weeks that doomed the Coalition.

    From the moment he became leader, it was clear Dutton had little interest in winning back the former Liberal heartland seats that fell to Teal independents in 2022. Instead, he held out the promise the outer suburbs would become the new heartland.

    Following the patterns established by John Howard, Tony Abbott and Scott Morrison, he believed the loss of middle-class women, once the backbone of the Liberal vote, could be compensated by gains among working-class men.

    This was always a pipe dream, given the flimsiness of the culture war issues that have been Dutton’s preferred terrain. But it drove urban voters further away from the Liberal Party.

    The Liberals should have been alarmed that in state elections and byelections last year, they were making almost no gains in metropolitan seats, whether inner suburban or outer suburban.

    The Coalition should resist seeing Trump as a natural disaster over which they had no control. Dutton consciously positioned himself as part of the global populist right that Trump leads. Voters recognised this, even when Dutton half-heartedly tried to distance himself from Trump.

    Not all right-wing populists are the same. Poilievre and Dutton have their own brands of populism they have spent decades cultivating, as have other right-wing populists like Javier Milei in Argentina. But in the suffocating global environment created by Trump, there is limited room for brand differentiation. He is the unavoidable reference point of right-wing politics.

    Last November, many right-wing figures thought this would benefit them. One of them is now a spectacular political casualty.

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

    – ref. Blaming Donald Trump for conservative losses in both Canada and Australia is being too kind to Peter Dutton – https://theconversation.com/blaming-donald-trump-for-conservative-losses-in-both-canada-and-australia-is-being-too-kind-to-peter-dutton-255599

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Election flops – a night to forget for minor parties on the left and the right

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Maxine Newlands, Adjunct Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Policy Futures, University of Queensland, Adjunct Principal Research Fellow, Cairns Institute, James Cook University

    Minor parties were all the rage at the last election when, along with independent candidates, they secured almost a third of votes.

    But they have failed to build on that success at this election. The biggest and best funded of the minor parties – the Greens, One Nation and Trumpet of Patriots – have all had disappointing results.

    Few green shoots

    The Greens are the largest party outside of the traditional two-party system. But they failed to launch on Saturday night.

    In 2022, the Greens secured 12.2% of the primary support which returned a record four members to the lower house. This time around, their nationwide vote is up – but only marginally and not where it matters.

    The party has lost big in Queensland, with Stephen Bates in Brisbane and Max Chandler-Mather in Griffith relinquishing their seats to Labor. Elizabeth Watson-Brown could hold on in the neighbouring seat of Ryan, though preference flows will be critical.

    Peter Dutton might not be the only party leader to lose his seat, with Adam Bandt on a knife’s edge in Melbourne, which he has held for 15 years. Again, it will come down to the spread of preferences.

    The Greens had high hopes for two other Melbourne-based seats. They remain a chance in Wills, but got nowhere near it in Macnamara.

    And it is unlikely to snatch the New South Wales seat of Richmond from Labor despite running a close second on primary vote.

    Balance of power

    The Greens have performed much better in the Senate, where they will once again be the largest cross bench party with a predicted 11 seats.

    While the ALP will clearly dominate the lower house in the 48th parliament, the Senate is looking to be more of a two-way spilt between Labor and the Coalition.

    The Albanese government will likely require only the support of the Greens to pass legislation. This is a much better scenario for Labor than the previous parliament when it needed to stitch together all the Greens and four independents to navigate the Senate.

    Once again, the Greens will effectively hold the balance of power. However, Labor will have other crossbench options, such as independents David Pocock, Lidia Thorpe and Fatima Payman if the Greens obstruct bills that are also opposed by the Coalition.

    Minor party fizzers

    Despite their disappointing result in the lower house, the Greens easily outperformed the right-wing minor parties, most of which flopped.

    None more so than Clive Palmer’s newly registered Trumpet of Patriots, which fielded candidates in most lower house seats and in the Senate. It scored 1.8% of the vote, the highest positive swing of all the minor parties.

    But it misfired everywhere, despite Palmer’s reported $A50-60 million advertising spend. While Senate votes are still being counted, Trumpet of Patriots is lagging behind both One Nation and the Legalise Cannabis Party.

    Pauline Hanson’s One Nation recorded just over 6% of first preference votes, up only slightly on its 2022 result and nowhere near enough to win any lower house seats. However, there are enough disaffected voters in Queensland to return Malcolm Roberts to the Senate. Hanson won’t be up for reelection until 2028.

    Hanson’s daughter Lee Hanson is an outside chance of securing a Senate spot for One Nation in Tasmania. Her main rivals are Jacqui Lambie and Legalise Cannabis, which is also in the mix to win the final Senate seat in Victoria.

    Gerard Rennick’s People First party also failed to make an impression. So too, Fatima Payman’s Australia’s Voice.

    What next for the minor parties?

    Minor parties play an important role in the Australian political landscape, and have long been players in federal parliament.

    The previous two elections have seen shifts away from the two-party system, with one in four voters preferring minor parties or independent candidates in 2019, and one in three in 2022.

    On the numbers counted so far in this election, voters have favoured either the traditional major parties or the array of independent candidates.

    The trend towards minor parties has been halted, at least for now.

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

    – ref. Election flops – a night to forget for minor parties on the left and the right – https://theconversation.com/election-flops-a-night-to-forget-for-minor-parties-on-the-left-and-the-right-255623

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Second-term Albanese will face policy pressure, devastated Liberals have only bad options

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

    On February 1, on The Conversation’s podcast, Anthony Albanese not only declared that Labor would retain majority government, but held out the prospect it could win the Victorian Liberal seats of Menzies and Deakin.

    This was when the polls were still bad for Labor and the Coalition was confident of gaining a swathe of seats in Victoria.

    Now Liberal Michael Sukkar has lost Deakin to Labor’s Matt Gregg, while fellow Liberal Keith Wolahan says it is “more likely than not” he’ll be ousted from Menzies.

    Obviously Albanese’s political judgement was better than most. Two other points are notable. The first is how quickly things turned around. But there’s a counterpoint: maybe they didn’t turn around in quite the way they seemed. Perhaps a few months ago, voters were expressing their frustrations, but many were always going to be reluctant to endorse Peter Dutton when decision-time came.

    Even so, the extent of the decimation of the Liberals was nearly unthinkable. Labor minister Don Farrell said that two days out, Labor’s polling showed a majority but not this result. The Liberals are a rump, without a leader, with no obvious successor, and no clue of what direction to take a party left with hardly any urban seats and the prospect of another two terms, at least, in the wilderness.

    First, however, to the government. Albanese is basking in golden days. But he knows Labor must avoid hubris. As he enjoyed Sunday morning at a local coffee shop, he said “we will be a disciplined, orderly government”.

    To state the obvious, the win will boost Albanese’s authority. But it will also open him to pressures, externally and internally.

    In Labor’s first term, many commentators and stakeholders argued the government was too cautious. Some urged it should tackle more robust economic reform; others wanted it to shift left. Those voices will strengthen now Labor has the numbers to flex its muscles more vigorously. But Albanese is wary of breaking promises – it took a long time for him to go back on his word over the stage three tax cuts – or surprising the electorate.

    The person to watch is Treasurer Jim Chalmers.

    On Saturday night, the treasurer said, “We do believe we’re an ambitious government but we know there is a sense of impatience as well when it comes to some of our big national challenges”.

    Chalmers told the ABC on Sunday, “The best way to think about the difference between our first term and the second term that we won last night [is the] first term was primarily inflation without forgetting productivity, the second term will be primarily productivity without forgetting inflation”.

    This is a very big aspiration. Australia’s productivity performance is dreadful. If that’s to improve significantly, Chalmers may have to take on battles in some policy areas, such as industrial relations, that are very sensitive for Labor and the unions.

    The win, but more particularly the issues ahead, which focus on the economy here and overseas, will give Chalmers an even more central voice, as well as present even tougher tests for him. Chalmers was lavish in his praise of Albanese on Saturday night and Sunday; he said he had rung the PM during Saturday, before the result, and “I said his was an extraordinary campaign, he’s got a lot to be proud of and we are certainly proud to be part of his team”.

    For all that, Chalmers is, and sees himself as, Albanese’s most credible successor, although other aspirants are in the mix. Despite Albanese indicating he will serve a full term and the result leading people to say he will be well placed to lead into the 2028 election, that is not inevitable.

    Who will lead the Liberals into that election is absolutely unknowable. The potential field for the post election leadership vote is lacklustre, and whoever wins that vote could be a seat warmer.

    That field includes shadow treasurer Angus Taylor, deputy leader Sussan Ley, shadow immigration minister Dan Tehan, and defence spokesman Andrew Hastie.

    Taylor, an economic conservative, has faced immense criticism for his performance over the past three years. Ley, who is more towards the centre, has been guilty of overreach, although she’s toned down somewhat recently. Hastie has not broadened out from his defence comfort zone. Tehan is experienced but does not present well to voters.

    Dutton had a weak team around him; the next leader will have an even thinner one.

    Even more diabolical than who the Liberal Party should choose is where it should go in its positioning. The party has become an identity vacuum. It has lost its more genteel urbanites, and failed to win the aspirational suburbanites. These constituencies have different priorities but to revive themselves the Liberals have to thread the needle between them, which looks, at the moment, an impossible task.

    Then there are the problems with women and younger voters. The Liberals’ “women problem” has been debated for years; they seem further than ever from grappling with it. The failure ranges from candidate selection to policy blindness.

    On the latter, the working-from-home debacle was a classic example of disconnect with many women’s lives. The policy (later dumped) to bring public servants back to the office five days a week was driven by a woman, shadow finance minister Jane Hume. It wasn’t properly workshopped, but surely it was obvious that running this policy would be a disaster, especially with female voters. You wouldn’t need a focus group to tell you that.

    As the baby boomers, already outnumbered, fade further, how are the Liberals to connect with the younger voters who are now the dominant demographic? These voters are increasingly progressive. For them, the Liberals need generational change. But the only new generation contender in the present leadership list is Hastie, and he is a conservative.

    Another complication for the Liberals is that the Nationals have done well. This means they’ll have a bigger say in the Coalition, including a bigger share of the frontbench. This might push the Coalition further to the populist right. A few will argue the Coalition parties should separate, but this is not the answer – it hasn’t worked in the past.

    There’ll be a policy overhaul, and that could involve a tricky argument over nuclear, to which the Nationals especially are deeply committed. And will the Coalition commitment to the Paris agreement and the 2050 net zero emissions target come under assault?

    The Liberals are in an extraordinarily bad place. Politicians in such circumstances search for so-called “narrow goat tracks” to better ground. Debris is littering any track in sight for the Liberals. Their only comfort can be that politics is volatile.

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

    – ref. Second-term Albanese will face policy pressure, devastated Liberals have only bad options – https://theconversation.com/second-term-albanese-will-face-policy-pressure-devastated-liberals-have-only-bad-options-255618

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: ‘Dead weight comes to mind’ when thinking about Gazan parents and genocide

    World Media Freedom Day reflections of a protester

    Yesterday, World Media Freedom Day, we marched to Television New Zealand in Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland to deliver a letter asking them to do better.

    Their coverage [of Palestine] has been biased at its best, silent at its worst.

    I truly believe that if our media outlets reported fairly, factually and consistently on the reality in Gaza and in all of Palestine that tens of thousands of peoples lives would have been saved and the [Israeli] occupation would have ended already.

    Instead, I open my Instagram to a new massacre, a new lifeless child.

    I often wonder how we get locked into jobs where we leave our values at the door to keep our own life how (I hope) we wish all lives to be. How we all collectively agree to turn away, to accept absolute substandard and often horrific conditions for others in exchange for our own comforts.

    Yesterday I carried my son for half of this [1km] march. He’s too big to be carried but I also know I ask a lot from him to join me in this fight so I meet him in the middle as I can.

    Near the end of the march he fell asleep and the saying “dead weight” came to mind as his body became heavier and more difficult to carry.

    I thought about the endless images I’ve seen of parents in Gaza carrying their lifeless child and I thought how lucky I am, that my child will wake up.

    How small of an effort it is to carry him a few blocks in the hopes that something might change, that one parent might be spared that terrible feeling — dead weight.

    Republished from an Instagram post by a Philippine Solidarity Network Aotearoa supporter.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Independents will not help form government – but they will be vital in holding it to account

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Joshua Black, Visitor, School of History, Australian National University

    When the newspapers delivered their standard election-eve editorials, there were few surprises. Former Fairfax papers and smaller outlets offered qualified support for Labor, while the News Corp papers unashamedly championed the Coalition. In Adelaide, The Advertiser ran a curious line recommending a majority government of whatever persuasion, “lest our futures be in the hands of the mad Greens, self-serving teals or the independent rabble.”

    How must those editors feel this morning? On the one hand, they got the majority government they wished for, and then some. The 2025 election will be mythologised in Labor circles for decades to come.

    On the other hand, the “independent rabble” defied the expectations of some, and the best efforts of others, holding their seats and making gains in Sydney and Canberra, and potentially Melbourne and Perth as well. New crossbenchers will certainly be welcomed into the 48th parliament. And with the Coalition reeling from an historic defeat, they may all play a critical role in policy the debates to come.

    Weathering the storm

    The election campaign put all of the incumbent independent MPs through their paces. Coalition candidates and some of their outspoken media allies applied enormous personal pressure, with accusations of weakness on the issue of antisemitism and piercing questions from conservative news outlets about the transparency of some independent MPs’ donations.

    Vast sums of money were also involved. In the Perth-side seat of Curtin, for example, independent MP Kate Chaney’s supporters and the Liberal Party allegedly spent $1 million each on their respective campaigns.

    In the end, incumbent independents benefited from the historic pattern in federal politics: that a good independent is a tough proposition to beat. At election time, successful independent MPs benefit from the advantages of incumbency, the ability to point to specific policy or project victories arising from greater political competition for the seat, and the flexibility to adapt more quickly to changing voter attitudes, unencumbered by any party machinery.

    Zali Steggall in Warringah and Helen Haines in Indi enjoyed their third successive wins, Rebekah Sharkie in Mayo a fourth general election win (she won a competitive byelection in 2018), Andrew Wilkie in Hobart a sixth victory on the trot, and north Queensland’s Bob Katter yet another term after 50 years of parliamentary service.

    At the time of writing, all of the independents who won their seats in 2022 appear to have been returned. (The exception was Kylie Tink, whose electorate was abolished last year.) The closest count is in Goldstein, where incumbent Zoe Daniel narrowly leads her Liberal predecessor Tim Wilson. Other incumbents, such as Sophie Scamps in Mackellar, Allegra Spender in Wentworth, Monique Ryan in Kooyong and Kate Chaney in Curtin, have enjoyed distinctive swings toward them. In the formerly safe Labor seat of Fowler, where the party hoped to win, independent MP Dai Le enjoyed a handsome primary vote swing of around 6% in her favour.

    Changing hands

    The picture has been more mixed for the rest of the crossbench and other minor parties. The Greens seem set to lose two of their Brisbane seats, but a close race in the formerly safe Labor seat of Wills in Victoria may yet provide a win. Another record spendathon from Clive Palmer will see the Trumpet of Patriots win zero seats. One Nation may keep Queensland senator Malcolm Roberts in his place, but there do not appear to be any other gains for Pauline Hanson’s team.

    Coalition defectors fared poorly, too. Monash MP, independent and former Liberal Russell Broadbent, appears to have secured just 10% of the primary vote, placing him behind both major parties and the community independent candidate.

    In the Perth seat of Moore, Liberal defector Ian Goodenough has fallen behind Labor, Liberal and the Greens, with preferences flowing mainly to Labor candidate Tom French. Right-wing LNP defector Gerard Rennick appears unlikely to win his contest for a Queensland senate seat. In the regional NSW seat of Calare, ex-National MP Andrew Gee appears the only one able to buck the trend, coming second on primary votes and benefiting from a stronger flow of preferences than his National Party opponent.

    New crossbench faces?

    A series of close contests may yet result in extra independent members of parliament. Despite a bitter campaign, community independent Nicolette Boele appears likely to win in the north Sydney seat of Bradfield. In the Victorian seat of Flinders, independent Ben Smith has enjoyed a 5.4% swing toward him, and away from Liberal MP Zoe McKenzie, though preferences have not yet been published in that seat. In Fremantle, where the Australian Electoral Commission is yet to report any preference flows, independent candidate Kate Hulett may still be in with a shot to beat Labor’s Josh Wilson. The competitive result follows an impressive campaign from Hulett at the state election earlier this year.

    After five weeks of vicious debates about the public service and Canberra, voters in the ACT sent clear messages to both major parties. Voices for Bean candidate Jessie Price appears to have taken one of the three ACT electorates from Labor, and independent Senator David Pocock enjoyed an easy victory. Labor received less than a third of the primary vote in that Senate race, and barely one in seven ACT residents voted Liberal.

    Not burning down the house

    Despite that qualification, Labor’s victory is historic by several measures. It is one of only four occasions over the past 30 years where its primary vote actually grew at a federal election. It looks to have won a lower house majority comparable with that of the Howard government’s final term, and maybe even with the Coalition’s 2013 victory (when it won 90 seats, more than double the figure it is likely to have won this time). The two-party preferred vote shows Albanese securing the kind of victory that made John Curtin a Labor hero in 1943.

    So what role does that leave for independents in the 48th parliament?

    Returning crossbenchers will regard their impressive primary votes as confirmation their voters want them to keep doing politics differently. The Liberal and National parties, on the other hand, will be consumed for much of the parliamentary term with introspection and institutional reckoning. Given how unhelpful their studied unity over the past term ultimately proved, it may be there’s more infighting within the Coalition during the next parliament.

    Does it matter that the crossbenchers will not hold the balance of power in the lower house? Not necessarily. In the event of a serious policy misstep from the Albanese government during this term, the crossbenchers may prove to be the more influential voices of opposition in the lower house.

    Sometimes a solo voice speaks with powerful volume. In 2001 the rural independent for Calare, Peter Andren, proved to be a singularly powerful voice against the Howard government’s draconian offshore detention program for asylum seekers arriving in Australia by boat. Andren defied the national trends (and the local opinion polls) and was returned with an increased primary vote, and again in 2004. When he died, some said his opposition to the Howard government showed “more guts and decency” than “all the other Coalition and ALP candidates combined”.

    Several of the current independents have earned themselves a national profile and are trusted advocates on issues such as public integrity and accountability, climate and energy policy and even foreign and security affairs. There will certainly be few MPs left on the opposition benches who can speak with compelling authority on some of these issues. In the face of an emboldened Labor government, their opposition to contentious legislation may sometimes have outsized influence.

    In pragmatic political terms, it is arguably in the Labor Party’s interests to negotiate, and to be seen to negotiate, with the crossbench. The independents in formerly safe Liberal seats are some of the biggest obstacles in any future Liberal pathway back into office.

    Newly-elected Labor MPs may also depend on preferences from community independent candidates next time they go to the polls. The Menzies government owed part of its longevity in the late 1950s and 1960s to its ability to win the preferences of the Democratic Labor Party, an anti-communist breakaway party from Labor.

    Independents are nothing like the DLP, and many run open tickets instead of strictly recommending preferences on their how to vote cards. But in some seats, including the leader of the opposition’s seat of Dickson, independent and Greens voters’ preferences will have proven crucial for Labor’s success.

    ‘Every day is minority government in the Senate’

    The other crucial reason independents still have a role to play is the Senate. Pocock recently remarked that “every day is minority government in the Senate”. Albanese’s victory, no matter how impressive, does not extend to a majority in the red chamber.

    The last time a party won a majority in the Senate was in 2004. Before that, it was 1977. No matter how large a lower-house majority, negotiation and compromise are simply unavoidable for laws to get passed in the federal parliament.

    The Greens will continue to exercise their crucial balance of power role in the Senate. So too will Pocock and, assuming she is re-elected as the sixth senator for Tasmania, Jacqui Lambie. During the 47th parliament, Pocock and Lambie often proved decisive in shaping, amending and sometimes postponing legislation they felt needed improvement.

    Both will bring a range of priorities to the 48th parliament. They may also collaborate more routinely with lower house crossbench colleagues to make those critical votes in the senate count for everything that they are worth. That would be a good thing. After all, both chambers really do matter in our parliamentary system.

    Joshua Black is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at The Australia Institute.

    – ref. Independents will not help form government – but they will be vital in holding it to account – https://theconversation.com/independents-will-not-help-form-government-but-they-will-be-vital-in-holding-it-to-account-255517

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: State of the states: 6 experts on how the election unfolded across the country

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Clune, Honorary Associate, Government and International Relations, University of Sydney

    While counting continues nationally, the federal election result is definitive: a pro-Labor landslide and an opposition leader voted out.

    But beyond the headline results, how did Australians in the key seats in each state vote, and how did it shape the outcome?

    Here, six experts break down what happened in New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, Victoria and Western Australia.

    New South Wales

    Swing to Labor: 3.4%

    David Clune, honorary associate, government and international relations, University of Sydney

    The election results showed, in NSW as with the rest of Australia, a stronger than predicted swing to the government, returning it with a solid majority.

    Not only did Labor hold all its NSW marginals, many with increased margins, but it appears to have gained from the Liberals the seats of Banks and Hughes in suburban Sydney. Labor’s Jerome Laxale has retained Bennelong which was notionally Liberal after the redistribution.

    The Liberals appear likely to lose Bradfield to Teal Nicolette Boele and former National Andrew Gee seems likely to retain Calare in the central west as an independent.

    The three sitting Teals were all easily re-elected and right wing independent Dai Le held Fowler.

    At the time of writing, Labor has won 28 seats in NSW to the Coalition’s 12, a gain of three, with four independents so far and the probability of two more.

    The ALP two-party preferred vote in NSW was 54.8%, a swing towards it of 3.4%.

    Labor’s primary vote was 35.0% to the Coalition’s 31.8%, a swing against the latter of 4.7%.

    Albanese staged a Houdini-like escape from what seemed to be, in 2024, a steady decline in his prospects. Although only an average campaigner in 2022, he ran an almost flawless campaign three years later. The prime minister had a consistent, resonant message about Labor’s record, appealing policies for the future, and projected an image of stability in government.

    Given the bite of the cost of living, particularly in Western Sydney, the government should have been vulnerable. Instead, Albanese transformed this into a strength by persuading voters he was best placed to deal with the crisis.

    Queensland

    Swing to Labor: 3.9%

    Paul Williams, associate professor of politics and journalism, Griffith University

    I long argued Queensland would be inconsequential as to who would win the keys to The Lodge at this election.

    I was partly right. If Labor, as projected, wins 93 of the 150 House of Representatives seats, the six Queensland Labor appears to have seized from the Liberal-National Party (LNP) are but a small fraction of the government’s national haul. Even with no Labor gains in Queensland, Albanese could still have governed with a comfortable majority.

    But I was also partly wrong. The fact there were primary swings of up to five percentage points away from the LNP across Queensland (even in very safe seats like Maranoa), and the fact Labor appears to have captured two seats (Brisbane and Griffith) from the Greens, suggests the state has behaved very differently from expectations and, for the first time in more than a decade, become one of real consequence.

    Labor now looks to hold 13 of the state’s 30 seats, the LNP 15, the Greens one, and Bob Katter returned in Kennedy for the KAP. Few would be surprised that Pauline Hanson’s One Nation (PHON) and Clive Palmer’s Trumpet of Patriots failed to win any House seats, although PHON’s Malcolm Roberts is likely to be returned to the Senate.

    Nor is it unexpected that Dickson, held by the LNP by a tiny 1.7% margin, should have been in play this election. But that fact Dickson was lost by an opposition leader – the first such occurrence at federal level – is astonishing.

    So, too, are the LNP losses in the outer-suburban “battler” seats of Forde and Petrie (held by the LNP since 2010 and 2013 respectively) that embraced former Liberal PM Scott Morrison, even when he was at his nadir.

    The additional reality of an LNP losing such contrasting seats as Leichhardt in far north Queensland and Bonner in middle Brisbane suburbia now points to a deep existential crisis for conservatives even in their Queensland heartland.

    In the Northern Territory, Labor’s Marion Scrymgour has retained the seat of Lingiari and strengthened her position, with a 6.6% swing in her favour.

    So, what happened? How did Queensland, like the rest of Australia, defy electoral gravity? Was it that angry Queenslanders, stinging from a cost-of-living crisis, had already vented their wrath on a state Labor government six months ago? Or did the state finally warm to an Albanese it now concluded was a more competent economic manager? Or did Queensland, like every other state, reject a hard-right Peter Dutton – offering little in meaningful policy amid a ramshackle campaign – as out of touch with a moderate, centrist Australia?

    After defeats at local and state elections in 2024, Labor is back in Queensland.

    South Australia

    Swing to Labor: 5.1%

    Rob Manwaring, associate professor of politics and public policy, Flinders University

    On first glance, South Australia did not seem to be at the centre of the Albanese government’s landslide win. Of the ten electoral seats in the state, only one changed hands – the seat of Sturt which Labor’s Claire Clutterham won from the Liberals’ James Stevens. Yet, this was a massive win for Labor, with a 57–43 two-party preferred vote.

    This is a seismic result and exemplifies all of the Coalition’s electoral problems. Sturt was a classic Liberal blue ribbon seat which the Liberals had held since 1972. The Teal candidate in Sturt, Dr Verity Cooper, might well be disappointed not to have scored a higher primary vote than her 7.2%.

    Elsewhere, Labor handsomely improved its position in the hitherto marginal seat of Boothby. A 8% swing to Louise Miller-Frost saw the Liberals’ Nicolle Flint easily routed.

    To confirm the Liberal misery in the state, the Centre Alliance’s Rebekha Sharkie consolidated her place in Mayo. The scale of Labor’s performance also brought into scrutiny the Liberal regional seat of Grey, where long-standing member Rowan Ramsay retired. The Liberals will retain it despite a swing against them.

    Overall, this is now a solidly Labor state, and the party holds a remarkable seven of the ten seats. Those with long memories, will know seats like Kingston and Adelaide, traditionally bellweather, are now solidly safe Labor seats.

    The Liberals’ loss of Sturt confirms the party now has only two seats in the state, and no representation at all in the major cities around the country. It might well be a long road back for the centre-right.

    Tasmania

    Swing to Labor: 8.1%

    Robert Hortle, deputy director of the Tasmanian Policy Exchange, University of Tasmania

    If the Liberal Party’s ranks were thinned out on the mainland, in Tasmania they have been clear-felled. The state elected four Labor candidates out of five, and notably, all women.

    In Braddon, Labor’s Anne Urquhart overturned the 8.3% margin enjoyed by retiring Liberal MP Gavin Pearce. It looks like the swing to Labor will be around 15%, with Urquhart’s pro-salmon farming and pro-jobs position resonating in the traditionally conservative electorate.

    A swing of around 10% to Labor in Bass was more than enough for first-time candidate Jess Teesdale to defeat Liberal MP Bridget Archer. Labor’s messaging that “a vote for Archer is a vote for Dutton” successfully neutralised Archer’s personal popularity in the electorate and reputation for standing up to her party.

    Lyons was Tasmania’s most marginal seat after the 2022 election. That’s no longer the case, with Rebeca White, former state Labor leader, securing a swing of around 10%. White’s popularity as a state MP transferred smoothly to the federal level – Labor’s primary vote in the seat looks to have jumped by more than 14%.

    So why was the swing to Labor in these Tasmanian seats so much greater than on the mainland? Astute candidate selection played a role – in particular, White and Urquhart were well-known in their communities.

    It is also possible the ongoing travails of the state Liberal government played a part. Northern Tasmanians are strongly opposed to the controversial AFL stadium in Hobart, and the ongoing Spirit of Tasmania ferry fiasco has involved prominent mismanagement of port upgrades in Devonport in the state’s north-west. State politics isn’t usually considered to have a big impact on federal elections, but these issues may have been high profile – and long running – enough to make a difference.

    The southern seat of Franklin was a focal point for a lot of drama during the campaign. In the end, Julie Collins, Tasmania’s only cabinet minister, received a bit of a scare. She slightly increased her primary vote, but the ABC currently projects her overall margin will be cut in half. Anti-salmon farming independent Peter George achieved the second highest primary vote, but wasn’t close enough to Collins for preferences to get him over the line.

    As expected, independent Andrew Wilkie won the Hobart seat of Clark for a sixth time, with a margin of just over 20%. He increased his primary vote, but it looks like Labor will shave a tiny amount off his margin.

    Victoria

    Swing to Labor: 1.8%

    Zareh Ghazarian, senior lecturer in politics, school of social sciences, Monash University

    The Liberal Party’s fortunes in Victoria went from bad in 2022 to much worse in 2025.

    The ALP’s primary vote increased by about 1% while the Liberal Party’s primary vote fell by about 2.5%. While the percentages are smaller than in other states, this performance had a significant affect on the representation of the parties in Victoria.

    The Liberal Party lost Deakin in the eastern suburbs of Melbourne. Held by Michael Sukkar since 2013, the seat has been marginal for several elections. The primary vote swing against the Liberal Party was 4.2%. In a two-party preferred outcome, Deakin now appears to be a relatively safe seat for Labor.

    The Liberal Party primary vote also went backwards in Kooyong which was held by independent Monique Ryan. High profile Liberal candidate Amelia Hamer could not reclaim the seat which had previously been held by then-Treasurer Josh Frydenberg.

    Goldstein, the other inner metropolitan seat won by an independent at the last election, looks to be a closer contest with the Liberal Party’s Tim Wilson experiencing a rise in the primary vote but it may not be enough to defeat incumbent Zoe Daniel.

    Compounding the problems for the Liberal Party was that it could not make any inroads in other key seats across the eastern suburbs in Melbourne. This was where the party needed to win seats if it was to be competitive in forming government. In Aston, the seat the party lost at a byelection in 2023, the Liberal Party’s primary vote fell by 5%. The party’s primary vote also went back in Chisholm and McEwen.

    In short, this was a disastrous result for the Liberal Party in the state of Victoria.

    Western Australia

    Swing to Labor: 1.2%

    Narelle Miragliotta, associate professor in politics, Murdoch University

    WA didn’t disappoint for Labor. Although the two-party swing was more muted than in other parts of the country, it came off the back of a more much stronger electoral position entering this contest. On a two-party preferred basis, Labor gained 56.2% of the vote.

    Labor has retained the nine lower house seats it won in 2022, and it has also managed to make decent, even if not spectacular, gains in the party’s share of the primary vote in Tangney (+4.9%), Hasluck (+5.93), Swan (+3.5%), and Perth (+4.7%).

    One of the unexpected wins for Labor was the former Liberal held seat of Moore. Labor won the seat on the back of +0.9% increase in the party’s primary vote. Assisting Labor’s electoral fortunes was a former Liberal incumbent who ran as an independent, and whose vote accounts for much of the -10.4% swing against the Liberal candidate.

    But it wasn’t all good news for Labor, going backwards on primary votes in Fremantle (-4.48%) Brand (-5.96%) and Pearce (-0.01%).

    The Liberals’ performance affirms just how much trouble the party in the West. The Liberals recorded a swing of -5.66% in their primary vote, winning only 28.5% of the first preference vote.

    In addition to the loss of Moore, the party failed to win back the once-prized seat of Curtin, despite a heavy investment of resources into the contest. The Liberals also have a fight to retain the seat of Forrest, where is registered a -13.4% swing in its primary vote. The Liberals are, however, expected to win it.

    There were very few bright spots for the Liberals. The Liberals did achieve an increase in their two-party preferred vote in O’Connor (+6.3%) and Canning (+3.8%). And at last check, the Liberals are still in the hunt for the new seat of Bullwinkel.

    In the senate, the swing against the Liberals on primary votes was even more pronounced (-7.36%) although the party are on track to elect two senators. The Greens senate primary vote held up, enjoying a very slight increase (+0.74%) and comfortably returning a senator. Although recording a -0.04% swing, Labor has two senators confirmed and the possibility of the election of a third.

    Paul Williams is a research associate with the T.J. Ryan Foundation.

    David Clune, Narelle Miragliotta, Rob Manwaring, Robert Hortle, and Zareh Ghazarian do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. State of the states: 6 experts on how the election unfolded across the country – https://theconversation.com/state-of-the-states-6-experts-on-how-the-election-unfolded-across-the-country-255508

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: ER Report: A Roundup of Significant Articles on EveningReport.nz for May 4, 2025

    ER Report: Here is a summary of significant articles published on EveningReport.nz on May 4, 2025.

    Too many journalists remain silent over the Gaza genocide, a threat to our media credibility
    Report by Dr David Robie – Café Pacific. – By David Robie on World Press Freedom Day 2025 I ask you now: Do not stop speaking about Gaza. Do not let the world look away. Keep fighting, keep telling our stories – until Palestine is free. These are not my words, although I believe and

    Labor makes Senate gains, and left-wing parties will hold a Senate majority
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne On Saturday, Labor won a thumping victory in the House of Representatives, and this has carried over to the Senate results. Only 35% of enrolled voters have

    Rabuka salutes Fiji media but warns against taking freedom for granted
    By Anish Chand in Suva Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka has paid tribute to all those working the media industry in his message to mark World Press Freedom Day. He said in his May 3 message thanks to democracy his coalition government had removed the “dark days of oppression and suppressions”. “Today as we join

    Albanese increases majority and Dutton loses seat in stunning election landslide
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra The Albanese government has been re-elected with a substantially increased majority, and Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has lost his seat, in a crushing defeat of the Coalition. As of late Saturday night, there was a two-party swing to Labor of

    Labor wins election in landslide: full results
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Digital Storytelling Team, The Conversation The Conversation, CC BY-SA Digital Storytelling Team does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment. – ref. Labor

    Labor wins surprise landslide, returned with a thumping majority
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne With 52% of enrolled voters counted, The Poll Bludger has Labor ahead in 92 of the 150 House of Representatives seats, the Coalition in 43, the Greens

    Labor routs the Coalition as voters reject Dutton’s undercooked offering
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra In a dramatic parallel, what happened in Canada at the beginning of this week has now been replicated in Australia at the end of the week. An opposition that a few months ago had looked just possibly on track to

    Dutton and the Coalition did not do the work, and misread the Australian mood
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mark Kenny, Professor, Australian Studies Institute, Australian National University The former federal director of the Liberal Party, Brian Loughnane, used to tell media companies that their practice of commissioning expensive opinion polls right through a parliamentary term was a waste of money. Election 2025 seemed to vindicate

    Labor wins with a superior campaign and weak opposition – now it’s time to make the second term really matter
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Chris Wallace, Professor, School of Politics Economics & Society, Faculty of Business Government & Law, University of Canberra Superior campaigning by the Labor machine, a lift in the personal performance of Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, and a woeful campaign by Opposition Leader Peter Dutton have seen Labor

    Albanese’s government might not thrill, but it has shown unity and competence – and that’s no mean feat
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Frank Bongiorno, Professor of History, ANU College of Arts and Social Sciences, Australian National University The Coalition’s election campaign of 2025 has a strong claim to be considered among the worst since federation. I know of none more shambolic. Barely a day passed without some new misstep

    Palestine protesters march on TVNZ, accuse broadcaster of bias on Gaza
    Asia Pacific Report About 1000 pro-Palestinian protesters marked World Press Freedom Day — May 3 — today by marching on the public broadcaster Television New Zealand in Auckland, accusing it of 18 months of “biased coverage” on the genocidal Israeli war against Gaza. They delivered a letter to the management board of TVNZ from Palestine

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Too many journalists remain silent over the Gaza genocide, a threat to our media credibility

    Report by Dr David Robie – Café Pacific. –

    By David Robie on World Press Freedom Day 2025

    I ask you now: Do not stop speaking about Gaza.

    Do not let the world look away.

    Keep fighting, keep telling our stories – until Palestine is free.

    These are not my words, although I believe and support them absolutely. They are the words of Palestinian journalist Hossam Shabat in his final message left behind when he was killed by an Israeli air strike on March 24.

    His message is a poignant one today, especially today which is May 3 — World Press Freedom Day.

    It is a message that I have been carrying in my heart since even earlier, since the assassination of another Palestinian journalist, the famous Shireen Abu Akleh, who was murdered by Israeli sharpshooters six days after Media Freedom Day in 2022 while reporting in Jenin refugee camp in the West Bank.

    It was her blatant killing in plain view on live video with impunity that signalled how the rogue state Israel was flaunting all international laws and accountability with contempt. And it was a hint of how it would it conduct itself in this disaster.

    According to the United Nations Human Rights Office in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OHCHR), since October 2023, Israeli occupation forces have killed 211 Palestinian journalists, including 28 women reporters reporting on Gaza. At least 47 journalists have been killed while on duty, and at least 49 media people are languishing in Israeli detention or hidden in prisons, mostly without charge.

    Why? To silence the journalists.

    To silence their storytelling, as Hossam Shabat indicated in his final message.

    And for more than 18 months Israel has refused access to Gaza by international journalists.

    Why? To kill the truth. To stop the world’s media from exposing the Israeli lies and their controlled narrative.

    But it hasn’t worked. The Zionists are losing control of the narrative — and they know it. As Amnesty International called it this week, the mass atrocity is a “livestreamed genocide” thanks due to the courage and dedication of the Gazan reporters and citizen journalists.

    A year ago — on this very day — the Gazan journalists were honoured with the UNESCO Guillermo Cano Prize in Santiago, Chile, in recognition of their “unique suffering and fearless reporting”.

    The protest march to Television New Zealand headquarters. Image: Asia Pacific Report

    Who would have thought this grotesque war, this obscene war would still be causing such terrible suffering more than year later?

    And we can’t even really call it a war at all because it is continuous massacres carried out by one of the most advanced and powerful military machines in the world, supplied and aided by the United States, on one side, with a relatively tiny resistance force armed with small arms on the other.

    Gaza is a “killing field – and civilians are in an endless death loop”, as the UN Secretary General, António Guterres, said the other day. Horrendous!

    And since the Cano award for the Gazan journalists, a further 111 media workers have been killed by Israel.

    Gazan journalist Hossam Shabat’s final message . . . he was killed by the Israeli military last month. Image: APR screenshot

    In the latest survey by Reporters Without Borders 2025 World Press Freedom Index released yesterday, global zones have been flagged where press freedom is “entirely absent and practising journalism is particularly dangerous”.

    “This is the case in Palestine, where the Israeli army has been annihilating journalism for more than 18 months, killing more than 200 media professionals — including at least 43 murdered while working — and imposing a blackout on the besieged strip.”

    Just a couple of weeks ago, a group of French and international journalists staged a “die-in” in Paris. They lay down on the steps of the Opera-Bastille as a street theatre representation of the unprecedented scale of the killing of journalists.

    It was organised by Reporters Without Borders, and secretary-general Thibaut Bruttin said:

    “The difficulty of making the cause of Palestinian journalists heard is proof that the insidious poison of the Israel armed forces has sometimes even penetrated our own narrative.

    “I have never seen a war in which, when a journalist is killed, you are told that they were really a terrorist.”

    Bruttin also reflected: “I think it must be said that solidarity is a form of strength. It is a source of strength, I hope, for Palestinian journalists to whom we send these images and to whom we express our solidarity through words and action.

    “And I also think that is an appeal to the media profession, and it’s true that this demonstration is happening late, perhaps too late. It must be recognised.

    “In the 10 years that I have been working at Reporters Without Borders, this is the first time that I have been asked if the journalist was really a journalist when they were killed. This had never happened. Never.

    “And I think we must salute all those who have been marching and all those professionals who have come and who say: ‘Yes, we must continue to report what is happening but we must also protest and do more. Journalists are being targeted. And they are also being defamed after their deaths.’”

    In January 2024, I wrote an article for Declassified Australia headlined: “Silencing the messenger: Israel kills journalists, while the West merely censors them.”

    I declared then that reporting Israel’s war on Gaza had become the greatest credibility challenge for journalists and media of our times.

    Dr David Robie and Del Abcede speaking at Auckland’s “Palestine Corner” rally on World Press Freedom Day. Image: Bruce King

    “Covering the conflict has opened divisions among media groups about fairness and balance that have become the most bitter since the climate change and covid pandemic debates when media ‘deniers’ and ‘bothsideism’ threatened to undermine the science.”

    It shocks me that so many journalists have remained silent. They should also be on the streets like us and reporting the truth. To me, the deafening silence is a betrayal of the 50 years of truth to power journalism that I have grown up with.

    Silence is complicity.

    Finally, I would like to quote from PSNA’s co-chair John Minto in the letter that we are taking today to Television New Zealand appealing for an independent review of 1News reporting on Palestine/Israel.

    Minto says: “Over the past 18 months of industrial scale killing of Palestinians by the Israeli military in Gaza we have been regularly appalled at the blatantly-biased reporting on the Middle East by Television New Zealand.

    “TVNZ’s reporting has been relentlessly and virulently pro-Israel . . .

    “The damage to human rights, justice and freedom in the Middle East by Western media such as TVNZ is incalculable.”

    I endorse and support these comments and call a halt to Israel deliberately targeting of Palestinian journalists. Let the truth be told, as Hossam told us, over and over again and prevent this blatant Western attempt to “normalise” genocide.

    Dr David Robie is editor of Asia Pacific Report and convenor of Pacific Media Watch. He gave this address at the World Press Freedom Day rally in “Palestine Corner” in Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland’s Te Komititanga Square on 3 May 2025.

    The Television New Zealand protest on World Press Freedom Day – “Remembering the journalists killed by Israel”. Image: APR

    This article was first published on Café Pacific.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Labor makes Senate gains, and left-wing parties will hold a Senate majority

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne

    On Saturday, Labor won a thumping victory in the House of Representatives, and this has carried over to the Senate results.

    Only 35% of enrolled voters have been counted in the Senate so far, compared with 71% in the House. It’s likely that the current Senate count is biased to Labor, so Labor is likely to drop back in some states as more votes are counted.

    There are 76 senators, who have six-year terms, with about half up for election at every House election. Each state has 12 senators, with six up for election, and the territories have two senators each, who are all up for election.

    Senators are elected by proportional representation with preferences. A quota in a state is one-seventh of the vote, or 14.3%. In the territories, it’s one-third or 33.3%. I had a Senate preview on April 16.

    Comments on each state are below. I disagree with the ABC’s view that Labor is “likely” to win a third New South Wales seat. Putting this seat into the doubtful column reduces Labor to an overall 27 senators with the Greens on 11, so the two main left-wing parties would hold a minimum 38 of the 76 seats in the new Senate.

    This would represent a two-seat gain for Labor (one in Queensland, one in South Australia). Labor has reasonable chances to gain further Senate seats.

    If Labor and the Greens combined hold the minimum 38 seats after the election, Labor will only need one more vote to pass legislation supported by the Greens but opposed by right-wing parties. Independent David Pocock, former Green Lidia Thorpe and former Labor senator Fatima Payman will be good options.

    In NSW, Labor has 2.6 quotas, the Coalition 1.9, the Greens 0.9 and One Nation 0.4. Labor would win three seats on current primaries, but the Senate swing to them is much greater than in the House, so they will drop back.

    In Victoria, Labor has 2.4 quotas, the Coalition 1.9, the Greens 1.0, One Nation 0.3 and Legalise Cannabis 0.3. Labor is likely to drop back, with the final seat likely a three-way contest between Labor, One Nation and Legalise Cannabis.

    In Queensland, Labor has 2.1 quotas, the Liberal National Party 1.8, the Greens 0.9, One Nation 0.5 and former LNP senator Gerard Rennick 0.35. One Nation is the favourite to win the sixth seat.

    In Western Australia, Labor has 2.4 quotas, the Liberals 1.7, the Greens 1.1, One Nation 0.4, Legalise Cannabis 0.3 and the Nationals 0.3. Labor would be the favourite to win the sixth seat on current counting, as the Liberals would absorb right-wing preferences that would otherwise help One Nation.

    In SA, Labor has 2.6 quotas, the Liberals 1.8, the Greens 1.0 and One Nation 0.4. Labor won the House vote in SA by 58.4–41.6, so the Senate result looks plausible. Labor and the Greens are likely to win four of SA’s six Senate seats.

    In Tasmania, Labor has 2.4 quotas, the Liberals 1.5, the Greens 1.2, Jacqui Lambie 0.5, One Nation 0.4 and Legalise Cannabis 0.3. It’s difficult to determine which parties are the favourites to win the last two seats.

    In the ACT (two senators), Pocock has been easily re-elected with 1.3 quotas, and Labor will win the second seat. In the Northern Territory, Labor and the Country Liberals will win one seat each.

    Doubtful House seats, and the Greens’ and teals’ performance

    There are many seats where the electoral commission selected the incorrect final two candidates on election night and now needs to redo this count. Labor could lose Bean, Fremantle or Calwell to independents. Labor could also lose Bullwinkel or Bendigo to the Coalition.

    The Greens have lost Brisbane and Griffith to Labor. They lost Brisbane after falling to third behind Labor and the LNP and Griffith because the LNP fell to third and their preferences will help Labor. Labor is narrowly ahead against the Greens in Wills.

    In Greens leader Adam Bandt’s Melbourne, there was a substantial primary vote swing to Labor and against Bandt, and the electoral commission needs to redo the preference count between Bandt and Labor.

    Teal independents in Kooyong, Goldstein and Curtin are likely to retain their seats, but they didn’t gain substantial swings that usually occur when an independent elected at the last election recontests. It’s possible they’ve become too associated with the left in their seats. Fortunately for them, the left won a thumping victory at this election.

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

    – ref. Labor makes Senate gains, and left-wing parties will hold a Senate majority – https://theconversation.com/labor-makes-senate-gains-and-left-wing-parties-will-hold-a-senate-majority-255848

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Rabuka salutes Fiji media but warns against taking freedom for granted

    By Anish Chand in Suva

    Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka has paid tribute to all those working the media industry in his message to mark World Press Freedom Day.

    He said in his May 3 message thanks to democracy his coalition government had removed the “dark days of oppression and suppressions”.

    “Today as we join the rest of the international community in celebrating World Press Freedom Day, let us recommit ourselves to the values and ideals of our fundamental human rights freedom of expression and the freedom of the press,” said Rabuka, a former coup leader.

    “With our recent history, let as not take this freedom for granted.”

    Rabuka also remembered the late Sitiveni Moce who died in 2015.

    RNZ Pacific reports Moce was left paralysed and bedridden in 2007 after being assaulted by soldiers shortly after the 2006 military coup.

    “Today is also an opportune time to remember those in the media fraternity that made the ultimate sacrifice.”

    ‘Brave photographer’
    “In particular, I pay tribute to my ‘Yaca’ (namesake), the late Sitiveni Moce who died in 2015.

    “This brave newspaper photographer was set upon by a mob in Parliament House in 2000, and again by some members of the disciplined forces in 2007 for simply carrying out his job which was to capture history in still photographs.

    “His death is a sombre reminder of the fickleness of life, and how we must never ever take our freedoms for granted.”

    Republished from The Fiji Times with permission.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Albanese increases majority and Dutton loses seat in stunning election landslide

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

    The Albanese government has been re-elected with a substantially increased majority, and Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has lost his seat, in a crushing defeat of the Coalition.

    As of late Saturday night, there was a two-party swing to Labor of about 3.4%, with two-party vote of 55.5%-44.5%

    It was sitting on about 86 seats (up from 78), and in the hunt for more. The Coalition, which went into the election with 57 seats, has won 41, and may pick up one or two more.

    The Labor primary vote was 34.7%, up 2.1%; the Coalition primary vote was 31.1%, down 4.6%.

    Among the Liberal losses is frontbencher Michael Sukkar in his Victorian seat of Deakin. Shadow foreign minister David Coleman is likely to lose his Sydney seat of Banks. Outspoken Liberal backbencher Bridget Archer has lost her Tasmanian seat of Bass.

    It was all over by 8.30PM, as it became increasingly clear a big swing to Labor was underway.

    A trumphant and emotional Anthony Albanese told a jubilant Labor crowd: “Australians have chosen a majority Labor government”.

    “Today the Australian people have voted for Australian values. For fairness, aspiration and opportunity for all. For the strength to show courage in adversity and kindness to those in need.

    “And Australians have voted for a future that holds true to these values, a future built on everything that brings us together as Australians and everything that sets our nation apart from the world.

    “Australians have chosen to face global challenges the Australian way, looking after each other while building for the future.

    “I make this solemn pledge. We will not forget that we will never take it for granted, repaying your trust will drive a government each and every day of the next three years.”

    Albanese, who has used a Medicare card as a prop through the campaign, produced it once again. “We will be a government that helps every Australian who relies on Medicare.”

    According to the ABC, seats changing hands from the Liberals to Labor are Banks and Hughes in NSW; Forde, Bonner, Dickson, Petrie, Leichhardt in Queensland; Deakin in Victoria; Braddon and Bass in Tasmania; Sturt in South Australia, and Moore in Western Australia.

    It was a bad night for the Greens. They are likely to lose two of their three Queensland seats, Griffith, held by high profile MP Max Chandler-Mather, and Brisbane held by Stephen Bates.

    The Greens’ expected losses occurred despite roughly holding its primary vote, which is 12.5%, up 0.2%. Their leader Adam Bandt is in trouble in his seat of Melbourne.

    Dutton said in his concession speech he had called Albanese and congratulated him. “I said to the prime minister that his mum would be incredibly proud of his achievement tonight, and he should be very proud of what he’s achieved.”

    Dutton said he had also spoken to Ali France, the Labor candidate who has beaten him in Dickson. “She lost her son Henry, which is a tragic circumstance that no parent should ever go through. And equally I said to Ali that her son Henry would be incredibly proud of her tonight and that she’ll do a good Local member for Dixon.”

    He expressed his sorrow for the Liberal MPs and candidates who had lost.

    All the teals have held their seats. The teal candidate in Bradfield, Nicolette Boele, is ahead of her Liberal opponent. The teal Jessie Price is also ahead in the ACT Labor seat of Bean.

    Queensland LNP Senator James McGrath said it was a brutal night for Peter Dutton and the Coalition. “We have got to make sure we take stock of why we lost this election and have a serious review into those reasons.”

    As the Liberals prepare to review their disastrous loss and choose a new leader, their Senate leader Michaelia Cash is backing fellow West Australian Andrew Hastie. “I think Andrew Hastie is an outstanding member … I’m a very good friend of his. Andrew’s always been seen as leadership material.”

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

    – ref. Albanese increases majority and Dutton loses seat in stunning election landslide – https://theconversation.com/albanese-increases-majority-and-dutton-loses-seat-in-stunning-election-landslide-255616

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Palestine protesters march on TVNZ, accuse broadcaster of bias on Gaza

    Asia Pacific Report

    About 1000 pro-Palestinian protesters marked World Press Freedom Day — May 3 — today by marching on the public broadcaster Television New Zealand in Auckland, accusing it of 18 months of “biased coverage” on the genocidal Israeli war against Gaza.

    They delivered a letter to the management board of TVNZ from Palestine Solidarity Network (PSNA) co-chair John Minto declaring: “The damage [done] to human rights, justice and freedom in the Middle East by Western media such as TVNZ is incalculable.”

    The protesters marched on the television headquarters near Sky Tower about 4pm after an hour-long rally in the heart of the city at a precinct dubbed “Palestine Square” in the Britomart transport hub’s Te Komititanga Square.

    Several opposition politicians spoke at the rally, calling for a ceasefire in the brutal war on Gaza that has killed more than 62,000 Palestinians with no sign of a let-up.

    Labour Party’s disarmament and arms control spokesperson Phil Twyford was among the speakers that included Green Party co-leader Marama Davidson and Ricardo Menéndez March.

    All three spoke strongly in support of Greens co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick’s Member’s Bill to sanction Israel for its unlawful presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

    Davidson said the opposition parties were united behind the bill and all they needed were six MPs in the coalition government to “follow their conscience” to support it.

    Appeals for pressure
    They appealed to the protesters to put pressure on their local MPs to support the humanitarian initiative.

    Protesters outside the Television New Zealand headquarters in Auckland today. Image: Asia Pacific Report

    In The Hague this week, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) heard evidence from more than 40 countries and global organisations condemning Israel over its actions in deliberately starving the more than 2 million Palestinians by blockading the besieged enclave for more than the past two months.

    Only the United States and Hungary spoke in support of Israel.

    A senior diplomat from Qatar, a leading mediator country in the war, told the ICJ that Israel was conducting a “genocidal war against the Palestinian people” and weaponising humanitarian aid.

    Mutlaq al-Qahtani, Qatari Ambassador to The Netherlands, also said there were “new trails of tears in the West Bank mirroring Gaza’s fate”.


    Israel executing ‘genocidal war’ against Gaza, Qatar tells ICJ.    Video: Al Jazeera

    Among the speakers in the Auckland rally, one of about 30 similar protests for Palestine across New Zealand this weekend, was coordinator Roger Fowler of the Auckland-based Kia Ora Gaza humanitarian aid organisation, who denounced the overnight drone attack on the Gaza-bound Freedom Flotilla aid ship Conscience in international waters after leaving Malta.

    The ship was crippled by the suspected Israel attack, endangering the lives of some 30 human rights activists on board. Fowler said: “That’s 2000 km away from Israel, that’s how desperate they are now to stop the Freedom Flotilla.”

    A protester placard declaring “TVNZ, you’re biased reporting is shameful. Where is your integrity?” Image: Asia Pacific Report

    He reminded protesters that Marama Davidson and retired trade unionist Mike Treen had been on previous aid protest voyages in past years trying to break the Israeli blockade, but there was no New Zealander on board in the current mission.

    Media ‘credibility challenge’
    Journalist and Pacific Media Watch convenor Dr David Robie spoke about World Media Freedom Day. He paid a tribute to the sacrifices of 211 Palestinian journalists killed by Israel — many of them targeted — saying Israel’s war on Gaza had become the “greatest credibility challenge for journalists and media of our times”.

    Many protesters carried placards declaring slogans such as “TVNZ your biased reporting is shameful. Where is your integrity?”, “Journalists are not targets” and “Caring for the children of Palestine is what it’s about.”

    After marching about 1km between Te Komititanga Square and the TVNZ headquarters, the protesters gathered outside the entrance chanting for fairness and balance in the reporting.

    “TVNZ lies. For the past 18 months they have been nothing but complicit,” said one Palestinian speaker to a chorus of: “Shame!”

    He said: “Every time TVNZ lies, a little boy in Gaza dies.”

    Another Palestinian speaker, Nadine, said: “Every time the media lies, a little girl in Gaza dies.”

    The Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) letter to Television New Zealand’s board. Image: Asia Pacific Report

    Deputation delivers TVNZ letter
    A deputation from the protesters delivered the letter from PSNA’s John Minto addressed to the TVNZ board chair Alastair Carruthers but found the main foyer main entrance closed so the message was left.

    Minto’s two-page letter calling for an independent review of TVNZ’s reporting on Palestine and Israel said in part:

    “Over the past 18 months of industrial scale killing of Palestinians by the Israeli military in Gaza we have been regularly appalled at the blatantly-biased reporting on the Middle East by Television New Zealand.

    “TVNZ’s reporting has been relentlessly and virulently pro-Israel. TVNZ has centred Israeli narratives, Israeli explanations, Israeli justifications and Israeli propaganda points on a daily basis while Palestinian viewpoints are all but absent.

    “When they are presented they are given rudimentary coverage at best. More often than not Palestinians are presented as the incoherent victims of Israeli brutality rather than as an occupied people fighting for liberation in a situation described by the International Court of Justice as a “plausible genocide”.

    “This pattern of systemic bias and unbalanced reporting is not revealed by TVNZ’s complaints system which focuses on individual stories rather than ingrained patterns of pro-Israel bias.

    “Every complaint we have made to TVNZ has, with one minor exception, been rejected by your corporation with the typical refrain that it’s not possible to cover every aspect of an issue in a single story but that over time the balance is made up.

    “Our issue is that the bias continues throughout TVNZ’s reporting on a story-by-story, day-by-day basis — the balance is never achieved. The reporting goes ahead just the way the pro-Israel lobby is happy with.”

    The rest of the letter detailed many examples of the alleged systematic bias, such as failing to describe Gaza, West Bank and East Jerusalem and as “Occupied” territory as they are designated under international law, and failing to state the illegality of Israel’s military occupation.

    Minto concluded by stating: “It is prolonging Israel’s illegal occupation, its apartheid policies, its ethnic cleansing and theft of Palestinian land. TVNZ is part of the problem – a key part of the problem.”

    The letter called for an independent investigation.

    Palestinian protesters at TVNZ headquarters while demonstrating against the public broadcaster’s coverage of the Israeli war against Gaza on World Press Freedom Day. Image: Asia Pacific Report

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Albanese’s government might not thrill, but it has shown unity and competence – and that’s no mean feat

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Frank Bongiorno, Professor of History, ANU College of Arts and Social Sciences, Australian National University

    The Coalition’s election campaign of 2025 has a strong claim to be considered among the worst since federation. I know of none more shambolic. Barely a day passed without some new misstep or about-face, some embarrassing revelation about a candidate, some new policy condemned by experts as half-baked, uncosted or worse. Three years of waiting for Labor and Anthony Albanese to fall over instead of doing serious policy work came home to roost, and the chicken concerned was very ugly.

    The campaign more generally was nothing to write home about. From the preoccupations of the major players, if you didn’t already know, you’d hardly have guessed that the wider world was in the midst of its greatest convulsions since the second world war, as the United States retreated from its longstanding global role into protectionism and isolationism, abandoning and bullying old friends and allies, helping rivals and enemies, upending international trade, and dismantling democracy and the rule of law.

    The government assured voters it had everything in hand, adopting a small-target re-election strategy, to pair with its similar 2022 approach. Albanese invariably looked solid and prime ministerial. There was no fumbling the figures on the level of unemployment or the Reserve Bank cash rate this time.

    Like the Coalition, Labor threw itself enthusiastically into a spendathon. It did not take major policy reform into the campaign. We live in the shadow of the two elections that saw parties with policy ambition suffer humiliating defeat: the Coalition in 1993 and Labor in 2019. That made the Coalition’s policy of building nuclear power plants foolhardy rather than brave.

    Trump’s shadow followed Peter Dutton everywhere, making a small-target strategy unviable for the Coalition. On Trump, Dutton sometimes sounded a bit like Saint Peter thrice denying he knew Jesus Christ, but he reverted to type as the campaign wore on by playing up favoured culture war topics of the moment, such as winding back Indigenous Welcomes to Country.

    But the Liberals’ biggest mistake – the one on which all others would be built – occurred three years ago, on May 30 2022.

    Dutton, unopposed as the Liberal Party’s new leader, told his first press conference that his policies would be aimed at the “forgotten people” of the suburbs. It was a pitch so hackneyed as to be barely worth attention. But it was also a strange thing to say given the reality of the situation his party then faced – and still faces today.

    Hackneyed, because Dutton’s promise recalled the Liberal Party’s talismanic foundational document, Robert Menzies’ “The Forgotten People”, broadcast 80 years before to the very month. But strange because the Coalition had been in office for nine years. If there were indeed “forgotten people” in the nation’s suburbs, the Coalition had surely enjoyed ample opportunity to remember them.

    It was strange for another reason, too: the Liberal Party had just been devastated by the loss of its traditional urban heartland, Menzies’ old seat of Kooyong among the casualties. The residents of these electorates – most of them not far from city centres – may well have felt “forgotten”, but not in the sense Dutton imagined. They felt their values and interests were not reflected in the modern Liberal Party.

    It is worth revisiting what Dutton said on that occasion, because it seems to have guided his whole pitch as opposition leader ever since:

    I’m not giving up on any seat, but I do want to send a very clear message to those in the suburbs, particularly those in seats where there has been a swing against the Labor Party on their primary vote, in many parts of the country.

    The emphasis here was not really on winning back teal seats. They received just a grudging nod of acknowledgement. For Dutton, it was all about going out into the suburbs and winning seats held by Labor. And true to form, teal seats received very little of his campaign attention during the 2025 campaign.

    This was a foolish strategy of avoidance for which Dutton and the Liberal Party have now paid a heavy price. The Coalition’s journey took it into support for nuclear power, blaming housing shortages on immigration, and opposing a First Nations Voice to Parliament – the latter an issue the Coalition even desperately sought to revive against Labor during the campaign.

    The Voice referendum nurtured the illusion that the six in ten “no” voters were ripe for Coalition picking. Wiser heads might have noticed Labor continued to rule for eight years after the Hawke government was humiliated at a 1988 referendum, and Menzies was prime minister for 15 years following his Communist Party referendum defeat.

    Wiser heads might also have noticed that the Coalition’s only path back to power demanded it address its losses in the more affluent metropolitan seats won by Independents, Labor and the Greens. Short of huge and unlikely advances in the outer suburbs and regional cities and towns, the Liberals need to win metropolitan seats with high proportions of well-off, well-educated, socially progressive and younger voters to be competitive for majority government.

    Still, that was a hard ask in three years. It nonetheless left a chance of minority Coalition government, which many pundits believed a distinct possibility for much of 2024 and early 2025.

    But where were the Coalition’s votes on the floor of the House going to come from, if not from teal and teal-like independents? The Greens? Hardly. It would have made a great deal of sense to pitch policies that might help to win over community independents and their supporters.

    Instead, the Coalition alienated them, such as by joining with Labor to produce an ineffectual National Anti-Corruption Commission and new electoral finance laws opposed by the teals.

    The Liberals and Nationals made little effort to attract women voters – indeed, policies such as opposing working from home alienated them – and they wandered off on their nuclear frolic. Dutton flirted with Trumpish policies on reducing immigration and public service cuts, before retreating on the latter but in such a confused manner as to leave voters without a clue what his intentions actually were.



    Read more:
    When ‘equal’ does not mean ‘the same’: Liberals still do not understand their women problem

    And as the Liberals’ election campaign unravelled, its friends in the right-wing media continued to campaign relentlessly against the teals. There was no method to this madness, unless it was shoring up the Coalition against possible depredations on its dwindling voting base from parties further to the right.

    It is not that Labor was invincible. Its majority was the narrowest of any first-term government since 1913. It was under pressure in normally friendly Victoria. It lost momentum through the Voice referendum. Interest rates intensified mortgage stress. People complained they could afford a visit to neither the supermarket nor the doctor’s surgery. There was growing unease about immigration levels, and continuing frustration at the lack of housing.

    The contest for government, however, is still largely a two-horse race and each of the major party leaders is the main bearer of their side’s colours. Dutton and the Liberals failed to do the hard yakka on policy, ideology, image or strategy.

    Dutton himself continued to worry many voters as a risky proposition or worse. The few weeks of the election campaign itself seemed more consequential than most in living memory because it so amply demonstrated his lack of fitness for prime ministerial leadership.

    For Labor, the Rudd and Gillard years remain the central reference in modern political history, formative of their understanding of what not to do in government if you want to be treated respectfully by voters.

    In contrast, in the past three years, Labor established an image of unity and competence. We should not underestimate this achievement. It amounted to a significant rebuilding of the Labor brand.

    “You campaign in poetry, you govern in prose,” New York governor Mario Cuomo was fond of saying. Labor has defied him: it campaigns and governs in prose.

    But perhaps that’s what those fabled punters want: not a Trump-inspired disruptor, nor a radical visionary, but the kind of bloke you’d trust with your tax return.

    The times ahead will call for more.

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

    – ref. Albanese’s government might not thrill, but it has shown unity and competence – and that’s no mean feat – https://theconversation.com/albaneses-government-might-not-thrill-but-it-has-shown-unity-and-competence-and-thats-no-mean-feat-254570

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Labor wins with a superior campaign and weak opposition – now it’s time to make the second term really matter

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Chris Wallace, Professor, School of Politics Economics & Society, Faculty of Business Government & Law, University of Canberra

    Superior campaigning by the Labor machine, a lift in the personal performance of Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, and a woeful campaign by Opposition Leader Peter Dutton have seen Labor re-elected for a second term.

    Albanese will go down as one of the luckiest Labor leaders in Australian political history. He faced two deeply unpopular and somewhat odd Coalition leaders – Scott Morrison in 2022 and Dutton in 2025 – and edged out both to first win, and now retain, power. Dutton even lost his seat.

    Albanese was lucky, too, that the distress and dysfunction evident in the United States in the first 100 days of the Trump administration made voters reluctant to risk a version of that under the Trumpesque Dutton in Australia.

    His luck was compounded by the Liberal team’s shocking underperformance, along with that of Dutton personally. Policy reversals, ineffective advertising and an overall lack of focus blighted their campaign from the outset.

    In contrast, Labor National Secretary Paul Erickson and key party figures combined to ensure the government got the jump on the Coalition before the election was imminent. This included getting Albanese onto the hustings early in the new year, making policy announcements that demonstrated a commitment to build Australia’s future.

    Albanese himself shook off the torpor evident since the failed Voice referendum campaign and presented a more energetic and congenial face to Australians than the awkward and floundering Dutton.

    For the first time in many elections, Labor produced memorable, cut-through advertising with its “He cuts. You pay.” ad, designed to persuade voters they would be worse off under the Coalition.

    The swing to Labor was a big turnaround in the fortunes of a party that only months ago looked at risk of struggling to achieve even minority government. As in last month’s Canadian election, the long shadow of Donald Trump helped secure victory for an incumbent government against a Trumpesque opposition.

    Dutton flip-flopped under pressure between masking his usual right-wing approach and reverting to type with hardline positions of limited appeal to swinging voters. The more Australians saw of him during the campaign, the worse his net approval rating became.

    The Coalition’s election postmortem is likely to hinge on the mystery of why, given the scores of interest rate rises since the previous election and misery experienced by so many Australians as a result, it did not simply hammer the cost of living as its return ticket to power.

    It should also dwell on the lesson that a leader and policies that please local oligarchs and right-wing media echo chambers make winning the centre ground needed for election victory in Australia hard.

    That one-third of Australians gave an independent or minor party candidate their first preference vote should be the focus of serious contemplation by the major parties, even by Labor in victory.

    The crossbench will remain sizeable in the 150-member House of Representatives, though without the balance of power eagerly sought by the teal and orange independents. The Senate will continue to be a challenge for the government to get its bills through.

    One clear message is that voters aren’t impressed by the leaders the major parties are offering.

    Albanese campaigned well, and got better as the election went on. However, like Dutton, he remained in net negative approval territory. In the final Newspoll of the campaign, published on election day, Albanese and Dutton had –10% and –27% net approval ratings, respectively. Both leaders were a drag on their party’s vote.

    Labor’s low primary, but emphatic two party-preferred vote signals Australians want it in office but expect more than tinkering around the edges. The Albanese government will be expected to come up with structural solutions that meet contemporary Australians’ real needs in this second term.

    With his re-election as prime minister, Albanese can be confident and secure in his governing style, giving talented frontbenchers more scope to develop the deeper policy solutions Australians seek.

    That increased security will also enable him to drop the petty persecution of rivals that gives voters an insight into the lesser side of the sunny personality he publicly presents.

    Whether he does either of those things will remain to be seen.

    Labor MPs will also have to play their role properly in this term of government.

    Slavish quiescence to an all-powerful prime minister produces paltry results. Caucus needs to get elbows up with the re-elected Albanese and make sure he doesn’t clock off between elections like he appeared to at times last time around.

    Chris Wallace has received funding from the Australian Research Council.

    – ref. Labor wins with a superior campaign and weak opposition – now it’s time to make the second term really matter – https://theconversation.com/labor-wins-with-a-superior-campaign-and-weak-opposition-now-its-time-to-make-the-second-term-really-matter-255516

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Dutton and the Coalition did not do the work, and misread the Australian mood

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mark Kenny, Professor, Australian Studies Institute, Australian National University

    The former federal director of the Liberal Party, Brian Loughnane, used to tell media companies that their practice of commissioning expensive opinion polls right through a parliamentary term was a waste of money.

    Election 2025 seemed to vindicate his charge. For example, polls conducted within sight of the election – since about February this year – returned markedly different results from those that had been breathlessly reported through 2024.

    A rigorous strategist, Loughnane had reasoned that the central polling task of establishing “who you would vote for were an election held this Saturday” prompts a meaningful answer only when an election is actually about to occur. Midway through a term, voters simply see the question as a hypothetical exercise limited to assessing the incumbent government’s performance.

    Come the campaign, though, considerations shift to stereo. Inexorably, voters’ attention expands to include the would-be government: the opposition. What are its solutions? Is it really ready for office? And perhaps most crucially, who is its leader, this person insisting on becoming prime minister?

    This electoral reckoning – a turning point from the abstract to the applied – is where Peter Dutton’s three-year strategy started to come unstitched.

    The conservative Queenslander had risen in the polls through 2024, buoyed by his surprisingly effective dismantling of the Voice in the 2023. He had been lifted further by the Albanese government’s handling the cost-of-living crisis. Dutton’s team was uncommonly unified, his focus laser-like on Labor’s shortcomings.

    As 2025 approached, Dutton looked to be in a strong position, drawing encouragement from the success of populist right-wing parties across the democratic world. These victories suggested Dutton had a winning formula – a pitch consistent with the populist-nationalist zeitgeist.

    The biggest of these international success stories, the barnstorming election of US President Donald Trump in November 2024, lifted right-wing spirits into the stratosphere.

    Trump’s defiant return was a frontal repudiation of liberal elites and their priorities around climate change, procedural governance, feminism and other identity-based politics.

    To Dutton, this new, brash and disruptive electoral mood felt propitious. He faced a uncharismatic opponent, widely perceived as weak, during a cost-of-living crunch. Voters were angry at the government. The opposition leader had the wind at his back. He told his colleagues he would win. Albanese was “weak, woke, and sending you broke”.

    More explicitly, he praised Trump as “shrewd” and a “big thinker”, and when tariffs were placed on Australian imports to the US, Dutton hinted he would have secured exemptions because of his ideological like-mindedness with the president.

    Actions followed.

    Within days of Trump’s headline-grabbing appointment of Elon Musk to lead a department of government efficiency, Dutton followed suit, promoting the Indigenous hero of the anti-Voice campaign, Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa-Price, to his shadow cabinet in charge of government efficiency.

    He would go on to announce a consciously Trumpian-sounding plan to slash Australia’s public service jobs by 41,000, and another policy to end work-from-home arrangements. The latter proved so disastrous he was forced into an embarrassing backdown on it.

    Fuelling his growing ebullience, Dutton unwisely favoured soft-ball interviews with conservative backers on Sky News and talkback radio. Where orthodox media interviews might have sharpened his communication skills and also alerted him to holes or excesses in his suite of policies, Dutton received pats on the back and encouragement to go harder.

    This meant he came away even more convinced that the times were suiting him, and that the prize of unseating a first-term government for the first time since the Great Depression was within reach.

    By the time the pace lifted and the scrutiny intensified as the election campaign neared, the weaknesses in Dutton’s campaign were structural and impossible to hide.

    Trump had trashed the global trading system. He insulted America’s closest and most dutiful friends, Australia included.

    Polls showed that Australians saw Trump as a threat. Dutton had backed the wrong horse.

    A preoccupation with attacking the Albanese government rather than undertaking the detailed policy development work needed for government – replete with potentially difficult internal disputes both within the Liberal Party and within the Coalition – had left Dutton with a thin offering to voters.

    And an unwillingness to brook these searching introspections also left Dutton with an overly compliant and unimpressive frontbench.

    In policy terms, this thinness led to election commitments that had not been adequately stress-tested. Some would draw fire and be abandoned while others would be announced and then de-emphasised, effectively back-officed for the campaign.

    On personnel, most shadow ministers were kept out of the national campaign spotlight. This was either because they were consumed with their own electoral survival, were considered by Dutton’s office to be incompetent, or simply because there was insufficient policy meat to defend within their allotted area of responsibility.

    This meant an ever-greater “presidential” focus on Dutton, even as he became a net drag on the Coalition vote. The Liberal Party’s polling must have identified his low standing, yet still the campaign remained unusually focused around him as leader. A stark measure of how crazy-brave this was came on election night when Dutton lost his seat (Dickson). Albanese had made a point of going straight to Dickson as his first move on day one of the campaign, and returned there at the end.

    When policy promises were announced, they tended to be late in the campaign, swamped by other events, or lost in public holiday periods (Easter and Anzac Day).

    The late-to-very-late release of policy fuelled criticism that Team Dutton was not confident of its own programs and wanted to attract as little attention as possible.

    Thus a major $21 billion increase in defence spending came with scant detail in the penultimate week, sandwiched between public holidays and after early voting had already begun. It attracted little sustained attention.

    An otherwise attention-grabbing proposal to legalise the sale of vaping products outside of pharmacies to better regulate its harm and derive billions in revenue, lobbed on Thursday afternoon of the final week. Millions of Australians had already voted. It suggested even Dutton was sheepish about its virtues.

    While a public service work-from-home ban was abandoned mid-campaign amid a backlash, public service job cuts, a policy that initially had been regarded as a positive was softened to apply only to Canberra, to exempt front-line service jobs, and to be achieved only through attrition rather than sackings. Its cost savings were thrown into doubt.

    It became such a liability that even the Liberals’ ACT Senate candidate campaigned against it, putting him in the invidious position of effectively saying, “vote Liberal to give Canberrans better protection from the Liberals”.

    Dutton’s formal campaign was untidy and inept, but it was led by a man intent on bending the electorate to his will rather than building a broader constituency for his party’s worldview.

    In the end, the campaign asked to do too much after a wasted three years in which hard policy development was shirked, and tough decisions to strengthen an underperforming frontbench were avoided.

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

    – ref. Dutton and the Coalition did not do the work, and misread the Australian mood – https://theconversation.com/dutton-and-the-coalition-did-not-do-the-work-and-misread-the-australian-mood-255515

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Labor routs the Coalition as voters reject Dutton’s undercooked offering

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

    In a dramatic parallel, what happened in Canada at the beginning of this week has now been replicated in Australia at the end of the week.

    An opposition that a few months ago had looked just possibly on track to dislodge the government, or at least run it close, has bombed spectacularly. Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has lost his Queensland seat of Dickson, as did the Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre in Canada.

    Far from being forced into minority government, as most observers had been expecting, Labor has increased its majority, with a substantial swing towards it.

    Its strong victory reflects not just the the voters’ judgement that the Coalition was not ready to govern. It was worse than that. People just didn’t rate the Coalition or its offerings.

    Multiple factors played into this debacle for the Coalition.

    A first-term government historically gets a chance of a second term.

    The Trump factor overshadowed this election. It made people feel it was best to stick with the status quo. People also were very suspicious of Dutton, whom they saw (despite disclaimers) as being too like the hardline US president.

    After the last election, Dutton was declared by many to be unelectable, and that proved absolutely to be the case, despite what turned out to be a misleading impression when the polls were so bad for Labor.

    Even if they’d had a very good campaign, the Coalition would probably not have had a serious chance of winning this election.

    But its campaign was woeful. The nuclear policy was a drag and a distraction. Holding back policy until late was a bad call. When the policies came, they were often thin and badly prepared. The ambitious defence policy had no detail. The gas reservation scheme had belated modelling.

    The forced backflip on working from home, and the late decision to offer a tax offset, were other examples of disaster in the campaign.

    Dutton must wear the main share of the blame. He kept strategy and tactics close to his chest.

    But the performance of the opposition frontbench, with a few exceptions, has been woeful. Shadow Treasurer Angus Taylor and finance spokeswoman Jane Hume have been no match for their Labor counterparts Jim Chalmers and Katy Gallagher.

    Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Labor ran a very disciplined campaign. Albanese himself performed much better than he did in 2022.

    Labor was helped by an interest rate cut in February and the prospect of another to come later this month.

    Albanese transformed himself, or was transformed, from last year to this year.

    The cost of living presented a huge hurdle for Labor, but the government was able to point to relief it had given on energy bills, tax and much else. The Coalition had opposed several of Labor’s measures and was left trying to play catch-up at the end.

    The Liberal Party now has an enormous task to rebuild. The “target the suburbs” strategy has failed. At the same time, the old inner-city Liberal heartland is deeply teal territory.

    Hume said, in an unfortunately colourful comment, on Friday, “You do not read the entrails until you have gutted the chicken”.

    The chicken has now been gutted. There will be a much more bitter post mortem than in 2022. The leadership choices are less than optimal for the party: Angus Taylor? Andrew Hastie? Sussan Ley?

    An interesting thought: if Josh Frydenberg had held his seat in 2022, and led the Liberal party to this election, would be result have been better? One thing is clear: Frydenberg took the right decision in not recontesting Kooyong, which teal Monique Ryan has held.

    Anyway, who would want to lead the Liberals at this moment?

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

    – ref. Labor routs the Coalition as voters reject Dutton’s undercooked offering – https://theconversation.com/labor-routs-the-coalition-as-voters-reject-duttons-undercooked-offering-255617

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Labor wins surprise landslide, returned with a thumping majority

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne

    With 52% of enrolled voters counted, The Poll Bludger has Labor ahead in 92 of the 150 House of Representatives seats, the Coalition in 43, the Greens in two, independents in 11 and others in two. In called seats, Labor is on 76 (already a majority), the Coalition 32, independents six and others two.

    Labor has gained ten seats and the Coalition has lost ten, including Peter Dutton’s Dickson to Labor. It’s amazing that Labor has held the Victorian seat of Aston, which they had gained from the Coalition during Labor’s honeymoon period.

    The Poll Bludger gives Labor a projected national two-party preferred vote of 54.5–45.5, a 2.4% swing to Labor since the 2022 election. Current primary votes are 34.7% Labor (up 2.3%), 30.5% Coalition (down 3.9%), 12.8% Greens (up 0.3%), 6.2% One Nation (up 1.3%), 2.0% Trumpet of Patriots (new), 8.1% independents (up 4.5%) and 5.8% others (up 0.6%).

    I believe this election result was mostly because Dutton became too close to One Nation and Donald Trump for the Australian people to tolerate. Dutton would have done better to have stuck to the cost-of-living issue and avoided culture wars.

    With the addition of the YouGov poll below, Albanese finished the campaign at a net -4.2 using an average of five polls in the final week that asked for leaders’ ratings. Dutton finished at -20.8.

    The Canadian election on Monday and now Australia’s election demonstrate the left’s ability to win elections. Many thought Trump’s election would herald an era of right-wing dominance, but both Canada’s Conservatives and Australia’s Coalition lost what had looked like wins two months ago. Both leaders also lost their seats.

    Before the 2022 Australian election, I wrote that Australia and Canada could be strong for the left owing to big cities that make up a large share of the population in both countries. The right’s gains in the last decade have been biggest in regional areas.

    The polls understated Labor at this election, with none of the ten polls by different pollsters conducted in the final week putting Labor’s two party share above 53%. The Morgan poll that was conducted April 14–20 gave Labor a 55.5–44.5 lead, but Morgan’s final two polls retreated back to a 53–47 Labor lead.

    The Ipsos poll below that gave Labor just a 51–49 lead and the Freshwater poll that gave Labor a 51.5–48.5 lead were particularly poor. I will give a full assessment of the polling when the results are nearly complete.

    This is the poll graph I’ve been publishing with the provisional Labor two-party win by 54.5–45.5 marked.

    More final polls

    The polls below were not released in time for Friday night’s final poll wrap.

    The final national YouGov non-MRP poll, conducted April 24 to May 1 from a sample of 3,000, gave Labor a 52.2–47.8 lead, a 1.3-point gain for the Coalition since the April 17–22 YouGov poll.

    Primary votes were 31.4% Coalition (up 0.4), 31.1% Labor (down 2.4), 14.6% Greens (up 0.6), 8.5% One Nation (down two), 2.5% Trumpet of Patriots (up 0.5), 6.7% independents (up 1.7) and 5.2% others (up 1.2). By 2022 election flows, Labor would lead by 54.2–45.8.

    Anthony Albanese’s net approval was up one point to -6, with 49% dissatisfied and 43% satisfied. Peter Dutton’s net approval slumped six points to a record low in YouGov of -24. Albanese led Dutton as better PM by 51–34 (50–35 previously).

    A national Ipsos poll for The Daily Mail was released Friday without fieldwork dates provided, but the sample was 2,574. Labor led by 51–49 from primary votes of 33% Coalition, 28% Labor, 12% Greens, 8% One Nation, 2% Trumpet of Patriots, 12% for all Others and 5% undecided.

    Ipsos has conducted Australian polling before, but this was its only voting intentions poll this term. Its previous two polls for The Daily Mail had only asked about the leaders’ ratings.

    The final wave of the tracking poll of 20 marginal seats by Redbridge and Accent Research for the News Corp tabloids gave Labor a 53–47 lead across these seats, a 1.5-point gain for the Coalition since the previous week.

    Primary votes were 34% Coalition (steady), 33% Labor (down two), 12% Greens (down two), 6% One Nation (down one) and 15% for all Others (up five). These seats voted for Labor by 51–49 at the 2022 election, so this poll has a 2% swing to Labor across these seats.

    Labor won nationally in 2022 by 52.1–47.9, so this poll implies about a 54–46 Labor national margin.

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

    – ref. Labor wins surprise landslide, returned with a thumping majority – https://theconversation.com/labor-wins-surprise-landslide-returned-with-a-thumping-majority-255518

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Labor wins election in landslide: full results

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Digital Storytelling Team, The Conversation

    The Conversation, CC BY-SA

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

    – ref. Labor wins election in landslide: full results – https://theconversation.com/labor-wins-election-in-landslide-full-results-251905

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: ER Report: A Roundup of Significant Articles on EveningReport.nz for May 3, 2025

    ER Report: Here is a summary of significant articles published on EveningReport.nz on May 3, 2025.

    ‘Super antibodies’ for snake toxins: how a dangerous DIY experiment helped scientists make a new antivenom
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christina N. Zdenek, Associate Researcher, The University of Queensland Scientists in the United States have created a new snake antivenom using the blood of a man who deliberately built up immunity to snakebites by injecting himself with many different kinds of venom more than 800 times over

    Human rights group calls for probe into attack on Freedom Flotilla ship
    Asia Pacific Report A human rights agency has called for an investigation into the drone attacks on the Gaza Freedom Flotilla aid ship Conscience with Israel suspected of being responsible. The Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor said in a statement that the deliberate targeting of a civilian aid ship in international waters was a “flagrant violation”

    RSF condemns Israeli targeting of Gaza journalists – then slandering them in death
    Pacific Media Watch After a year and a half of war, nearly 200 Palestinian journalists have been killed by the Israeli army — including at least 43 slain on the job. Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has brought multiple complaints before the International Criminal Court (ICC) and continues to tirelessly support Gazan journalists, working to halt

    Final polls give Labor a clear lead before the election
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne With those who haven’t already cast a pre-poll vote ready to hit the polling places tomorrow, a final batch of polls give Labor a firm lead. The

    Culture wars and costings: election special podcast with Michelle Grattan and Amanda Dunn
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra As we roll into the dying hours of the election campaign, the polls are suggesting a Labor win, although it is not yet clear if it will be in minority or majority. Chief Political Correspondent Michelle Grattan and Politics Editor

    Keith Rankin Analysis – The Great World War 1914-1945: Germany, Russia, Ukraine
    Analysis by Keith Rankin. On Anzac Day we remembered World War One and World War Two, or at least the peripheral little bits of those imperial wars that New Zealand was involved in. There was and is little context given to how New Zealand got involved with such far-away wars which need never have become

    What is iNaturalist? The citizen science app playing an unlikely role in Erin Patterson’s mushroom murder trial
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Caitlyn Forster, Associate Lecturer, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney Death cap mushrooms (_Amanita phalloides_) Jolanda Aalbers/Shutterstock The world has been gripped by the case of Australian woman Erin Patterson, who was charged with the murder of three people after allegedly serving them a

    Fake news and the election campaign – how worried should voters be?
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrea Carson, 2024 Oxford University visiting research fellow RIJS; Professor of Political Communication., La Trobe University shutterstock JRdes/Shutterstock The spread of electoral misinformation and disinformation is undermining democracies around the world. The World Economic Forum has identified the proliferation of false content as the leading short-term global

    The MMR vaccine doesn’t contain ‘aborted fetus debris’, as RFK Jr has claimed. Here’s the science
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hassan Vally, Associate Professor, Epidemiology, Deakin University Robert F. Kennedy Jr, the United States’ top public health official, recently claimed some religious groups avoid the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine because it contains “aborted fetus debris” and “DNA particles”. The US is facing its worst measles

    Scientists surprised to discover mayflies and shrimp making their bodies out of ancient gas
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Paul McInerney, Senior Research Scientist in Ecosystem Ecology, CSIRO The native shrimp _Paratya australiensis_ was among the species found to incorporate carbon from natural gas into their bodies in the Condamine River. Chris Van Wyk/Flickr, CC BY-NC-ND What’s the currency for all life on Earth? Carbon. Every

    Archibald Packing Room Prize goes to Abdul Abdullah for Jason Phu portrait, among broader set of bold and deeply personal works
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Joanna Mendelssohn, Honorary Senior Fellow, School of Culture and Communication. Editor in Chief, Design and Art of Australia Online, The University of Melbourne Winner Packing Room Prize 2025, Abdul Abdullah ‘No mountain high enough’, oil on linen, 162.4 x 136.7cm © the artist, image © Art Gallery

    New Zealand condemned for failing to make ICJ humanitarian case over Gaza genocide
    Asia Pacific Report The advocacy group Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa has condemned the New Zealand government fpr failing to make a humanitarian submission to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) hearings at The Hague this week into Israel blocking vital supplies entering Gaza. The ICJ’s ongoing investigation into Israeli genocide in the besieged enclave is

    The Liberals’ women problem may seem intractable, but here’s what they could learn from the Teals
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Phoebe Hayman, PhD Candidate and Casual Academic in Politics, La Trobe University The impression of the Liberal Party as out of touch with women persists in this year’s election. The party’s “women problem” was brought into sharp focus by the backlash to its now-abandoned policy to stop

    This NZ law aims to give people with criminal convictions a ‘clean slate’. It’s not working
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alexander Plum, Senior Research Fellow, Auckland University of Technology Andrey_Popov/Shutterstock If you own a business, would you be willing to hire a person who has been convicted for a crime? Give them a chance when a background check shows they have a criminal record? The answers matter

    ER Report: A Roundup of Significant Articles on EveningReport.nz for May 2, 2025
    ER Report: Here is a summary of significant articles published on EveningReport.nz on May 2, 2025.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: ‘Super antibodies’ for snake toxins: how a dangerous DIY experiment helped scientists make a new antivenom

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christina N. Zdenek, Associate Researcher, The University of Queensland

    Scientists in the United States have created a new snake antivenom using the blood of a man who deliberately built up immunity to snakebites by injecting himself with many different kinds of venom more than 800 times over 18 years.

    The researchers showed “super antibodies” from the man’s blood prevented toxic damage from neurotoxins found in the venoms of 19 different snake species, including mambas and cobras.

    The new study may represent a welcome advance in antivenom production. Most current techniques are more than a century old and involve injecting venom into horses and other animals, then harvesting antibodies from their blood.

    Even so, new treatments are only part of the challenge of addressing the huge global problem of snakebites, which kill and maim hundreds of thousands of people around the world each year.

    How was this new antivenom made?

    Tim Friede describes himself as an “autodidact herpetologist and venom expert”. He deliberately immunised himself with increasing doses of a number of snake venoms over an 18-year period, in a risky practice known as “mithridatism” that we don’t recommend. Some issues include: Friede nearly died several times, and immunity can drop in weeks.

    Scientists took a small sample of Friede’s blood and isolated the antibodies his immune system had developed to counteract the venoms. Next, they determined which of the antibodies were broadly effective against two important types of neurotoxins found in the venoms of elapid snakes, a family of species including cobras, mambas, and taipans.

    The next step was to sequence the DNA from Friede’s b-cells (a type of immune cell) that produced those two antibodies, then insert the genes responsible into a kind of virus called a bacteriophage. Then, using the modified bacteriophage and human cells as mini factories, the researchers produced lots of the antibodies to use in their work.

    How is antivenom usually made?

    Antivenom is currently the only specific treatment available for snakebites. It is usually produced by first collecting venom (which is dangerous), then “hyper-immunising” a domesticated animal (such as a horse) by routinely injecting it with small but increasing doses of that venom.

    Christina Zdenek and Chris Hay extracting venom from a coastal taipan (Oxyuranus scutellatus).
    Russell Shakespeare

    The horse’s blood is extracted and its antibodies purified. The antibodies can then be injected into a snakebite victim, where they stick to toxins. This prevents the toxins from binding to targets in the body, and it also flags them for elimination by the immune system.

    Traditional antivenoms have their problems. They can cause a severe allergic response known as an anaphylactic reaction (up to 50% of the time, in some countries). They may also have limited effectiveness due to differences in venom composition in snakes from different regions, or at different stages of the snake’s life.

    Broad-spectrum or “polyvalent” antivenoms are made by injecting horses with mixtures of venom from different species or different populations of snakes. However, the elevated antibody content per dose can increase the risk of adverse reactions.

    Another challenge with mixed antivenoms is that some toxins that produce a strong immune response can suppress the production of antibodies against other equally dangerous toxins.

    Why has it taken so long to improve antivenom production?

    Antivenom production is not presently a very profitable business. The expenses are huge, there is limited economy of scale, the effectiveness of antivenoms can be geographically specific, and the products have a short shelf-life and may have strict refrigeration requirements.

    Snakebite is also a disease of poverty. The people most affected are those least able to afford treatment.

    In Australia, the government has been supporting onshore antivenom production since 2020.

    Christina Zdenek retrieves snake venoms from a freezer for antivenom tests in the lab.
    Russell Shakespeare

    How else can we treat snakebite?

    In the past decade, more precise, ethical, and potentially cost-effective methods of producing snakebite therapeutics have emerged. These include monoclonal antibodies produced in the lab, as well as more conventional drugs.

    For example, varespladib is one drug that has progressed to phase II clinical trials. It works extremely well against a major component found in many snake venoms worldwide.

    Hybrid products containing “designer antibodies” and inhibitors like varespladib may be the future of snakebite treatment.

    The new “universal elapid antivenom” is in many ways an improvement on traditional antivenoms. However, there are still several deadly toxins present in elapid snake venoms it does not address, such as the coagulotoxin (blood-attacking) prothrombinase found in the venom of eastern brown snakes and taipans.

    Why do we need antivenom?

    Many people around the world live with the daily threat of being bitten by a venomous snake. Farmers, graziers, children walking barefoot to school, and many rural and remote workers in tropical and subtropical region, are at risk.

    The World Health Organisation deems snakebite a neglected tropical disease. It kills one person roughly every four minutes. As many as 2.7 million people are bitten annually, resulting in up to 138,000 deaths and around 400,000 people permanently maimed.

    An eastern brown snake (Pseudonaja textilis) passes through a suburban backyard in eastern Australia.
    Chris Hay

    Will this new medicine reduce snakebite deaths?

    When it comes to reducing the number of people who die from snakebite, novel snakebite treatments are undoubtedly important. However, developing new drugs is the relatively easy part of the problem.

    A drug is only as good as your capacity to deliver it when and where it’s needed. For snakebites, time is short and locations may be remote.

    Several antivenoms available in Australia.
    Christina N. Zdenek

    Far more attention and resources need to be devoted to all aspects of health infrastructure in the tropics, including the availability and distribution of life-saving medicines.

    Prevention is also critical. Reducing the number of snakebites will reduce the burden on health infrastructure by saving lives and limbs.

    To achieve this, we need far more resources devoted to research on snake behaviour, snake ecology, human–snake interactions, and public education about snakes. Snakebite is the result of an ecological encounter between two organisms, and we know disappointingly little about the circumstances in which it occurs.

    Christina N. Zdenek co-owns and works for the Australian Reptile Academy, a Queensland-based company that provides venomous-snake identification and handling courses for industry and the public.

    Timothy N.W. Jackson is co-head of the Australian Venom Research Unit, which has previously received funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, Department of Health, and Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

    – ref. ‘Super antibodies’ for snake toxins: how a dangerous DIY experiment helped scientists make a new antivenom – https://theconversation.com/super-antibodies-for-snake-toxins-how-a-dangerous-diy-experiment-helped-scientists-make-a-new-antivenom-255611

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Human rights group calls for probe into attack on Freedom Flotilla ship

    Asia Pacific Report

    A human rights agency has called for an investigation into the drone attacks on the Gaza Freedom Flotilla aid ship Conscience with Israel suspected of being responsible.

    The Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor said in a statement that the deliberate targeting of a civilian aid ship in international waters was a “flagrant violation” of the United Nations Charter, the Law of the Sea, and the Rome Statute, which prohibits the targeting of humanitarian objects.

    It added: “This attack falls within a recurring and documented pattern of force being used to prevent ships from reaching the Gaza Strip, even before they approach its shores.”

    The monitor is calling for an “independent and transparent investigation under Maltese jurisdiction, with the participation of the United Nations”.

    It is also demanding “guarantees for safe sea passage for humanitarian aid bound for Gaza”.

    “Any failure to act today will only encourage further attacks on humanitarian missions and deepen the catastrophe unfolding in Gaza,” said the monitor.

    A spokesperson for the Gaza Freedom Flotilla said the group blamed Israel or one of its allies for the attack, adding it currently did not have proof of this claim.

    Israeli TV confirms attack
    However, Israel’s channel 12 television reported that Israeli forces were responsible for the attack.

    The Freedom Flotilla Coalition (FFC) is a grassroots people-to-people solidarity movement composed of campaigns and initiatives from different parts of the world, working together to end the illegal Israeli blockade of Gaza.

    The organisation said its goals included:

    • breaking Israel’s more than 17-year illegal and inhumane blockade of the Gaza Strip;
    • educating people around the world about the blockade of Gaza;
    • condemning and publicising the complicity of other governments and global actors in enabling the blockade; and
    • responding to the cry from Palestinians and Palestinian organisations in Gaza for solidarity to break the blockade.

    The MV Conscience — with about 30 human rights and aid activists on board — came under direct attack in international waters off the coast of Malta at 00:23 local time.

    The Maltese government said everyone on the ship was safe following the attack. Although several New Zealanders have been on board past flotilla ships, none were on board this time.

    In May 2010, Israeli security forces attacked six vessels in a Freedom Flotilla mission carrying aid aid bound for Gaza.

    Nine of the flotilla passengers were killed during the raid, with 30 wounded — one of whom later died of his wounds.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: RSF condemns Israeli targeting of Gaza journalists – then slandering them in death

    Pacific Media Watch

    After a year and a half of war, nearly 200 Palestinian journalists have been killed by the Israeli army — including at least 43 slain on the job.

    Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has brought multiple complaints before the International Criminal Court (ICC) and continues to tirelessly support Gazan journalists, working to halt the extraordinary bloodshed and the media blackout imposed on the strip.

    Now, RSF has launched a petition in World Press Freedom Day week demanding an end to the ongoing massacres and calling for the besieged enclave to be opened to foreign media.

    “Journalists are being targeted and then slandered after their deaths,” RSF director-general Thibaut Bruttin said during a recent RSF demonstration in Paris in solidarity with Gazan journalists.

    “I have never before seen a war in which, when a journalist is killed, you are told they are really a ‘terrorist’.”

    The journalists gathered together with the main organisations defending French media workers and press freedom on April 16 in front of the steps of the Opéra-Bastille to condemn the news blackout and the fate of Palestinian journalists.

    The slaughter of journalists is one of the largest media massacres this century being carried out as part of the Israeli genocide in Gaza.

    RSF said there was “every reason to believe that the Israeli army is seeking to establish a total silence about what is happening in Gaza”.

    This was being done by preventing the international press from entering the territory freely and by targeting those who, on the ground, continue to bear witness despite the risks.


    Mobilisation of journalists in Paris, France, in solidarity with their Gazan colleagues.  Video: RSF

    Last year, Palestinian journalists covering Gaza were named as laureates of the 2024 UNESCO/Guillermo Cano World Press Freedom Prize, following the recommendation of an International Jury of media professionals.

    Republished in collaboration with Reporters Without Borders.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Final polls give Labor a clear lead before the election

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne

    With those who haven’t already cast a pre-poll vote ready to hit the polling places tomorrow, a final batch of polls give Labor a firm lead.

    The final Newspoll gave Labor a 52.5–47.5 lead, a Freshwater poll gave Labor a 51.5–48.5 lead, a DemosAU poll gave Labor a 52–48 lead and a Morgan poll gave Labor a 53–47 lead. Vote counting at the election is also covered.

    The final Newspoll, conducted Monday to Thursday from a sample of 1,270, gave Labor a 52.5–47.5 lead, a 0.5-point gain for Labor since the April 21–24 Newspoll. Primary votes were 34% Coalition (down one), 33% Labor (down one), 13% Greens (up two), 8% One Nation (steady) and 12% for all Others (steady).

    Applying 2022 election preference flows to these primary votes would give Labor about a 53–47 lead. Newspoll is giving the Coalition a greater share of One Nation preferences than in 2022.

    Here is the final poll graph. Labor is clearly ahead and will win Saturday’s election unless polls are overstating them by as much as they did in the 2019 election.

    Anthony Albanese’s net approval in Newspoll was down one point to -10, with 52% dissatisfied and 42% satisfied. Peter Dutton’s net approval slumped a further four points to a new record low of -28. Albanese led Dutton as better PM by an unchanged 51–35.

    Since the early March Newspoll (the last one before the election campaign began), Dutton has lost 14 points on net approval, while Albanese has gained two points.

    Here is the graph of Albanese’s net approval in Newspoll this term. The plus signs are the Newspoll data points and a trend line has been fitted.

    A simple average of the four polls this week that have asked for leaders’ ratings (Newspoll, Freshwater, Essential and Resolve) has Albanese at net -3.8 approval and Dutton at net -20.

    By 57–43, voters thought they would be better off in the next three years under an Albanese Labor government than a Dutton Coalition government.

    Labor takes 51.5–48.5 lead in final Freshwater poll

    A national Freshwater poll for The Financial Review, conducted Tuesday to Thursday from a sample of 2,055 (double the normal sample size), gave Labor a 51.5–48.5 lead by respondent preferences, a 1.3-point gain for Labor since the April 14–16 Freshwater poll.

    Primary votes were 37% Coalition (down two), 33% Labor (up one), 12% Greens (steady) and 18% for all Others (up one). One Nation were broken out for the first time and had 8%. By 2022 election flows, Labor would lead by about 51–49.

    Freshwater has been the most pro-Coalition of regular Australian pollsters, and its last poll had a near tie when other polls had Labor well ahead.

    Albanese’s net approval was up seven points to -3, with 44% unfavourable and 41% favourable. Dutton’s net approval was down five points to -16. Albanese led Dutton as preferred PM by 49–39 (46–41 previously).

    Labor gained a point on cost of living and economic management to reduce the Coalition’s lead to one point and five points on these issues respectively.

    The Coalition led by 55–45 with the 42% who had already voted (25% early and 17% by postal ballot). Labor led by 52–41 with those yet to vote with 7% undecided.

    Two DemosAU final week polls

    The two national DemosAU polls listed here were taken over a concurrent fieldwork period. The previous DemosAU poll, conducted April 22–23, had given Labor a 52–48 lead from primary votes of 31% Coalition, 29% Labor, 14% Greens, 9% One Nation, 7% independents and 10% others.

    A national DemosAU poll
    , conducted April 27–30 from a large sample of 4,100, gave Labor a 52–48 lead, from primary votes of 33% Coalition, 31% Labor, 12% Greens, 9% One Nation, 2% Trumpet of Patriots, 7% independents and 6% others. State and other breakdowns are provided in the report.

    Albanese led Dutton by 46–34 as preferred PM. Party breakdowns of this question had Albanese leading by 71–10 with Greens voters, 57–20 with independent voters and 36–27 with other voters. Dutton only led by 43–21 with One Nation voters and 37–30 with Trumpet of Patriots voters. These breakdowns don’t imply a Coalition surge on preference flows.

    A second national DemosAU poll for The Gazette, conducted April 27–29 from a sample of 1,974, gave Labor a 51–49 lead, Primary votes were 32% Coalition, 29% Labor, 12% Greens, 9% One Nation, 7% independents and 11% others.

    Labor retains 53–47 lead in final Morgan poll

    The final national Morgan poll, conducted Monday to Friday from a sample of 1,368, gave Labor a 53–47 lead, unchanged from the April 21–27 Morgan poll.

    Primary votes were 34.5% Coalition (steady), 33% Labor (down one), 13.5% Greens (up 0.5), 6.5% One Nation (down one), 2% Trumpet of Patriots (up 0.5), 3% teal independents (up one) and 7.5% for all Others (steady). By 2022 election flows, Labor led by an unchanged 54–46.

    More from the Spectre poll

    I’ve received the full Spectre poll that I wrote about on Thursday. Labor’s net favourability was net zero, the Liberals were at net -2, Albanese was net -6, Dutton was net -13, Pauline Hanson was net -8 and Greens leader Adam Bandt was net -12.

    The most unpopular people in this poll were US President Donald Trump at net -47 and Elon Musk at net -45.

    Vote counting for the election

    Polls close at 6pm AEST Saturday in the eastern states, which have 122 of the 150 House of Representatives seats. Polls close at 6:30pm AEST in South Australia and the Northern Territory (12 combined seats), and in Western Australia at 8pm AEST (16 seats).

    By 8pm AEST, I expect the large majority of votes cast on election day to be counted in the eastern states. But pre-poll votes and returned postal votes already account for 40% of enrolled voters, and the biggest day of pre-polling (Friday) is still to be added.

    In many seats, we will need to wait until the pre-poll votes are counted before a result can be called. It’s unlikely the election will be called until a large proportion of the pre-poll votes have been counted. This is likely to take until late at night AEST.

    Not all seats will be called on election night. In some seats, the electoral commission will have selected the incorrect candidates for its final two candidate count, and will need to re-do this count with the correct candidates.

    Other seats will be close between the final two, and we will need to wait for late postals and absent votes to decide the winner. If postmarked by election day, postals have up to May 16 to arrive (13 days after the election).

    I wrote about the Senate election on April 16. It will usually be clear on election night who has won the top four or five seats out of six in a state. But to resolve the final seats, all votes need to be data entered into a computer system, then a button is pressed to electronically distribute preferences. This is likely to take about four weeks after the election.

    UK byelection and local elections

    I covered Thursday’s United Kingdom parliamentary byelection and local government elections for The Poll Bludger. The far-right Reform gained the safe Labour Runcorn and Helsby seat, winning by just six votes. They are making massive gains from both the Conservatives and Labour in the local elections.

    In final results from Monday’s Canadian election, the centre-left Liberals won 169 of the 343 seats, three short of the 172 needed for a majority. The Conservatives won 144 seats, the separatist left-wing Quebec Bloc (BQ) 22, the left-wing New Democratic Party (NDP) seven and the Greens one. Vote shares were 43.7% Liberals, 41.3% Conservatives, 6.3% BQ, 6.3% NDP and 1.3% Greens.

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

    – ref. Final polls give Labor a clear lead before the election – https://theconversation.com/final-polls-give-labor-a-clear-lead-before-the-election-255724

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Culture wars and costings: election special podcast with Michelle Grattan and Amanda Dunn

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

    As we roll into the dying hours of the election campaign, the polls are suggesting a Labor win, although it is not yet clear if it will be in minority or majority. Chief Political Correspondent Michelle Grattan and Politics Editor Amanda Dunn discuss why the Coalition has focussed on culture wars issues this week, plus the parties’ policies finally costed after millions of Australians have already voted.

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

    – ref. Culture wars and costings: election special podcast with Michelle Grattan and Amanda Dunn – https://theconversation.com/culture-wars-and-costings-election-special-podcast-with-michelle-grattan-and-amanda-dunn-255774

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: The MMR vaccine doesn’t contain ‘aborted fetus debris’, as RFK Jr has claimed. Here’s the science

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hassan Vally, Associate Professor, Epidemiology, Deakin University

    Robert F. Kennedy Jr, the United States’ top public health official, recently claimed some religious groups avoid the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine because it contains “aborted fetus debris” and “DNA particles”.

    The US is facing its worst measles outbreaks in years with nearly 900 cases across the country and active outbreaks in several states.

    At the same time, Kennedy, secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, continues to erode trust in vaccines.

    So what can we make of his latest claims?

    There’s no fetal debris in the MMR vaccine

    Kennedy said “aborted fetus debris” in MMR vaccines is the reason many religious people refuse vaccination. He referred specifically to the Mennonites in Texas, a deeply religious community, who have been among the hardest hit by the current measles outbreaks.

    Many vaccines work by using a small amount of an attenuated (weakened) form of a virus, or in the case of the MMR vaccine, attenuated forms of the viruses that cause measles, mumps and rubella. This gives the immune system a safe opportunity to learn how to recognise and respond to these viruses.

    As a result, if a person is later exposed to the actual infection, their immune system can react swiftly and effectively, preventing serious illness.

    Kennedy’s claim about fetal debris specifically refers to the rubella component of the MMR vaccine. The rubella virus is generally grown in a human cell line known as WI-38, which was originally derived from lung tissue of a single elective abortion in the 1960s. This cell line has been used for decades, and no new fetal tissue has been used since.

    Certain vaccines for other diseases, such as chickenpox, hepatitis A and rabies, have also been made by growing the viruses in fetal cells.

    These cells are used not because of their origin, but because they provide a stable, safe and reliable environment for growing the attenuated virus. They serve only as a growth medium for the virus and they are not part of the final product.

    You might think of the cells as virus-producing factories. Once the virus is grown, it’s extracted and purified as part of a rigorous process to meet strict safety and quality standards. What remains in the final vaccine is the virus itself and stabilising agents, but not human cells, nor fetal tissue.

    So claims about “fetal debris” in the vaccine are false.

    It’s also worth noting the world’s major religions permit the use of vaccines developed from cells originally derived from fetal tissue when there are no alternative products available.

    Are there fragments of DNA in the MMR vaccine?

    Kennedy claimed the Mennonites’ reluctance to vaccinate stems from “religious objections” to what he described as “a lot of aborted fetus debris and DNA particles” in the MMR vaccine.

    The latter claim, about the vaccine containing DNA particles, is technically true. Trace amounts of DNA fragments from the human cell lines used to produce the rubella component of the MMR vaccine may remain even after purification.

    However, with this claim, there’s an implication these fragments pose a health risk. This is false.

    Any DNA that may be present in this vaccine exists in extremely small amounts, is highly fragmented and degraded, and is biologically inert – that is, it cannot cause harm.

    Even if, hypothetically, intact DNA were present in the vaccine (which it’s not), it would not have the capacity to cause harm. One common (but unfounded) concern is that foreign DNA could integrate with a person’s own DNA, and alter their genome.

    Introducing DNA into human cells in a way that leads to integration is very difficult. Even when scientists are deliberately trying to do this, for example, in gene therapy, it requires precise tools, special viral delivery systems and controlled conditions.

    It’s also important to remember our bodies are exposed to foreign DNA constantly, through food, bacteria and even our own microbiome. Our immune system routinely digests and disposes of this material without incorporating it into our genome.

    This question has been extensively studied over decades. Multiple health authorities, including Australia’s Therapeutic Goods Administration, have addressed the misinformation regarding perceived harm from residual DNA in vaccines.

    Ultimately, the idea that fragmented DNA in a vaccine could cause genetic harm is false.

    The bottom line

    Despite what Kennedy would have you believe, there’s no fetal debris in the MMR vaccine, and the trace amounts of DNA fragments that may remain pose no health risk.

    What the evidence does show, however, is that vaccines like the MMR vaccine offer excellent protection against deadly and preventable diseases, and have saved millions of lives around the world.

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

    – ref. The MMR vaccine doesn’t contain ‘aborted fetus debris’, as RFK Jr has claimed. Here’s the science – https://theconversation.com/the-mmr-vaccine-doesnt-contain-aborted-fetus-debris-as-rfk-jr-has-claimed-heres-the-science-255718

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –