The year is 1972. The Whitlam Labor government has just been swept into power and major changes to Australia’s immigration system are underway. Many people remember this time for the formal end of the racist White Australia Policy.
A lesser-known legacy of this period was the introduction of Australia’s first immigration amnesty. This amnesty, implemented later in 1974 with bilateral support, provided humane pathways to permanency or citizenship for undocumented people in Australia.
In other words, people living without lawful immigration status could “legalise” their status without risk of punishment or deportation.
More immigration amnesties were promised during later election campaigns and then implemented in 1976 and 1980.
These amnesties occurred under successive Labor and Liberal federal governments, and each enjoyed enthusiastic bipartisan support.
So, how did these amnesties work – and could they happen again?
Started by Whitlam
Australia’s first amnesty was announced in January 1974, as part of the Whitlam government’s official policy of multiculturalism.
Its purpose was to grant permanency to people who had been living in Australia “illegally” and at risk of labour exploitation.
The amnesty was open for five months, from late January until the end of June 1974.
The main eligibility criteria was that the person:
had to have been living in Australia for three years or more and
be of “good character”.
This program had only a modest uptake. However, it set the path for more successful initiatives in the future.
Continued by Fraser
During the 1975 election campaign, then caretaker Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser promised another amnesty if his government won the election.
He committed to “do everything we can” to allow undocumented people
to stay here and make Australia their permanent home.
After the election, Fraser’s Liberal government implemented a broad amnesty for “overstayed visitors” in January 1976.
Departmental figures show 8,614 people sought legal status in the amnesty period.
The vast majority (63%) lived in New South Wales. The main nationalities of these applicants were:
Greek (1,283 applicants)
UK (911 applicants)
Indonesian (748 applicants)
Chinese (643 applicants).
Australia’s third broad immigration amnesty came in 1980, again as a result of a bipartisan election promise.
Immigration Minister Ian Macphee announced a six-month Regularisation of Status Program. It aimed, he said, to deal “humanely with the problem of illegal immigration” while also seeking to curb such unauthorised migration in the future.
Not a trick
Many migrants worried these amnesties were a government “trick” to facilitate deportations.
In an attempt to reassure the public, Prime Minister Fraser insisted in 1980 that the program was
not a trap to lure people into the open so that they can be seized, jailed and deported.
By the end of the amnesty period in December 1980, it was reported that more than 11,000 applications had been received. This covered more than 14,000 people.
What made the past amnesties successful?
Our research looked at what motivated the amnesties and how they worked.
We found several key factors that drove success, including the need for:
simple and inclusive criteria for eligibility
a clear application process
a careful campaign for promotion, to build trust with migrant communities, and
durable outcomes that offer of clear pathways to citizenship.
The 1980 amnesty program involved an effective campaign to publicise successful cases.
A 21-year-old Greek waitress working in her aunt’s Goulburn restaurant was widely publicised as the first person to be granted immigration amnesty status in July 1980. A Uruguayan refugee was profiled as the 1,000th.
The Department of Immigration also translated amnesty information into 48 languages, publicised in non-English language press and radio.
Of the three amnesties, the 1974 one was the least successful, due to:
stringent eligibility criteria
limited media publicity, and
no official outreach strategy to build trust with migrant communities.
Precarious lives
Recent calls for an immigration amnesty has focused on two groups in Australia:
undocumented people, including migrant workers and international students, and
refugee applicants whose status has lapsed, or who cannot access permanent residency.
The Department of Home Affairs estimates more than 70,000 people live in Australia today without immigration status.
Undocumented workers are highly vulnerable to exploitation and deportation.
Yet, these workers often fulfil crucial labour market shortages. Many have been living in Australia for years or even decades.
Asylum seekers and refugees on temporary or no visas cannot return “home” for fear of persecution. They risk lapsing into irregular status with no rights or entitlements.
Lessons from past amnesties
Amnesties are a humane and cost-effective response to unauthorised migration.
Australia currently spends millions, if not billions of dollars, on the detention and deportation of people without visas.
In the lead up to both the 1976 and 1980 amnesties, successive governments acknowledged such a “detection and deportation” approach would be unnecessarily costly. It would require “increased resources in manpower”.
An amnesty, instead, was in the words of then Immigration Minister Macphee a chance to:
clean the slate, to acknowledge that no matter how people got here they are part of the community.
These historical precedents show Australia’s migration system and politicians could, if they wanted, accommodate initiatives and reforms that fundamentally value migrants and prioritise migrant access to permanency.
Our research also shows Australian election campaigns can be opportunities for advancing policies that embrace the reality of immigration and offer hope, not fear.
Sara Dehm receives funding from the Australian Research Council. She is a co-convenor of the interdisciplinary academic network, Academics for Refugees.
Anthea Vogl receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Commonwealth Departure of Health and Aged Care. She is a Board Member of the Forcibly Displaced People Network and co-convenor of the interdisciplinary academic network, Academics for Refugees.
We’ve all been there – trying to peel a boiled egg, but mangling it beyond all recognition as the hard shell stubbornly sticks to the egg white. Worse, the egg ends up covered in chewy bits of adhesive membrane in the end.
The internet is littered with various “hacks” that claim to prevent this problem. But there are several reasons why eggs can be hard to peel. Luckily, that means there are also science-based strategies we can use to avoid the problem.
Egg ‘peelability’ factors
Eggs consist of a hard, porous shell, an inner and outer membrane, the egg white (albumen), and a membrane-encased yolk at the centre. There is also an air cell between the inner and outer membrane next to the shell.
A lot of research was done in the late 1960s and 1970s on factors that affect the peelability of eggs after they’ve been boiled.
One of these factors is the pH of the egg white. An early study from the 1960s indicated that the pH of the egg white needs to be in the range of 8.7–8.9, quite alkaline, in order for the egg to be easier to peel.
Storage temperature has a role to play, too. A study from 1963 showed that storing eggs at about 22 degrees Celsius (or 72 degrees Fahrenheit) gives a better peelability result than storage at lower temperatures of 13°C, or even fridge temperatures at 3–5°C.
Of course, there is a risk of spoilage if eggs are stored at higher ambient temperatures.
In the studies, an increase in storage time before boiling – using less fresh eggs – also increased the ease of peelability.
The fact that fresh eggs are harder to peel is relatively well known. Based on the factors above, there are a couple of reasons for this.
For one, in a fresh egg the air cell is still quite small. As the egg ages, it (very) slowly loses moisture through the porous shell, increasing the size of the air cell while the rest of the egg contents shrink. A bigger air cell makes it easier to start the peeling action.
Additionally, egg whites, although they already start out relatively alkaline, increase in pH as the eggs age, also making them easier to peel.
Step two: water temperature
Some keen egg boiling pundits believe that starting off with boiling water and lowering it to a simmer before gently placing the eggs into it provides a better result. However, you want to do this with room temperature eggs to avoid them cracking due to a sudden temperature change.
The reasoning behind this approach is that exposure to higher temperatures from the start of cooking also makes it easier for the membrane to come away from the shell and egg white.
Furthermore, the quick hot start makes it easier for the egg white proteins to denature (change structure as they cook) and bond to each other, rather than to the membrane.
After boiling eggs for the desired amount of time (typically 3–5 minutes for runny yolks, 6–7 minutes for jammy yolks, and 12–15 minutes for hard boiled), you can quench them in ice water. This should help the egg white to slightly shrink away from the shell, improving peelability.
Starting in hot water might help peelability, especially if you plunge the eggs in ice water afterwards. Max4e Photo/Shutterstock
Step three (optional): adding things to the water
Some other suggestions to improve peelability include adding salt to the boiling water, but this has mixed results. In one study, this approach did actually improve peelability, but this effect was lost after eggs had been stored for longer periods.
Acids and alkali have also been shown to aid eggshell peelability or removal. The patent that describes this used rather harsh substances with the goal to dissolve away the shell.
But based on this idea, you could try adding baking soda or vinegar to the water. With vinegar, the theory is that it attacks the calcium carbonate in the eggshell to then aid its removal. As for baking soda, because it’s alkaline, it could help detach the membrane from the shell.
Bonus: alternative cooking methods
There are other methods for hard-cooking eggs, such as pressure steaming, air-frying and even microwaving.
In steaming eggs, some proponents theorise that water vapour permeates the eggshell, loosening the membrane from the egg white, and thereby making the egg much easier to peel.
While studies have recently been done on the air-frying of other foods, there is still scope to further understand how this style of cooking might affect eggshells and peelability.
Lastly, once you have successfully separated the eggshells, don’t just throw them in the bin. There are lots of different uses for them, including compost, slug and snail deterrent in your garden, using them as little biodegradable pots for seedlings, or even something as advanced as scaffolds for cancer research.
Paulomi (Polly) Burey receives funding from the Australian Government Department of Education which has funded the eggshell research mentioned at the end of this article.
The fourth election debate was the most idiosyncratic of the four head-to-head contests between Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Opposition Leader Peter Dutton.
Apart from all the usual topics, the pair was charged with producing one-word responses to pictures of the prime minister’s Copacabana house, a three-eyed fish and Elon Musk.
They were asked the price of a dozen eggs. It’s an old trick from debates past, but those “prepping” the leaders had fallen down. Dutton said about A$4.20. Albanese was closer with “$7, if you can find them”. The actual price is $8.80 at Woolworths (or $8.50 at Coles). Watching at home, some viewers would have thought, “here are a couple of guys in the cost-of-living election who don’t do the shopping”.
Debate host Seven had an audience of 60 undecided voters, who scored the pair on a range of topics. They gave the overall result to Albanese over Dutton by 50%–25% with the other 25% undecided.
In general, Dutton pursued Albanese aggressively whenever he could, pressing the accusation he made in their last encounter that the prime minister does not tell the truth. “Honestly, this whole campaign, it’s hard to believe anything you say.”
Albanese, however, effectively marshalled his points and counterpoints on a number of the topics.
This showed in the scores the audience awarded on core issues. On cost of living, 65% gave the tick Albanese, and only 16% were more convinced by Dutton. On housing, Albanese also had a win, although more narrowly – 35% to 30%. With tax cuts, Albanese’s margin was 49% to 21%.
Dutton was openly critical of their extensive use. “I think a lot of Australians think it’s overdone and it cheapens the significance of what it was meant to do.”
Albanese was supportive of the ceremonies but circumspect. “Well, from my perspective, it’s a matter of respect, but it’s also, of course, up to the organisations that are hosting an event, whether they have a Welcome to Country or not. It’s up to them, and people will have different views, and people are entitled to their views.”
Dutton scored 46% to Albanese’s 27% on this topic.
One of the more bizarre moments came in a discussion about whether the leaders had US President Donald Trump’s mobile phone number. The prime minister said he was not sure whether the president even had a mobile phone (despite it being highly publicised Greg Norman had to pass the number onto former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull when Trump was elected).
But Dutton coped with the question of trusting Trump better than in the last debate, when he had said he didn’t know him. Asked whether we could trust Trump to have our back, he said “We can trust whoever’s in the Oval Office”.
Pressed on which country posed the biggest threat to Australia’s security, Dutton said, “the biggest concern from our intelligence agencies and our defence agency is in relation to the Communist Party of China”.
Albanese talked around the question of whether China posed the biggest risk to Australia’s national security. “Well, China is the major power in the region which is seeking to increase its influence. But the relationship is complex as well, because China is our major trading partner.” And on and on his answer went.
On defence Dutton was well out in front in the minds of the audience, 43% to 37%.
Albanese would have gone home the happier of the two leaders. He won on the issues at the centre of the election.
As Tony Abbott once said, who needs sleep at the end of a campaign?
Dutton plans to visit up to 28 seats in the campaign’s final week, the majority of them held by Labor.
The Liberals say with the Coalition needing to gain 21 seats for a majority, the seats’ blitz underlines the election is winnable for the Coalition.
It also underlines the adrenaline rush leaders get in the dash to the finish line. In 2010 opposition leader Tony Abbott launched into a 36-hour non-stop blitz for the final three days of the election. “Why sleep at a time like this?” Abbott said. Prime Minister John Howard had finished his unsuccessful 2007 campaign blitzing shopping centres in Queensland.
Dutton started his marathon on Sunday in Labor territory with a rally in west Melbourne, in the seat of Hawke. The opposition leader’s seat list includes Solomon (NT), Aston (Victoria), Gilmore (NSW), Moreton (Queensland), Gorton (Victoria), Lyons (Tasmania), Dunkley (Victoria), Goldstein (Victoria), Kooyong (Vitoria), Paterson (NSW), Dobell (NSW), Bennelong (NSW), Bullwinkel (Western Australia) and Boothby (South Australia). Later on Sunday he was in the Sydney teal seat of Mackellar, where Howard also spoke in support of the Liberal candidate James Brown who is taking on independent Sophie Scamps.
But as each day passes, for an increasing number of voters in these and other seats the visits and messages will be irrelevant. They’ll have pre-polled. People are flocking to vote early. There are 11 days for pre-polling this election. Back in 2019 pre-polling ran for 19 days. As of Saturday, 2.4 million people had already pre-polled.
The politicians are vaguely resentful so many people are voting with their feet and avoiding, for a variety of reasons, the last days of what most commentators have thought has been an uninspiring campaign. Some of the politicians would like everyone to listen to their pitches right up to the end. But there is also a more practical reason why they regard pre-polling as a problem – they and their supporters have to spend long hours outside polling booths handing out how-to-vote cars.
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.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Opposition Leader Peter Dutton have had their fourth and final leaders’ debate of the campaign. The skirmish, hosted by 7News in Sydney, was moderated by 7’s Political Editor Mark Riley.
Cost of living and housing affordability featured in the clash, with both leaders acknowledging the price pain being felt by many Australians. Immigration, US President Donald Trump, energy policy and welcome to country ceremonies were also thrashed out in a number of lively exchanges.
How did each leader perform? Have they done enough to convince undecided voters before polling day? Three experts give their analysis
Andy Marks, Western Sydney University
This is the election, Seven’s opening voiceover proclaimed, “that will decide the future of Welcome to Country ceremonies.”
Puzzled voters no doubt welcomed the promise of clarification. So Riley cut to the chase. Some people, he said, are “uncomfortable” with the ceremonies.
Dutton agreed:
I think a lot of Australians think it is overdone and cheapens the significance of what it was meant to do.“
Albanese said it was up to event organisers to decide whether to have a ceremony. On the lost Voice referendum? He “accepts the outcome”.
No fight. Just consensus from both leaders January 26 should remain as Australia Day.
Lack of spark was never going to stop Seven. A dramatic soundtrack rumbled away behind the leaders’ statements added an Oscars vibe, with each rushing their answers before being played off.
It worked. Halfway in, a fire was lit. “It’s hard to believe anything you say”, Dutton said to his opponent. “You’ve made promises you haven’t delivered. People are getting smashed.”
Albanese shot back. “Peter can attack me. But I won’t let him attack the wages of working people.”
Hostilities abated as Riley asked Albanese if he had Trump’s mobile number. “Do you have [UK Prime Minister] Keir Starmer’s?” Dutton added.
Nuclear power reheated the debate. “I am proud”, Dutton said of the Coalition’s energy plans. But he would not commit to visiting any of the proposed sites in the final days of the campaign.
Suddenly it became a science lesson. Dutton asked “how will solar work at night?” When you turn on a tap, Albanese responded, water still comes out even when it isn’t raining.
A highlight? Dutton almost quoted Taylor Swift. “The prime minister promises a band-aid on a bullet wound” he quipped on cost of living.
Blair Williams, Monash University
“This is the debate for every Australian”, the Channel 7 voiceover said at the start of the debate. However, to reference Sex and the City’s Carrie Bradshaw, I couldn’t help but wonder if this debate would truly include everyone.
We saw the usual quibbles between Albanese and Dutton over various crises, such as housing and the cost of living. Albanese argued he would help through initiatives such as cheaper medicines and childcare.
However, he put his foot down on scrapping negative gearing as it’s a measure that “will not build supply”.
Dutton’s response made it clear he was not planning to include “everyone” in this debate, as he quickly blamed immigrants for the housing crisis in Australia.
Riley posed a question to both leaders about Welcome to Country, saying booing during an ANZAC event sparked an “important discussion […] there are people in Australia who are uncomfortable being welcomed to Country”.
Riley asked both leaders if the ceremonies are “overdone”.
Dutton argued they do have a place but he wants “everyone to be equal” as “we are all equal”. Dutton said he wanted the country to be “one”. This overlooks how structural disadvantages, such as racism and sexism, result in inequality.
Albanese took a more Keating-esque perspective, citing ANZAC Day in New Zealand and the central place of Maori language in their events, emphasising the importance of First Nations people and multiculturalism in Australia.
The debate ended without any discussion of violence against women. So far this year, 24 women have been killed as a result of gendered violence, with three in just the past week. Yet both parties have barely mentioned it during the campaign or the debates.
Women’s issues were also barely raised. While Albanese mentioned cheaper childcare, Dutton failed to reference any issues that might specifically impact women. He has done little in this campaign and during this debate to win them over.
Instead, both leaders wasted time arguing over the Coalition’s plan to produce nuclear energy in 2035.
“Is this helping you decide?” Channel 7 asked viewers. For many women – and other – around the country, it merely showed two white men in suits and ties yelling over each other. This could explain why a third of Australians will preference a minor party or independent at the ballot box. Perhaps these are the voters who have felt left out.
Michelle Cull, Western Sydney University
While the debate started off friendly, it became quite heated very quickly. Dutton found it difficult to finish his talking points on time but had no problem interrupting Albanese. Cost of living was central to the debate.
There wasn’t much the leaders could agree on – no surprises there. Although both concurred there should be no change to the date for Australia Day.
When asked about Welcome to Country ceremonies, Dutton mentioned them happening at the “start of every meeting at work” and they were “divisive”. Perhaps there was some confusion here with Acknowledgement of Country.
Dutton focused on short-term cost-of-living relief and his fuel excise cuts. He blamed Albanese for high inflation, high interest rates and housing affordability issues. The prime minister was quick to remind him not everything was “hunky dory” when Labor took office.
Albanese did well to promote many of the Labor policies targeted at reducing cost of living through lower HECS-HELP, free TAFE and cheaper childcare. He was the only leader to include what his party was doing for renters and those in social housing, as well as first home buyers. Albanese also responded to Dutton’s short-term cost-of-living relief with Labor’s more permanent help through wage increases and tax cuts.
Dutton was clever enough to throw Labor’s proposed superannuation changes into the debate by referring to the plan to tax unrealised capital gains on superannuation balances greater than A$3 million. But this didn’t seem to make it much further in the debate, as it did not relate to the question being asked.
We’ll now have to wait until Saturday to see if the leaders really managed to sway any undecided voters.
Michelle Cull is an FCPA member of CPA Australia, member of the Financial Advice Association Australia and President Elect of the Academy of Financial Services in the United States. Michelle is an academic member of UniSuper’s Consultative Committee. Michelle co-founded the Western Sydney University Tax Clinic which has received funding from the Australian Taxation Office as part of the National Tax Clinic Program. Michelle has previously volunteered as Chair of the Macarthur Advisory Council for the Salvation Army Australia.
Andy Marks and Blair Williams 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.
Donald Trump campaigned for the White House by unleashing a nearly endless barrage of insults against journalists and news outlets.
He repeatedly threatened to weaponise the federal government against media professionals whom he considers his enemies.
In his first 100 days in office, President Trump has already shown that he was not bluffing.
“The day-to-day chaos of the American political news cycle can make it hard to fully take stock of the seismic shifts that are happening,” said Clayton Weimers, executive director of RSF North America.
“But when you step back and look at the whole picture, the pattern of blows to press freedom is quite clear.
“RSF refuses to accept this massive attack on press freedom as the new normal. We will continue to call out these assaults against the press and use every means at our disposal to fight back against them.
“We urge every American who values press freedom to do the same.”
Here is the Trump administration’s war on the press by the numbers: *
427 million – Weekly worldwide audience of the USAGM news outlets silenced by Trump
In an effort to eliminate the US Agency for Global Media (USAGM) by cutting grants to outlets funded by the federal agency and placing their reporters on leave, the government has left millions around the world without vital sources of reliable information.
This leaves room for authoritarian regimes, like Russia and China, to spread their propaganda unchecked.
However, RSF recently secured an interim injunction against the administration’s dismantling of the USAGM-funded broadcaster Voice of America,which also reinstates funding to the outlets Radio Free Asia (RFA) and the Middle East Broadcasting Networks (MBN).
8,000+ – US government web pages taken down
Webpages from more than a dozen government sites were removed almost immediately after President Trump took office, leaving journalists and the public without critical information on health, crime, and more.
3,500+ – Journalists and media workers at risk of losing their jobs thanks to Trump’s shutdown of the USAGM
Journalists from VOA, the MBN, RFA, and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty are at risk of losing their jobs as the Trump administration works to shut down the USAGM. Furthermore, at least 84 USAGM journalists based in the US on work visas now face deportation to countries where they risk prosecution and severe harassment.
At least 15 journalists from RFA and eight from VOA originate from repressive states and are at serious risk of being arrested and potentially imprisoned if deported.
180 – Public radio stations at risk of closing if public media funding is eliminated
The Trump administration reportedly plans to ask Congress to cut $1.1 billion in allocated funds for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which supports National Public Radio (NPR) and the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS). These cuts will hit rural communities and stations in smaller media markets the hardest, where federal funding is most impactful.
74 –Days the Associated Press (AP) has been banned from the White House
On February 11, the White House began barring the Associated Press (AP) news agency from its events because of the news agency’s continued use of the term “Gulf of Mexico,” which President Trump prefers to call the “Gulf of America” — a blatant example of retaliation against the media.
Despite a federal judge ruling the administration must reinstate the news agency’s access on April 9, the White House has continued to limit AP’s access.
64 – Disparaging comments made by Trump against the media on Truth Social since inauguration
In addition to regular, personal attacks against the media in press conferences and public speeches, Trump takes to his social media site nearly every day to insult, threaten, or intimidate journalists and media workers who report about him or his administration critically.
13 –Individuals pardoned by President Trump after being convicted or charged for attacking journalists on January 6, 2021
Trump pardoned over a dozen individuals charged with or convicted of violent crimes against journalists at the US Capitol during the January 6 insurrection.
6 –Federal Communications Commission (FCC) inquiries into media companies
Brendan Carr, co-author of the Project 2025 playbook and chair of the FCC, has wasted no time launching politically motivated investigations, explicit threats against media organisations, and implicit threats against their parent companies. These include inquiries into CBS, ABC parent company Disney, NBC parent company Comcast, public broadcasters NPR and PBS, and California television station KCBS.
4 – Trump’s personal lawsuits against media organisations
While Trump settled a lawsuit with ABC’s parent company Disney, he continues to sue CBS, The Des Moines Register, Gannett, and the Pulitzer Center over coverage he deemed biased.
$1.60 – Average annual amount each American pays for public media
Donald Trump has threatened to eliminate federal funding for public broadcasting, framing the move as a cost-cutting measure.
However, public media only costs each American about $1.60 each year, representing a tremendous bargain as it gives Americans access to a wealth of local, national, and lifesaving emergency programming.
* Figures as of the date of publication, 24 April 2025. Pacific Media Watch collaborates with RSF.
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
While last week’s Morgan and YouGov polls had Labor continuing its surge, Newspoll is steady for the fourth successive week at 52–48 to Labor. A Redbridge poll of the marginal seats was again very strong for Labor, while YouGov and KJC seat polls were respectively good and bad for Labor.
A national Newspoll, conducted April 21–24 from a sample of 1,254, gave Labor a 52–48 lead, unchanged from the April 14–17 Newspoll.
Primary votes were 35% Coalition (steady), 34% Labor (steady), 11% Greens (down one), 8% One Nation (up one) and 12% for all Others (steady). The drop for the Greens and gain for One Nation mean this poll was probably better for the Coalition before rounding than the previous Newspoll.
Here is the graph of Labor’s two-party preferred vote in national polls. The fieldwork midpoint date of Newspoll was April 23, three days ahead of the next most recent poll (YouGov). Perhaps Labor has peaked too early.
Analyst Peter Brent wrote for Inside Story that he thought Anthony Albanese performed poorly in the April 22 debate with Peter Dutton. This may explain some shift to the Coalition. But with just five full days left until the May 3 election and early voting in progress, Labor remains the heavy favourite to win.
Albanese’s net approval was steady at -9, while Dutton’s net approval was down two points to -24, a new record low. Albanese led Dutton by 51–35 as better PM (52–36 previously). Here is the graph of Albanese’s net approval in Newspoll, with the plus signs marking data points and a smoothed line fitted.
In this poll, 48% thought it was time to give someone else a go (down five since February), while 39% (up five) thought the government deserved to be re-elected. Meanwhile, 62% (up seven) said the Dutton-led Coalition was not ready to govern.
Labor retains 54.5–45.5 lead in Redbridge marginal seats poll
A poll of 20 marginal seats by Redbridge and Accent Research for the News Corp tabloids was conducted April 15–22 from a sample of 1,000. It gave Labor a 54.5–45.5 lead, unchanged since the April 9–15 marginal seats poll. Primary votes were 35% Labor (steady), 34% Coalition (steady), 14% Greens (up one) and 17% for all Others (down one).
The overall 2022 vote in these 20 seats was 51–49 to Labor, so this poll implies a 3.5-point swing to Labor from the 2022 election. If applied to the national 2022 result of 52.1–47.9 to Labor, Labor would lead by about 55.5–44.5. Since the first wave of this marginal seats tracker in early February, Labor has gained 6.5 points. If this poll is accurate, Labor is likely to win a thumping majority.
Over the five waves of this marginal seats tracker, the Liberals have gone from +1 net favourable to -8, while Labor has moved from -9 to -3. Albanese has gone from -16 to -4 (up one since last week), while Dutton has gone from -11 to -20 (up two since last week).
By 22–14, voters preferred Labor’s housing policy to the Coalition’s, with 38% for neither and 12% for both the same.
YouGov and KJC seat polls
The Canberra Times had YouGov polls of ten regional seats, conducted April 17–24 from an overall sample of 3,000 (so 300 per seat). The primary votes suggest the Coalition would lose the Tasmanian seat of Braddon to Labor, and the NSW and Victorian seats of Calare and Wannon to independents, leaving them with only Dutton’s Dickson out of the ten surveyed.
Labor would be likely to hold all its regional seats, although in the NSW seat of Hunter One Nation would be their final opponent instead of the Coalition. Seat polls are unreliable.
The Poll Bludger reported Saturday that KJC Research had taken seat polls on April 24 from a sample of 600 per seat for an industry group. These polls went against the trend, with the Liberals ahead of Labor by 49–45 including undecided in the Western Australian Labor-held seat of Tangney and 46–41 in the Queensland Labor-held seat of Blair.
In the New South Wales Labor-held seat of Richmond, the Greens led Labor by 39–34. In the NSW Labor-hels seat of Hunter, Labor led the Liberals by 45–41.
Gap narrows, but Liberals still likely to win majority at Canadian election
The Canadian election is on Monday, with the large majority of polls closing at 11:30am AEST Tuesday. The CBC Poll Tracker has the centre-left governing Liberals leading the Conservatives by 42.5–38.7 in national vote share and by 189–125 in seat point estimates (172 needed for a majority). I covered Canada and other upcoming and past international elections for The Poll Bludger on Saturday.
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.
Donald Trump is committing genocide for Israel after publicly admitting to being bought and owned by the Adelsons.
All the worst shit happens right out in the open. You don’t need to come up with any elaborate conspiracy theories to see it. It’s right there, completely unhidden.
It’s not hidden, it’s just spun. Disguised by the propaganda of the mass media which frame this holocaust as a war of defence in response to a terrorist attack while constantly diverting our attention to other far less significant issues.
It says so much about the power of the imperial propaganda machine that Trump could openly admit to having been fully controlled by Adelson cash on the campaign trail, get elected, and then facilitate a blatant extermination campaign in Gaza while aggressively stomping out free speech that is critical of Israel throughout the United States — and somehow not have this be the main thing that everyone talks about all the time. It is only because our minds are being forcefully manipulated by the powerful at mass scale that this has been the case.
All the worst evils . . . Video/Audio: Caitlin Johnstone
The narrative spin is greatly aided by the fact that Trump isn’t doing much different from the previous president here. A public which has been indoctrinated from childhood into seeing everything in Democrat-vs-Republican binaries is conditioned to focus far more on the differences between the two parties than the similarities.
But you can learn a whole lot more about real power and what’s actually going on in the world by paying less attention to how US presidents differ from each other, and more attention to the ways in which they are the same.
Take note of which Trump comments provoke controversy, and which don’t. Trump said this week that he “gave” the Golan Heights to Sheldon and Miriam Adelson, his top funders, who came to the White House “almost more than anybody.” Not a peep about this brazen admission of graft pic.twitter.com/MaJLFnH7oi
The mass-scale psychological manipulation is so pervasive and ubiquitous that only a small minority are reacting to history’s first live-streamed genocide with an appropriate level of horror. If Americans could see what their government is doing in their name with fresh eyes and uncallused hearts, the nation’s capitol would be burnt to the ground within days.
But because their vision is clouded by propaganda indoctrination they can’t see it, so they overlook what’s right in front of them while awaiting a gigantic Epstein bombshell or UFO disclosure or some other Big Reveal that never comes.
Consider the possibility that the Big Reveal has already happened. That it’s been right here staring you in the face this entire time, but you haven’t noticed its significance because it has been constantly normalised for you throughout your life since you were small. That the truth behind all your most sparkly conspiracy theories could be published online tomorrow, and it still wouldn’t tell you as much about what your rulers are doing and how evil they are as what’s already happening in plain sight.
This is the dystopia we were warned about. It’s not some ominous threat looming on the horizon. It’s here. We are being psychologically manipulated at mass scale into consenting to the most nightmarish atrocities imaginable.
Children’s bodies are being shredded to bits right in front of us. And when you turn on the TV you see famous people laughing and making jokes with fake plastic grins, babbling about vapid nonsense. This is the dystopia. It isn’t on its way. It’s here.
They’re ripping kids in half right in front of us and telling us we need to be mad at Kneecap and Ms Rachel.
We don’t need a Big Reveal. If the Big Reveal happened next week, the public would be indoctrinated into overlooking and dismissing it by the imperial spin machine by the weekend. We don’t need new information, we need people to truly see the information that’s already here. To see it with eyes that are free from the cataracts of propaganda conditioning, with hearts that are free from the calluses of desensitisation.
Waking the public up is less about whistleblowers, FOIA requests and investigative journalism at this point than it is about finding creative and artistic ways to get people noticing the information that’s already public.
And the good news is that we can all help do this. We can all help our fellow members of the public to see what’s really happening with fresh eyes. Using our creativity, our humour, our insight and our compassion, we can find new ways every day to open a new pair of eyelids to the truth of our present circumstances.
Our rulers do not have creativity. They do not have humour, insight or compassion. These are not tools that they have in their toolbox, and they have no weapons to counter them.
All they have is manipulation, and manipulation only works if you don’t know it’s happening to you. Our task is to keep finding new and creative ways to help more people see and understand the ways in which they have been manipulated.
When the US Embassy knocked on my door in late 2024, I was both pleased and more than a little suspicious.
I’d worked with them before, but the organisation where I did that work, Tohatoha, had closed its doors. My new project, Dark Times Academy, was specifically an attempt to pull myself out of the grant cycle, to explore ways of funding the work of counter-disinformation education without dependence on unreliable governments and philanthropic funders more concerned with their own objectives than the work I believed then — and still believe — is crucial to the future of human freedom.
But despite my efforts to turn them away, they kept knocking, and Dark Times Academy certainly needed the money. I’m warning you all now: There is a sense in which everything I have to say about counter-disinformation comes down to conversations about how to fund the work.
DARK TIMES ACADEMY
There is nothing I would like more than to talk about literally anything other than funding this work. I don’t love money, but I do like eating, having a home, and being able to give my kids cash.
I have also repeatedly found myself in roles where other people look to me for their livelihoods; a responsibility that I carry heavily and with more than a little clumsiness and reluctance.
But if we are to talk about President Donald Trump and disinformation, we have to talk about money. As it is said, the love of money is the root of all evil. And the lack of it is the manifestation of that evil.
Trump and his attack on all of us — on truth, on peace, on human freedom and dignity — is, at its core, an attack that uses money as a weapon. It is an attack rooted in greed and in avarice.
In his world, money is power But in that greed lies his weakness. In his world, money is power. He and those who serve him and his fascist agenda cannot see beyond the world that money built. Their power comes in the form of control over that world and the people forced to live in it.
Of course, money is just paper. It is digital bits in a database sitting on a server in a data centre relying on electricity and water taken from our earth. The ephemeral nature of their money speaks volumes about their lack of strength and their vulnerability to more powerful forces.
They know this. Trump and all men like him know their weaknesses — and that’s why they use their money to gather power and control. When you have more money than you and your whānau can spend in several generations, you suddenly have a different kind of relationship to money.
It’s one where money itself — and the structures that allow money to be used for control of people and the material world — becomes your biggest vulnerability. If your power and identity are built entirely on the power of money, your commitment to preserving the power of money in the world becomes an all-consuming drive.
Capitalism rests on many “logics” — commodification, individualism, eternal growth, the alienation of labour. Marx and others have tried this ground well already.
In a sense, we are past the time when more analysis is useful to us. Rather, we have reached a point where action is becoming a practical necessity. After all, Trump isn’t going to stop with the media or with counter-disinformation organisations. He is ultimately coming for us all.
What form that action must take is a complicated matter. But, first we must think about money and about how money works, because only through lessening the power of money can we hope to lessen the power of those who wield it as their primary weapon.
Beliefs about poor people If you have been so unfortunate to be subject to engagement with anti-poverty programmes during the neoliberal era either as a client or a worker, you will know that one of the motivations used for denying direct cash aid to those in need of money is a belief on the part of government and policy experts that poor people will use their money in unwise ways, be it drugs or alcohol, or status purchases like sneakers or manicures.
But over and over again, there’s another concern raised: cash benefits will be spent on others in the community, but outside of those targeted with the cash aid.
You see this less now that ideas like a universal basic income (UBI) and direct cash transfers have taken hold of the policy and donor classes, but it is one of those rightwing concerns that turned out to be empirically accurate.
Poor people are more generous with their money and all of their other resources as well. The stereotype of the stingy Scrooge is one based on a pretty solid mountain of evidence.
The poor turn out to understand far better than the rich how to defeat the power that money gives those who hoard it — and that is community. The logic of money and capital can most effectively be defeated through the creation and strengthening of our community ties.
Donald Trump and those who follow him revel in creating a world of atomised individuals focused on themselves; the kind of world where, rather than relying on each other, people depend on the market and the dollar to meet their material needs — dollars. of course, being the source of control and power for their class.
Our ability to fund our work, feed our families, and keep a roof over our heads has not always been subject to the whims of capitalists and those with money to pay us. Around the world, the grand multicentury project known as colonialism has impoverished us all and created our dependency.
Colonial projects and ‘enclosures’ I cannot speak as a direct victim of the colonial project. Those are not my stories to tell. There are so many of you in this room who can speak to that with far more eloquence and direct experience than I. But the colonial project wasn’t only an overseas project for my ancestors.
Enclosure is one of the core colonial logics. Enclosure takes resources (land in particular) that were held in common and managed collectively using traditional customs and hands them over to private control to be used for private rather than communal benefit. This process, repeated over and over around the globe, created the world we live in today — the world built on money.
As we lose control over our access to what we need to live as the land that holds our communities together, that binds us to one another, is co-opted or stolen from us, we lose our power of self-determination. Self-governance, freedom, liberty — these are what colonisation and enclosure take from us when they steal our livelihoods.
As part of my work, I keep a close eye on the approaches to counter-disinformation that those whose relationship to power is smoother than my own take. Also, in this the year of our Lord 2025, it is mandatory to devote at least some portion of each public talk to AI.
I am also profoundly sorry to have to report that as far as I can tell, the only work on counter-disinformation still getting funding is work that claims to be able to use AI to detect and counter disinformation. It will not surprise you that I am extremely dubious about these claims.
AI has been created through what has been called “data colonialism”, in that it relies on stolen data, just as traditional forms of colonialism rely on stolen land.
Risks and dangers of AI AI itself — and I am speaking here specifically of generative AI — is being used as a tool of oppression. Other forms of AI have their own risks and dangers, but in this context, generative AI is quite simply a tool of power consolidation, of hollowing out of human skill and care, and of profanity, in the sense of being the opposite of sacred.
Words, art, conversation, companionship — these are fiercely human things. For a machine to mimic these things is to transgress against all of our communities — all the more so when the machine is being wielded by people who speak openly of genocide and white supremacy.
However, just as capitalism can be fought through community, colonialism can and has been fought through our own commitment to living our lives in freedom. It is fought by refusing their demands and denying their power, whether through the traditional tools of street protest and nonviolent resistance, or through simply walking away from the structures of violence and control that they have implemented.
In the current moment, that particularly includes the technological tools that are being used to destroy our communities and create the data being used to enact their oppression. Each of us is free to deny them access to our lives, our hopes, and dreams.
This version of colonisation has a unique weakness, in that the cyber dystopia they have created can be unplugged and turned off. And yet, we can still retain the parts of it that serve us well by building our own technological infrastructure and helping people use that instead of the kind owned and controlled by oligarchs.
By living our lives with the freedom we all possess as human beings, we can deny these systems the symbolic power they rely on to continue.
That said, this has limitations. This process of theft that underlies both traditional colonialism and contemporary data colonialism, rather than that of land or data, destroys our material base of support — ie. places to grow food, the education of our children, control over our intellectual property.
Power consolidated upwards The outcome is to create ever more dependence on systems outside of our control that serve to consolidate power upwards and create classes of disposable people through the logic of dehumanisation.
Disposable people have been a feature across many human societies. We see it in slaves, in cultures that use banishment and exile, and in places where imprisonment is used to enforce laws.
Right now we see it in the United States being directed at scale towards those from Central and Latin America and around the world. The men being sent to the El Salvadorian gulag, the toddlers sent to immigration court without a lawyer, the federal workers tossed from their jobs — these are disposable people to Trump.
The logic of colonialism relies on the process of dehumanisation; of denying the moral relevance of people’s identity and position within their communities and families. When they take a father from his family, they are dehumanising him and his family. They are denying the moral relevance of his role as a father and of his children and wife.
When they require a child to appear alone before an immigration judge, they are dehumanising her by denying her the right to be recognised as a child with moral claims on the adults around her. When they say they want to transition federal workers from unproductive government jobs to the private sector, they are denying those workers their life’s work and identity as labourers whose work supports the common good.
There was a time when I would point out that we all know where this leads, but we are there now. It has led there, although given the US incarceration rate for Black men, it isn’t unreasonable to argue that in fact for some people, the US has always been there. Fascism is not an aberration, it is a continuation. But the quickening is here. The expansion of dehumanisation and hate have escalated under Trump.
Dehumanisaton always starts with words and language. And Trump is genuinely — and terribly — gifted with language. His speeches are compelling, glittering, and persuasive to his audiences. With his words and gestures, he creates an alternate reality. When Trump says, “They’re eating the cats! They’re eating the dogs!”, he is using language to dehumanise Haitian immigrants.
An alternate reality for migrants When he calls immigrants “aliens” he is creating an alternate reality where migrants are no longer human, no longer part of our communities, but rather outside of them, not fully human.
When he tells lies and spews bullshit into our shared information system, those lies are virtually always aimed at creating a permission structure to deny some group of people their full humanity. Outrageous lie after outrageous lie told over and over again crumbles society in ways that we have seen over and over again throughout history.
In Europe, the claims that women were consorting with the devil led to the witch trials and the burning of thousands of women across central and northern Europe. In Myanmar, claims that Rohinga Muslims were commiting rape, led to mass slaughter.
Just as we fight the logics of capitalism with community and colonialism with a fierce commitment to our freedom, the power to resist dehumanisation is also ours. Through empathy and care — which is simply the material manifestation of empathy — we can defeat attempts to dehumanise.
Empathy and care are inherent to all functioning societies — and they are tools we all have available to us. By refusing to be drawn into their hateful premises, by putting morality and compassion first, we can draw attention to the ridiculousness of their ideas and help support those targeted.
Disinformation is the tool used to dehumanise. It always has been. During the COVID-19 pandemic when disinformation as a concept gained popularity over the rather older concept of propaganda, there was a real moment where there was a drive to focus on misinformation, or people who were genuinely wrong about usually public health facts. This is a way to talk about misinformation that elides the truth about it.
There is an empirical reality underlying the tsunami of COVID disinformation and it is that the information was spread intentionally by bad actors with the goal of destroying the social bonds that hold us all together. State actors, including the United States under the first Trump administration, spread lies about COVID intentionally for their own benefit and at the cost of thousands if not millions of lives.
Lies and disinformation at scale This tactic was not new then. Those seeking political power or to destroy communities for their own financial gain have always used lies and disinformation. But what is different this time, what has created unique risks, is the scale.
Networked disinformation — the power to spread bullshit and lies across the globe within seconds and within a context where traditional media and sources of both moral and factual authority have been systematically weakened over decades of neoliberal attack — has created a situation where disinformation has more power and those who wield it can do so with precision.
But just as we have the means to fight capitalism, colonialism, and dehumanisation, so too do we — you and I — have the tools to fight disinformation: truth, and accurate and timely reporting from trustworthy sources of information shared with the communities impacted in their own language and from their own people.
If words and images are the chosen tools of dehumanisation and disinformation, then we are lucky because they are fighting with swords that we forged and that we know how to wield. You, the media, are the front lines right now. Trump will take all of our money and all of our resources, but our work must continue.
Times like this call for fearlessness and courage. But more than that, they call on us to use all of the tools in our toolboxes — community, self-determination, care, and truth. Fighting disinformation isn’t something we can do in a vacuum. It isn’t something that we can depersonalise and mechanise. It requires us to work together to build a very human movement.
I can’t deny that Trump’s attacks have exhausted me and left me depressed. I’m a librarian by training. I love sharing stories with people, not telling them myself. I love building communities of learning and of sharing, not taking to the streets in protest.
More than anything else, I just want a nice cup of tea and a novel. But we are here in what I’ve seen others call “a coyote moment”. Like Wile E. Coyote, we are over the cliff with our legs spinning in the air.
We can use this time to focus on what really matters and figure out how we will keep going and keep working. We can look at the blue sky above us and revel in what beauty and joy we can.
Building community, exercising our self-determination, caring for each other, and telling the truth fearlessly and as though our very lives depend on it will leave us all the stronger and ready to fight Trump and his tidal wave of disinformation.
Mandy Henk, co-founder of Dark Times Academy, has been teaching and learning on the margins of the academy for her whole career. As an academic librarian, she has worked closely with academics, students, and university administrations for decades. She taught her own courses, led her own research work, and fought for a vision of the liberal arts that supports learning and teaching as the things that actually matter. This article was originally presented as an invited address at the annual general meeting of the Asia Pacific Media Network on 24 April 2025.
ER Report: Here is a summary of significant articles published on EveningReport.nz on April 27, 2025.
Election Diary: Albanese promises around-the-clock health line, with leaders to hold rallies Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra Prime Minister Anthony Albanese will launch another push on health on Sunday, announcing a re-elected Labor government would set up a free around-the-clock 1800MEDICARE advice line and afterhours GP telehealth service. The service would be launched from January 1 and
Election Diary: Albanese promises around-the-clock health line, with leaders to hold rallies in Victoria Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra Prime Minister Anthony Albanese will launch another push on health on Sunday, announcing a re-elected Labor government would set up a free around-the-clock 1800MEDICARE advice line and afterhours GP telehealth service. The service would be launched from January 1 and
Homage paid to Pope Francis at NZ street theatre rally for Palestine Asia Pacific Report Activists for Palestine paid homage to Pope Francis in Aotearoa New Zealand today for his humility, care for marginalised in the world, and his courageous solidarity with the besieged people of Gaza at a street theatre rally just hours before his funeral in Rome. He was remembered and thanked for his daily
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese will launch another push on health on Sunday, announcing a re-elected Labor government would set up a free around-the-clock 1800MEDICARE advice line and afterhours GP telehealth service.
The service would be launched from January 1 and cost A$204.5 million over the forward estimates.
Albanese will tell a Sydney rally that people would be able to call at any time to get advice from a nurse. If the problem couldn’t wait for their regular GP, they would be connected to a free GP telehealth consultation.
“Life isn’t 9 to 5. Neither is health care,” Albanese will say in his speech, an extract of which was released ahead of delivery.
People with a sick child late at night or an unwell elderly parent would know there was trained expert advice at the end of the phone.
“This will take pressure off people – and off public hospitals.
“And in conjunction with our plan to open 50 more Medicare Urgent Care Clinics, it will ensure that free urgent care is within a 20 minute drive away for four out of every five Australians and just a phone call away for every Australian.”
The present telehealth service is patchy depending on which part of Australia people live and doesn’t provide a weekend GP service.
With a number of Victorian seats in strong contention, Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has a rally in Melbourne on Sunday. Federal Labor’s vote in Victoria has been volatile, first collapsing under the unpopularity of the state Allan government but recently reviving.
A small group of men from a boat that arrived illegally in remote northern Australia has been apprehended by Border Force. The men were first discovered by a commercial helicopter pilot.
They had written “SOS” in the sand and put up a flag. It is not known where they came from, or their circumstances.
Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke said in a statement on Saturday, “We do not confirm , or comment on, operational matters.
“There has never been a successful people smuggling venture under our government, and that remains true.
“When someone arrives without visa they are detained and then deported.”
In 2022 the Liberals tried to exploit a boat interception on election day, by publicising it and sending text messages to voters.
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.
Activists for Palestine paid homage to Pope Francis in Aotearoa New Zealand today for his humility, care for marginalised in the world, and his courageous solidarity with the besieged people of Gaza at a street theatre rally just hours before his funeral in Rome.
He was remembered and thanked for his daily calls of concern to Gaza and his final public blessing last Sunday — the day before he died — calling for a ceasefire in Israel’s genocidal war on the Palestinian enclave.
Several speakers thanked the late Pope for his humanitarian concerns and spiritual leadership at the vigil in Auckland’s “Palestinian Corner” in Te Komititanga Square, beside the Britomart transport hub, as other rallies were held across New Zealand over the weekend.
“Last November, Pope Francis said that what is happening in Gaza was not a war. It was cruelty,” said Catholic deacon Chris Sullivan. “Because Israel is always claiming it is a war. But it isn’t a war, it’s just cruelty.”
During the last 18 months of his life, Pope Francis had a daily ritual — he called Gaza’s only Catholic church to see how people were coping with the “cruel” onslaught.
Deacon Sullivan said the people of the church in Gaza “have been attacked by Israeli rockets, Israeli shells, and Israeli snipers, and a number of people have been killed as a result of that.”
In his Easter message before dying, Pope Francis said: “I appeal to the warring parties: call a ceasefire, release the hostages and come to the aid of a starving people that aspires to a future of peace.”
‘We lost the best man’ Also speaking at today’s rally, Dr Abdallah Gouda said: “We lost the best man. He was talking about Palestine and he was working to stop this genocide.
“Pope Francis; as a Palestinian, as a Palestinian from Gaza, and as a Moslem, thank you Pope Francis. Thank you. And we will never, never forget you.
“As we will always talk about you, the man who called every night to talk to the Palestinians, and he asked, ‘what do you eat’. And he talked to leaders around the world to stop this genocide.”
Pope Francis called Gaza’s Catholic parish every night. Video: AJ+
In Rome, the coffin of Pope Francis made its way through the city from the Vatican after the funeral to reach Santa Maria Maggiore basilica for a private burial ceremony.
It arrived at the basilica after an imposing funeral ceremony at St Peter’s Square.
The Vatican said that more than 250,000 people attended the open-air service that was held under clear blue skies
Dozens of foreign dignitaries, including heads of state, were also in attendance.
Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re eulogised Pope Francis as a pontiff who knew how to communicate to the “least among us” and urged people to build bridges and not walls.
In Auckland at the “guerrilla theatre” event, several highly publicised examples of recent human rights violations and war crimes in Gaza were recreated in several skits with “actors” taking part from the crowd.
Palestinian Dr Faiez Idais role played the kidnapping of courageous Kamal Adwan Hospital medical director Dr Hussam Abu Safiya by the Israeli military last December and his detention and torture in captivity since.
Palestinian Dr Faiez Idais (hooded) during his role play for courageous Kamal Adwan Hospital medical director Dr Hussam Abu Safiya held prisoner by Israeli forces since December 2024. Image: APR
Khalil was seized by ICE agents from his university apartment without a warrant and abducted to a remote immigration prison in Louisiana but the courts have blocked his deportation in a high profile case.
He is one of at least 300 students who have been captured ICE agents for criticising Israel and its genocide.
A one-and-a-half-year-old child holds a “peace for all children” in Gaza placard at today’s rally. Image: APR
The skits included a condemnation of the US corporation Starbucks, the world’s leading coffee roaster and retailer, with mock blood being kicked over fake bodies on the plaza.
The backlash against the brand has caused heavy losses and 100 outlets in Malaysia have been forced to shut down.
Singers and musicians Hone Fowler, who was also MC, Brenda Liddiard and Mark Laurent — including their dedicated “Make Peace Today” inspired by Jesus’ “Blessed are the peacemakers” — also lifted the spirits of the crowd.
Protesters call for an end to the genocide in Palestine, both in Gaza and the West Bank. Image: APR
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese will launch another push on health on Sunday, announcing a re-elected Labor government would set up a free around-the-clock 1800MEDICARE advice line and afterhours GP telehealth service.
The service would be launched from January 1 and cost A$204.5 million over the forward estimates.
Albanese will tell a Melbourne rally that people would be able to call at any time to get advice from a nurse. If the problem couldn’t wait for their regular GP, they would be connected to a free GP telehealth consultation.
“Life isn’t 9 to 5. Neither is health care,” Albanese will say in his speech, an extract of which was released ahead of delivery.
People with a sick child late at night or an unwell elderly parent would know there was trained expert advice at the end of the phone.
“This will take pressure off people – and off public hospitals.
“And in conjunction with our plan to open 50 more Medicare Urgent Care Clinics, it will ensure that free urgent care is within a 20 minute drive away for four out of every five Australians and just a phone call away for every Australian.”
The present telehealth service is patchy depending on which part of Australia people live and doesn’t provide a weekend GP service.
With a number of Victorian seats in strong contention, Opposition Leader Peter Dutton also has a rally in Melbourne on Sunday. Federal Labor’s vote in Victoria has been volatile, first collapsing under the unpopularity of the state Allan government but recently reviving.
A small group of men from a boat that arrived illegally in remote northern Australia has been apprehended by Border Force. The men were first discovered by a commercial helicopter pilot.
They had written “SOS” in the sand and put up a flag. It is not known where they came from, or their circumstances.
Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke said in a statement on Saturday, “We do not confirm , or comment on, operational matters.
“There has never been a successful people smuggling venture under our government, and that remains true.
“When someone arrives without visa they are detained and then deported.”
In 2022 the Liberals tried to exploit a boat interception on election day, by publicising it and sending text messages to voters.
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.
ER Report: Here is a summary of significant articles published on EveningReport.nz on April 26, 2025.
80 years after Benito Mussolini’s death, what can democracies today learn from his fascist rise? Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Matthew Sharpe, Associate Professor in Philosophy, Australian Catholic University Hitler and Mussolini in Munich, Germany, June 18, 1940. Everett Collection/Shutterstock This Monday marks 80 years since Italian dictator Benito Mussolini was killed in an Italian village towards the end of the Second World War in 1945. The
Samoan nun tells of ‘like a blur’ awesome meeting with Pope Francis By Susana Suisuiki, RNZ Pacific presenter The doors of St Peter’s Basilica in the Vatican have now been closed and the coffin sealed, ahead of preparations for tonight’s funeral of Pope Francis. The Vatican says a quarter of a million people have paid respects to Pope Francis in the last three days. Sister Susana Vaifale
Israel’s endgame for tormented Gaza is political and physical erasure COMMENTARY: By Nour Odeh There was faint hope that efforts to achieve a ceasefire deal in Gaza would succeed. That hope is now all but gone, offering 2.1 million tormented and starved Palestinians dismal prospects for the days and weeks ahead. Last Saturday, the Israeli Prime Minister once again affirmed he had no intention to
Trump signs ‘deeply dangerous’ order to fast-track deep sea mining An ocean conservation non-profit has condemned the United States President’s latest executive order aimed at boosting the deep sea mining industry. President Donald Trump issued the “Unleashing America’s offshore critical minerals and resources” order on Thursday, directing the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to allow deep sea mining. The order states: “It is the
Election Diary: Dutton tops list of most distrusted, amid deepening voter cynicism about political leaders Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra In this election, voters are more distrustful than ever of politicians, and the political heroes of 2022 have fallen from grace, swept from favour by independent players. A Roy Morgan survey has found, for the first time, that Australians are
Pacific editor welcomes US court ruling in favour of Radio Free Asia By Koroi Hawkins, RNZ Pacific editor The former head of BenarNews’ Pacific bureau says a United States court ruling this week ordering the US Agency for Global Media (USAGM) to release congressionally approved funding to Radio Free Asia and its subsidiaries “makes us very happy”. However, Stefan Armbruster, who has played a key role in
This Monday marks 80 years since Italian dictator Benito Mussolini was killed in an Italian village towards the end of the Second World War in 1945. The following day, his body was publicly desecrated in Milan.
Given the scale of Adolf Hitler’s atrocities, our image of fascism today has largely been shaped by Nazism. Yet, Mussolini preceded Hitler. Il Duce, as Mussolini was known, was Hitler’s inspiration.
Today, as commentators, bloggers and scholars are debating whether the governments of US President Donald Trump, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and Russian President Vladimir Putin are “fascist”, we can learn from Il Duce’s career about how democracies fail and dictators consolidate autocratic rule.
The early years
The term “fascist” itself originated around the time of Mussolini’s founding in 1914 of the Fasci d’Azione Rivoluzionaria, a militaristic group promoting Italy’s entry into the First World War.
Mussolini had been raised in a leftist family. Before WWI, he edited and wrote for socialist newspapers. Yet, from early on, the young rebel was also attracted to radically anti-democratic thinkers like Friedrich Nietzsche, George Sorel, and Wilfred Pareto.
When WWI broke out, Mussolini broke from the socialists, who opposed Italy’s involvement in the conflict. Like Hitler, he fought in the war. Mussolini considered his front-line experience as formative for his future ideas around fascism. His war experience led him to imagine making Italy great again – an imperial power worthy of the heritage of ancient Rome.
In March 1919, Mussolini formed the Fasci Italiani di Combattimento in Milan. This group brought together a motley collection of war veterans, primarily interested in fighting the socialists and communists. They were organised in squadristi (squads), which would become known for their black shirts and violence – they forced many of their targets to drink castor oil.
The political success of Mussolini’s fascist ideals, however, was neither instant nor inevitable. In the 1919 Italian elections, Mussolini received so few votes, communists held a mock funeral march outside his house to celebrate his political death.
The rise to power and the march on Rome
Fascism became a part of national political life in 1920-21, following waves of industrial and agricultural strikes and worker occupations of land and factories.
As a result, rural and industrial elites turned to the fascist squadristi to break strikes and combat workers’ organisations. Fascist squads also overturned the results of democratic elections in Bologna and Cremona, preventing left-wing candidates from assuming office.
The following October, fascists occupied the towns of Bolzano and Trento. The liberals, socialists and Italian monarchy were indecisive in the face of these provocations, allowing Mussolini to seize the moment. Mustering the fascist squads, he ordered the famous “march on Rome” in late October 2022 to demand he be appointed prime minister.
All the evidence suggests if the government had intervened, the march on Rome would have disbanded. It was a bold piece of political theatre. Nevertheless, fearing civil war — and the communists more than the black shirts — King Victor Emmanuel III caved in without a shot being fired.
Mussolini was made leader of a new government on October 31, 1922.
The consolidation of dictatorship
Like Hitler in 1933, Mussolini’s rule started as the head of a coalition government including non-fascist parties. Yet, with the repressive powers of the state now at his disposal, Mussolini exploited the division among his rivals and gradually consolidated power.
In 1923, the communist party was targeted with mass arrests and the fascist squads were brought under official state control as a paramilitary force. Mussolini began to use state powers to surveil all non-fascist political parties.
In the 1924 general election, with fascist militia menacingly manning the polls, Il Duce won 65% of the vote.
Then, in June, socialist leader Giacomo Matteotti was kidnapped and murdered by black shirts. When investigations pointed to Mussolini’s responsibility, he at first denied any knowledge of the killing. Months later, however, Mussolini proudly admitted responsibility for the deed, celebrating the fascists’ brutality. He faced no legal or political consequences.
The last nail in the coffin of Italy’s enfeebled democracy came in late 1926. Following an assassination attempt in which Mussolini’s nose was grazed (he wore a bandage for a time afterwards), Mussolini definitively banned all political opposition.
The “lesser evil”
Following his death in April 1945, Mussolini’s dictatorship was often portrayed as “dictatorship-lite”, a “lesser evil” compared to Nazism or Stalinist Russia. This narrative, bolstered by German crimes against Italians in the last months of the war, has understandably been embraced by many Italians.
Mussolini also pursued an imperialist dream by invading Ethiopia. Defying international conventions, Il Duce’s troops used chemical weapons and summary executions to quell acts of resistance. Over 700,000 Ethiopians are estimated by scholars to have been killed by the invaders, with around 35,000 forced into internment camps.
Italian Ca-111 bombers over Ethiopia in the 1930s. Getty Images/Wikimedia Commons
Mussolini’s fascists ran over 30 concentration camps from 1926–45, almost all of them offshore. Some 50–70,000 Libyans alone died in camps set up under Italy’s brutal colonial regime from 1929–34. Many more died through executions, starvation and ethnic cleansing.
Slovenian prisoner of the Italian Rab concentration camp. Archives, Museum of Modern History, Ljubljana/Wikimedia Commons
From late 1943, Italian fascists also participated in the rounding up of over 7,000 Italian Jews to transfer to Auschwitz. Almost all of them were murdered.
Following the war, even with Il Duce dead, few perpetrators faced justice for these atrocities.
Lessons for democracies after 80 years
The infamy of the crimes associated with the word “fascism” has meant that few people today claim the label – even those attracted to the same kinds of authoritarian, ethnonationalist politics.
Mussolini, even more than Hitler, can seem a bombastic fool, with his uniform, theatrical gestures, stylised hyper-masculinity and patented steely jaw.
Yet, one of the lessons of Mussolini’s career is that such political adventurists are only as strong as the democratic opposition allows. To fail to take them seriously is to enable their success.
Mussolini pushed his luck time and again between 1920 and 1926. As the wonderful recent teleseries of his ascent, Mussolini, Figlio del Seculo shows, time and again, the opposition failed to concertedly oppose the fascists’ attacks on democratic norms and institutions. Then it was too late.
Democracies mostly fall over time, by a thousand cuts and shifts of the goalposts of what is considered “normal”. Fascism, moreover, depends in no small measure on shameless political deception, including the readiness to conceal its own most radical intentions.
Fascist “strongmen” like Mussolini accumulate power thanks to people’s inabilities to believe that the barbarisation of political life – including open violence against opponents – could happen in their societies.
And there is a final, unsettling lesson of Mussolini’s career. Il Duce was a skilled propagandist who portrayed himself as leading a popular revolt to restore respectable values. He was able to win widespread popular support, including among the elites, even as he destroyed Italian democracy.
Yet, if the monarchy, military, other political parties and the church had attempted a principled, united opposition to fascism early enough, most of Mussolini’s crimes would likely have been avoided.
Matthew Sharpe has in the past (2013-17) received funding from the ARC to study religion and politics in the contemporary world.
The doors of St Peter’s Basilica in the Vatican have now been closed and the coffin sealed, ahead of preparations for tonight’s funeral of Pope Francis.
The Vatican says a quarter of a million people have paid respects to Pope Francis in the last three days.
Sister Susana Vaifale of the Missionaries of Faith has lived in Rome for more than 10 years and worked at the Vatican’s St Peter’s parish office.
She told RNZ Pacific Waves that when she met the Pope in 2022 for an “ad limina” (obligatory visit) with the bishops from Papua New Guinea and Solomon Islands, she was lost for words.
“When I was there in front of him, it’s like a blur, I couldn’t say anything,” she said.
Sister Vaifale said although she was speechless, she thought of her community back home in Samoa.
“In my heart, I brought everyone, I mean my country, my people and myself. So, in that time . . . I was just looking at him and I said, ‘my goodness’ I’m here, I’m in front of the Pope, Francis . . . the leader of the Catholic Church.”
At Easter celebration Sister Vaifale said she was at the Easter celebration in St Peter’s Square where Pope Francis made his last public appearance.
However, the next day it was announced that Pope Francis died.
The news shattered Sister Vaifale who was on a train when she heard what had happened.
“Oh, I cried, yeah I cried . . . until now I am very emotional, very sad.”
“He passed at 7:30 . . . I am very sad but like we say in Samoa: ‘maliu se toa ae toe tula’i mai se toa’.. so, it’s all in God’s hands.”
Pope Francis with Fatima Leung Wai in Krakow, Poland in 2016. Image: Fatima Leung Wai/RNZ Pacific
Siblings pay final respects The Leung-Wai family from South Auckland are in Rome and joined the long queue to pay their final respects to Pope Francis lying in state at St Peter’s Basilica.
Fatima Leung-Wai along with her siblings Martin and Ann-Margaret are proud of their Catholic faith and are active parishioners at St Peter Chanel church in Clover Park.
The family’s Easter trip to Rome was initially for the canonisation of Blessed Carlo Acutis — a young Italian boy who died at the age of 15 from leukemia and is touted to be the first millennial saint.
Leung Wai siblings in St Peter’s Basilica were among the thousands paying their final respects to Pope Francis. Image: Leung Wai family/RNZ Pacific
Plans changed as soon as they heard the news of the Pope’s death.
Leung-Wai said it took an hour and a half for her and her siblings to see the Pope in the basilica and the crowd numbers at St Peter’s Square got bigger each day.
Despite only seeing Pope Francis’ body for a moment, Leung-Wai said she was blessed to have met him in 2016 for World Youth Day in Krakow, Poland.
She said Pope Francis was well-engaged with the youth.
“I was blessed to have lunch with him nine years ago,” Leung-Wai said.
“Meeting him at that time he was like a grandpa, he was like very open and warm and very much interested in what the young people and what we had to say.”
Leung Wai siblings with their parents, mum Lesina, and dad Aniseko. Image: Leung Wai family/RNZ Pacific
There was faint hope that efforts to achieve a ceasefire deal in Gaza would succeed. That hope is now all but gone, offering 2.1 million tormented and starved Palestinians dismal prospects for the days and weeks ahead.
Last Saturday, the Israeli Prime Minister once again affirmed he had no intention to end the war. Benjamin Netanyahu wants what he calls “absolute victory” to achieve US President Donald Trump’s so-called vision for Gaza of ethnic cleansing and annexation.
To that end, Israel is weaponising food at a scale not seen before, including immediately after the October 7 attack by Hamas. It has not allowed any wheat, medicine boxes, or other vital aid into the Gaza Strip since 2 March.
This engineered starvation has pushed experts to warn that 1.1 million Palestinians face imminent famine.
Many believe this was Israel’s “maximum pressure” plan all along: massive force, starvation, and land grabs. It’s what the Israeli Minister of Defence, Israel Katz, referred to in March when he gave Palestinians in Gaza an ultimatum — surrender or die.
A month after breaking the ceasefire, Israel has converted nearly 70 percent of the tiny territory into no-go or forced displacement zones, including all of Rafah. It has also created a new so-called security corridor, where the illegal settlement of Morag once stood.
Israel is bombing the Palestinians it is starving while actively pushing them into a tiny strip of dunes along the coast.
Israel only interested in temporary ceasefire This mentality informed the now failed ceasefire talks. Israel was only interested in a temporary ceasefire deal that would keep its troops in Gaza and see the release of half of the living Israeli captives.
In exchange, Israel reportedly offered to allow critically needed food and aid back into Gaza, which it is obliged to do as an occupying power, irrespective of a ceasefire agreement.
Israel also refused to commit to ending the war, just as it did in the Lebanon ceasefire agreement, while also demanding that Hamas disarm and agree to the exile of its prominent members from Gaza.
Disarming is a near-impossible demand in such a context, but this is not motivated by a preserved arsenal that Hamas wants to hold on to. Materially speaking, the armaments Israel wants Hamas to give up are inconsequential, except in how they relate to the group’s continued control over Gaza and its future role in Palestinian politics.
Symbolically, accepting the demand to lay down arms is a sign of surrender few Palestinians would support in a context devoid of a political horizon, or even the prospect of one.
While Israel has declared Hamas as an enemy that must be “annihilated”, the current right-wing government in Israel doesn’t want to deal with any Palestinian party or entity.
The famous “no Hamas-stan and no Fatah-stan” is not just a slogan in Israeli political thinking — it is the policy.
Golden opportunity for mass ethnic cleansing This government senses a golden opportunity for the mass ethnic cleansing of Palestinians and the annexation of Gaza and the West Bank — and it aims to seize it.
Hamas’s chief negotiator Khalil al-Hayya recently said that the movement was done with partial deals. Hamas, he said, was willing to release all Israeli captives in exchange for ending the war and Israel’s full withdrawal from Gaza, as well as the release of an agreed-on number of Palestinian prisoners.
But the truth is, Hamas is running out of options.
Netanyahu does not consider releasing the remaining Israeli captives as a central goal. Hamas has no leverage and barely any allies left standing.
Hezbollah is out of the equation, facing geographic and political isolation, demands for disarmament, and the lethal Israeli targeting of its members.
Armed Iraqi groups have signalled their willingness to hand over weapons to the government in Baghdad in order not to be in the crosshairs of Washington or Tel Aviv.
Meanwhile, the Houthis in Yemen have sustained heavy losses from hundreds of massive US airstrikes. Despite their defiant tone, they cannot change the current dynamics.
Tehran distanced from Houthis Finally, Iran is engaged in what it describes as positive dialogue with the Trump administration to avert a confrontation. To that end, Tehran has distanced itself from the Houthis and is welcoming the idea of US investment.
The so-called Arab plan for Gaza’s reconstruction also excludes any role for Hamas. While the mediators are pushing for a political formula that would not decisively erase Hamas from Palestinian politics, some Arab states would prefer such a scenario.
As these agendas and new realities play out, Gaza has been laid to waste. There is no food, no space, no hope. Only despair and growing anger.
This chapter of the genocide shows no sign of letting up, with Israel under no international pressure to cease the bombing and forced starvation of Gaza. Hamas remains defiant but has no significant leverage to wield.
In the absence of any viable Palestinian initiative that can rally international support around a different dialogue altogether about ending the war, intervention can only come from Washington, where the favoured solution is ethnic cleansing.
This is a dead-end road that pushes Palestinians into the abyss of annihilation, whether by death and starvation or political and material erasure through mass displacement.
Nour Odeh is a political analyst, public diplomacy consultant, and an award-winning journalist. She also reports for Al Jazeera. This article was first published by The New Arab and is republished under Creative Commons.
An ocean conservation non-profit has condemned the United States President’s latest executive order aimed at boosting the deep sea mining industry.
President Donald Trump issued the “Unleashing America’s offshore critical minerals and resources” order on Thursday, directing the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to allow deep sea mining.
The order states: “It is the policy of the US to advance United States leadership in seabed mineral development.”
NOAA has been directed to, within 60 days, “expedite the process for reviewing and issuing seabed mineral exploration licenses and commercial recovery permits in areas beyond national jurisdiction under the Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act.”
Ocean Conservancy said the executive order is a result of deep sea mining frontrunner, The Metals Company, requesting US approval for mining in international waters, bypassing the authority of the International Seabed Authority (ISA).
US not ISA member The ISA is the United Nations agency responsible for coming up with a set of regulations for deep sea mining across the world. The US is not a member of the ISA because it has not ratified UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
“This executive order flies in the face of NOAA’s mission,” Ocean Conservancy’s vice-president for external affairs Jeff Watters said.
“NOAA is charged with protecting, not imperiling, the ocean and its economic benefits, including fishing and tourism; and scientists agree that deep-sea mining is a deeply dangerous endeavor for our ocean and all of us who depend on it,” he said.
He said areas of the US seafloor where test mining took place more than 50 years ago still had not fully recovered.
“The harm caused by deep sea mining isn’t restricted to the ocean floor: it will impact the entire water column, top to bottom, and everyone and everything relying on it.”
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
In this election, voters are more distrustful than ever of politicians, and the political heroes of 2022 have fallen from grace, swept from favour by independent players.
A Roy Morgan survey has found, for the first time, that Australians are driven more by who they distrust than who they trust.
Opposition Leader Peter Dutton is the most distrusted figure, outranking even US President Donald Trump. He’s three times more distrusted than Prime Minister Anthony Albanese.
Nor are any federal ministers or opposition frontbenchers in the top five trusted figures.
In March 2022, before the election of May that year, federal Labor figures, then in opposition, were riding a wave. Federal Labor frontbenchers occupied the top three “net trust” spots. Now, they have dropped out entirely from the top five.
The five political leaders with the highest net trust in 2022 were, in order: Penny Wong, Albanese, Tanya Plibersek, then Western Australian Labor premier Mark McGowan, and Jacqui Lambie, an outspoken crossbench senator from Tasmania.
in 2025, all but Lambie have disappeared from the top five. (McGowan has retired from politics.)
The new list is headed by ACT independent Senator David Pocock, who has been a key figure in negotiations with the government on a number of issues. Lambie has risen to second place. She’s followed by three premiers: Queensland’s David Crisafulli (LNP), Chris Minns (Labor, NSW) and Roger Cook (Labor, WA).
Both Pocock and Lambie recorded almost no distrust.
Pocock was seen by respondents as genuine and principled, and someone who listened to constituents. He was praised for championing the vulnerable and the environment and approaching politics with humility, according to the survey.
Lambie won points for being a straight talker. One respondent described her as “crude but honest”.
The Morgan survey asks people open-ended questions: to nominate the political leaders they trust and distrust and say why.
Dutton heads the 2025 list of those with the highest net distrust scores. Clive Palmer is second and Trump next. Albanese and Energy Minister Chris Bowen follow.
The list is rounded out by Victorian Labor Premier Jacinta Allan, Greens Leader Adam Bandt, One Nation Senator Pauline Hanson, Shadow Treasurer Angus Taylor, Nationals Barnaby Joyce and Shadow Attorney-General Michaelia Cash.
In 2022 there were no Labor politicians in the most distrusted list; now there are three, two from the federal government and one premier.
In 2022 the distrust list, in order, was: Palmer, Scott Morrison, Dutton, Joyce, Hanson, Vladimir Putin, Craig Kelly, Dominic Perrottet, Taylor, Cash and Josh Frydenberg.
Condemnation of neo-Nazi disruption unites leaders on campaign truce day
Anzac Day brought a truce in campaigning, as political players prepare for a final frantic week before the poll.
But ugliness broke out at Melbourne’s Shrine of Remembrance, when a small group of neo-Nazis heckled during the Welcome to Country by Bunurong and Gunditjmara elder Uncle Mark Brown.
The Age reported that convicted neo-Nazi Jacob Hersant led the men. Hersant last year was found guilty of performing an illegal Nazi salute.
Police escorted Hersant from the service.
Later Victoria Police said a 26-year-old man had been intervidewed over offensive behaviour and police would proceed via summons.
At the service, Victorian Governor Margaret Gardner was also booed when acknowledging the traditional owners of the land.
In Perth at the dawn service, a heckler shouted obscenities during the Welcome to Country.
Albanese responded, saying: “The disruption of Anzac Day is a disgraceful act and the people responsible must face the full force of the law. This was an act of low cowardice on a day when we honour courage.”
Dutton said neo-Nazis were “a stain on our national fabric”. He said the Welcome to Country was “an important part of official ceremonies and it should be respected”.
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.
The former head of BenarNews’ Pacific bureau says a United States court ruling this week ordering the US Agency for Global Media (USAGM) to release congressionally approved funding to Radio Free Asia and its subsidiaries “makes us very happy”.
However, Stefan Armbruster, who has played a key role in expanding the news agency’s presence in the region, acknowledged, “there’s also more to do”.
On March 14, President Donald Trump signed an executive order to defund USAGM outlets Radio Free Asia and Middle East Broadcasting Networks, including placing more than 1300 Voice of America employees on leave.
“This order continues the reduction in the elements of the Federal bureaucracy that the President has determined are unnecessary,” the executive order states.
Armbruster told RNZ Pacific Waves that the ruling found the Trump administration failed to provide evidence to support their actions.
Signage for US broadcaster Voice of America in Washington, DC . . . Trump administration failed to provide evidence to support its actions. Image: RNZ Pacific
“[Judge Royce Lamberth] is basically saying that the actions of the Trump administration [are] likely to have been illegal and unconstitutional in taking away the money from these organisations,” he said.
Order to restore funding “The judgments are saying that the US administration should return funding to its overseas broadcasters, which include Voice of America [and] Radio Free Asia.”
He said that in America, they can lay people off without a loss, and they can still remain employees. But these conditions did not apply for overseas employees.
“Basically, all the overseas staff have been staff let go, except a very small number in the US who are on visas, dependent on their employment, and they have spoken out about this publicly.
“They have got 60 days to find a job, a new sponsor for them, or they could face deportation to places like China, Cambodia, and Vietnam.
“So for the former employees, at the moment, we are just waiting to see how this all plays out.”
Armbruster said there were hints that a Trump administration could take such action during the election campaign, when the Trump team had flagged issues about the media.
Speed ‘totally unexpected’ However, he added the speed at which this has happened “was totally unexpected”.
“And the judge ruled on that. He said that it is hard to fathom a more straightforward display of arbitrary, capricious action, basically, random and unexplained.
“In short, the defendants had no method or approach towards shutting down USAGM that this Court could discern.”
Armbruster said the US Congress funds the USAGM, and the agency has a responsibility to disburse that funding to Radio Free Europe, Voice of America, and Radio Free Asia.
The judge ruled that the President does not have the authority to withhold that funding, he said.
“We were funded through till September to the end of the financial year in the US.
“In terms of how quickly [the executive order] came, it was a big surprise to all of us. Not totally unexpected that this would be happening, but not this way, not this hard.”
BenarNews ‘gave a voice’ The BenarNews Pacific bureau was initially set up two-and-a-half years ago but evolved into a fully-fledged bureau only 12 months ago. It had three fulltime staff based in Australia and about 15 stringers and commentators across the region.
“We built up this fantastic network of people, and the response has been fantastic, just like Radio New Zealand [Pacific],” Armbruster said.
“We were doing a really good thing and having some really amazing stories on our pages, and big successes. It gave a voice to a whole lot of Pacific journalists and commentators to tell stories from perspectives that were not being presented in other forums.
“It is hard to say if we will come back because there has been a lot of court orders issued recently under this current US administration, and they sometimes are not complied with, or are very slowly complied with, which is why we are still in the process.”
However, Armbruster remains hopeful there will be “some interesting news” next week.
“The judgment also has a little bit of a kicker in the tail, because it is not just an order to do [restore funding].
“It is an order to turn up on the first day of each month, and to appraise the court of what action is [the USAGM] taking to disburse the funds.”
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
ER Report: Here is a summary of significant articles published on EveningReport.nz on April 25, 2025.
Labor takes large leads in YouGov and Morgan polls as surge continues 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 just eight days until the May 3 federal election, and with in-person early voting well under way, Labor has taken a seven-point lead in a national
Beating malaria: what can be done with shrinking funds and rising threats Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Taneshka Kruger, UP ISMC: Project Manager and Coordinator, University of Pretoria Healthcare in Africa faces a perfect storm: high rates of infectious diseases like malaria and HIV, a rise in non-communicable diseases, and dwindling foreign aid. In 2021, nearly half of the sub-Saharan African countries relied on
Open letter to Fijians – ‘why is our country supporting Israel’s heinous crimes in Gaza?’ Pacific Media Watch The Fijians for Palestine Solidarity Network today condemned the Fiji government’s failure to stand up for international law and justice over the Israeli war on Gaza in their weekly Black Thursday protest. “For the past 18 months, we have made repeated requests to our government to do the bare minimum and enforce
Scares and stunts in the home stretch: election special podcast Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra Michelle Grattan and Amanda Dunn discuss the fourth week of the 2025 election campaign. While the death of Pope Francis interrupted campaigning for a while, the leaders had another debate on Tuesday night and the opposition (belatedly) put out its
Grattan on Friday: Coalition’s campaign lacks good planning and enough elbow grease Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra Whatever the result on May 3, even people within the Liberals think they have run a very poor national campaign. Not just poor, but odd. Nothing makes the point more strongly than this week’s release of the opposition’s defence policy.
Inside the elaborate farewell to Pope Francis Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Carole Cusack, Professor of Religious Studies, University of Sydney ➡️ View the full interactive version of this article here. Carole Cusack 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
5 ways to tackle Australia’s backlog of asylum cases Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Daniel Ghezelbash, Professor and Director, Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law, UNSW Law & Justice, UNSW Sydney People who apply for asylum in Australia face significant delays in having their claims processed. These delays undermine the integrity of the asylum system, erode public confidence and cause significant
Preference deals can decide the outcome of a seat in an election – but not always 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 Every election cycle the media becomes infatuated, even if temporarily, with preference deals between parties. The 2025 election is no exception, with many media reports about preference
What is preferential voting and how does it work? Your guide to making your vote count Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Robert Hortle, Deputy Director, Tasmanian Policy Exchange, University of Tasmania For each Australian federal election, there are two different ways you get to vote. Whether you vote early, by post or on polling day on May 3, each eligible voter will be given two ballot papers: one
Back to the fuel guzzlers? Coalition plans to end EV tax breaks would hobble the clean transport transition Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anna Mortimore, Lecturer, Griffith Business School, Griffith University wedmoment.stock/Shutterstock If elected, the Coalition has pledged to end Labor’s substantial tax break for new zero- or low-emissions vehicles. This, combined with an earlier promise to roll back new fuel efficiency standards, would successfully slow the transition to hybrid
Many experienced tradies don’t have formal qualifications. Could fast-tracked recognition ease the housing crisis? Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Pi-Shen Seet, Professor of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, Edith Cowan University Once again, housing affordability is at the forefront of an Australian federal election. Both major parties have put housing policies at the centre of their respective campaigns. But there are still concerns too little is being done
This may be as good as it gets: NZ and Australia face a complicated puzzle when it comes to supermarket prices Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Richard Meade, Adjunct Associate Professor, Centre for Applied Energy Economics and Policy Research, Griffith University Daria Nipot/Shutterstock With ongoing cost of living pressures, the Australian and New Zealand supermarket sectors are attracting renewed political attention on both sides of the Tasman. Allegations of price gouging have become
The phrase ‘fuzzy wuzzy angels’ is far from affectionate – it reflects 500 years of racism Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Erika K. Smith, Associate Lecturer, School of Social Sciences, Western Sydney University This article contains mention of racist terms in historical context. Every Anzac Day, Australians are presented with narratives that re-inscribe particular versions of our national story. One such narrative persistently claims “fuzzy wuzzy angel” was
Why AUKUS remains the right strategy for the future defence of Australia Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jennifer Parker, Adjunct Fellow, Naval Studies at UNSW Canberra, and Expert Associate, National Security College, Australian National University Australian strategic thinking has long struggled to move beyond a narrow view of defence that focuses solely on protecting our shores. However, in today’s world, our economy could be
Election meme hits and duds – we’ve graded some of the best (and worst) of the campaign so far Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By T.J. Thomson, Senior Lecturer in Visual Communication & Digital Media, RMIT University As Australia begins voting in the federal election, we’re awash with political messages. While this of course includes the typical paid ads in newspapers and on TV (those ones with the infamously fast-paced “authorised by”
Markets are choppy. What should you do with your super if you are near retirement? Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Natalie Peng, Lecturer in Accounting, The University of Queensland Shutterstock For Australians approaching retirement, recent market volatility may feel like more than just a bump in the road. Unlike younger investors, who have time on their side, retirees don’t have the luxury of waiting out downturns. A
Provocative, progressive and fearless: why Beatrice Faust’s views still resonate in Australia Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Judith Brett, Emeritus Professor of Politics, La Trobe University Beatrice Faust is best remembered as the founder, early in 1972, of the Women’s Electoral Lobby (WEL). Women’s Liberation was already well under way. Betty Friedan had published The Feminine Mystique in 1962, arguing that many women found
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 just eight days until the May 3 federal election, and with in-person early voting well under way, Labor has taken a seven-point lead in a national YouGov poll and an 11-point lead in a Morgan poll. An exit poll of early voters is also encouraging for Labor.
A national YouGov poll, conducted April 17–22 from a sample of 1,500, gave Labor a 53.5–46.5 lead, a 0.5-point gain for Labor since the April 11–15 YouGov poll. This is Labor’s biggest lead in YouGov this term.
Primary votes were 33.5% Labor (up 0.5), 31% Coalition (down two), 14% Greens (up one), 10.5% One Nation (up 3.5), 2% Trumpet of Patriots (steady), 5% independents (down four) and 4% others (up one). In this poll, the Coalition has lost votes on its right to One Nation.
However, recent polls that use respondent preferences suggest the gap in the Coalition’s favour between respondent and 2022 preference flows has dropped to nearly zero. This means YouGov’s current preference assumptions may be too pro-Coalition. The Poll Bludger expects another YouGov MRP poll this weekend.
While the gap between Morgan and YouGov’s headline voting intentions is two points, Morgan is using respondent preferences for all their polls, while YouGov uses respondent preferences from its last MRP poll. By 2022 election flows, the gap is only 0.5 points.
Here is the poll graph of Labor’s two-party vote in national polls. If YouGov and Morgan are right, Labor is likely headed for a landslide re-election. The only recent poll that has had the Coalition in a decent position was the April 14–16 Freshwater poll.
Both the YouGov and Morgan polls were taken after candidate nominations were declared on April 11. Both are now using seat-specific candidate lists in their polls. Support for independents fell as many seats don’t have viable independent candidates.
Anthony Albanese’s net approval in YouGov slid one point to -7, with 49% dissatisfied and 42% satisfied. Peter Dutton’s net approval slumped eight points to a record low in this poll of -18. Albanese led Dutton as better PM by 50–35 (48–38 previously).
Labor takes double-digit lead in Morgan poll
A national Morgan poll, conducted April 14–20 from a sample of 1,605, gave Labor a 55.5–44.5 lead by headline respondent preferences, a one-point gain for Labor since the April 7–13 Morgan poll.
Primary votes were 34.5% Labor (up 2.5), 34% Coalition (up 0.5), 14.5% Greens (steady), 6% One Nation (steady), 0.5% Trumpet of Patriots (down 0.5), 7.5% independents (down 2.5) and 3% others (steady). By 2022 election flows, Labor led by 55.5–44.5, a one-point gain for Labor.
By 48–34, voters thought Australia was headed in the wrong direction (48.5–34.5 previously). Morgan’s consumer confidence index increased 1.3 points to 85.5.
Exit polls of early voting in 19 seats encouraging for Labor
The News Corp tabloids on Thursday released results of exit polls of pre-poll voters from the first two days of in-person early voting (Tuesday and Wednesday). A total of 4,000 voters were surveyed across 19 seats (just over 200 per seat). The swings in these polls were compared against all votes in these seats in 2022, not just the early votes.
In Australia, Labor does better on election day booths than in pre-poll voting booths. ABC election analyst Antony Green said Labor’s two-party vote was 2.8 points higher at election day booths compared with pre-poll votes in 2022.
I also believe relatively few young people will vote very early based on US experience, so the demographic mix of these early votes will skew older and less Greens-friendly than the final early vote.
Comparing these very early exit polls with the final vote from pre-poll centres in 2022, The Poll Bludger had Labor gaining primary vote swings in all seats that are likely to be Labor vs Coalition contests, while the Coalition was down except in Victoria. The Greens also dropped, but not in the Brisbane Greens-held seats.
If these very early pre-poll votes skew older than the final pre-poll votes and these exit polls are representative of people who have already voted, the Coalition is in big trouble.
Newspoll aggregate data from late March to mid-April
The Australian on Tuesday released aggregate data for the four Newspolls conducted during the election campaign. These polls were conducted from late March to mid-April from an overall sample of 5,033.
The Poll Bludger said Labor led by 52–48 in New South Wales, a two-point gain for Labor since the January to March Newspoll aggregate. Labor led by 53–47 in Victoria, a two-point gain for Labor. The Coalition led by 54–46 in Queensland, a three-point gain for Labor. Labor led by an unchanged 54–46 in Western Australia. Labor led by 55–45 in South Australia, a five-point gain for Labor.
The Poll Bludger’s poll data has Labor leading with the university-educated by 55–45, a three-point gain for Labor. Among those with a TAFE/technical education, there was a 50–50 tie, a two-point gain for Labor. Among those without tertiary education, there was a 50–50 tie, a two-point gain for Labor.
The Poll Bludger’s BludgerTrack now gives Labor a national 53.0–47.0 lead, a 0.9% swing to Labor since the 2022 election. In NSW, Labor leads by 53.4–46.6, a 2.0% swing to Labor. In Victoria, Labor leads by 52.8–47.2, a 2.0% swing to the Coalition. In Queensland, the Coalition leads by 52.5–47.5, a 1.5% swing to Labor. In WA, Labor leads by 57.6–42.4, a 2.6% swing to Labor. In SA, Labor leads by 56.8–43.2, a 2.8% swing to Labor.
DemosAU poll of Greens-held Brisbane seats
The Poll Bludger reported Tuesday that DemosAU collectively polled the three Greens-held Brisbane seats (Brisbane, Ryan and Griffith) in mid-April from a sample of 1,087. Labor led the Liberal National Party by 56–44 while the Greens led by 55–45. The LNP had 36% of the primary vote across these three seats, with the Greens and Labor tied at 29%.
In 2022, primary votes across these seats were 35.7% LNP, 30.7% Greens and 26.2% Labor. The small swing to Labor and against the Greens implies Labor would gain Brisbane from the Greens, with the Greens retaining Ryan and Griffith.
A New South Wales state Resolve poll for The Sydney Morning Herald, conducted with the late March and mid-April federal Resolve polls from a sample of 1,123, gave the Coalition 36% of the primary vote (down two since February), Labor 33% (up four), the Greens 11% (down three), independents 14% (up three) and others 6% (down two).
No two-party estimate was provided, but The Poll Bludger said Labor had about a 52–48 lead. Labor incumbent Chris Minns led the Liberals’ Mark Speakman as preferred premier by 40–15 (35–14 previously).
Asked about NSW government services, by 42–27 voters thought public schools good, by 43–32 they thought public transport good and by 37–36 they thought road infrastructure good. But public hospitals were thought poor by 42–38.
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.
Healthcare in Africa faces a perfect storm: high rates of infectious diseases like malaria and HIV, a rise in non-communicable diseases, and dwindling foreign aid.
In 2021, nearly half of the sub-Saharan African countries relied on external financing for more than a third of their health expenditure. But donor fatigue and competing global priorities, such as climate change and geopolitical instability, have placed malaria control programmes under immense pressure. These funding gaps now threaten hard-won progress and ultimately malaria eradication.
The continent’s healthcare funding crisis isn’t new. But its consequences are becoming more severe. As financial contributions shrink, Africa’s ability to respond to deadly diseases like malaria is being tested like never before.
Malaria remains one of the world’s most pressing public health threats. According to the World Health Organization there were an estimated 263 million malaria cases and 597,000 deaths globally in 2023 – an increase of 11 million cases from the previous year.
The WHO African region bore the brunt, with 94% of cases and 95% of deaths. It is now estimated that a child under the age of five dies roughly every 90 seconds due to malaria.
Yet, malaria control efforts since 2000 have averted over 2 billion cases and saved nearly 13 million lives globally. Breakthroughs in diagnostics, treatment and prevention have been critical to this progress. They include insecticide-treated nets, rapid diagnostic tests, artemisinin-based combination therapies (drug combinations to prevent resistance) and malaria vaccines.
Since 2017, the progress has been flat. If the funding gap widens, the risk is not just stagnation; it’s backsliding. Several emerging threats such as climate change and funding shortfalls could undo the gains of the early 2000s to mid-2010s.
New challenges
Resistance to drugs and insecticides, and strains of the malaria parasite Plasmodium falciparum that standard
diagnostics can’t detect, have emerged as challenges. There have also been changes in mosquito behaviour, with vectors increasingly biting outdoors, making bed nets less effective.
Climate change is shifting malaria transmission patterns. And the invasive Asian mosquito species Anopheles stephensi is spreading across Africa, particularly in urban areas.
As the world observes World Malaria Day 2025 under the theme “Malaria ends with us: reinvest, reimagine, reignite”, the call to action is urgent. Africa must lead the charge against malaria through renewed investment, bold innovation, and revitalised political will.
Reinvest: Prevention is the most cost-effective intervention
We – researchers, policymakers, health workers and communities – need to think smarter about funding. The economic logic of prevention is simple. It’s far cheaper to prevent malaria than to treat it. The total cost of procuring and delivering long-lasting insecticidal nets typically ranges between US$4 and US$7 each and the nets protect families for years. In contrast, treating a single case of severe malaria may cost hundreds of dollars and involve hospitalisation.
In Tanzania, for instance, malaria contributes to 30% of the country’s total disease burden. The broader economic toll – lost productivity, work and school absenteeism, and healthcare costs – is staggering. Prevention through long-lasting insecticidal nets, chemoprevention and health education isn’t only humane; it’s fiscally responsible.
Reimagine: New tools, local solutions
We cannot fight tomorrow’s malaria with yesterday’s tools. Resistance, climate-driven shifts in transmission, and urbanisation are changing malaria’s patterns.
This is why re-imagining our approach is urgent.
African countries must scale up innovations like the RTS,S/AS01 vaccine and next-generation mosquito nets. But more importantly, they must build their own capacity to develop, test and produce these tools.
This requires investing in research and development, regional regulatory harmonisation, and local manufacturing.
There is also a need to build leadership capacity within malaria control programmes to manage this adaptive disease with agility and evidence-based decision-making.
Reignite: Community and collaboration matters
Reigniting the malaria fight means shifting power to those on the frontlines. Community health workers remain one of Africa’s greatest untapped resources. Already delivering malaria testing, treatment and health education in remote areas, they can also be trained to manage other health challenges.
Integrating malaria prevention into broader community health services makes sense. It builds resilience, reduces duplication, and ensures continuity even when external funding fluctuates.
Every malaria intervention delivered by a trusted, local health worker is a step towards community ownership of health.
Strengthened collaboration between partners, governments, cross-border nations, and local communities is also needed.
The cost of inaction is unaffordable
Africa’s malaria challenge is part of a deeper health systems crisis. By 2030, the continent will require an additional US$371 billion annually to deliver basic primary healthcare – about US$58 per person.
For malaria in 2023 alone, US$8.3 billion was required to meet global control and elimination targets, yet only US$4 billion was mobilised. This gap has grown consistently, increasing from US$2.6 billion in 2019 to US$4.3 billion in 2023.
The shortfall has led to major gaps in the coverage of essential malaria interventions.
The solution does not lie in simply spending more, but in spending smarter by focusing on prevention, building local innovation, and strengthening primary healthcare systems.
The responsibility is collective. African governments must invest boldly and reform policies to prioritise prevention.
Global partners must support without dominating. And communities must be empowered to take ownership of their health.
The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
The Fijians for Palestine Solidarity Network today condemned the Fiji government’s failure to stand up for international law and justice over the Israeli war on Gaza in their weekly Black Thursday protest.
“For the past 18 months, we have made repeated requests to our government to do the bare minimum and enforce the basic tenets of international law on Israel,” said the protest group in an open letter.
“We have been calling upon the Fiji government to uphold the principles of peace, justice, and human rights that our nation cherishes.
“We campaigned, we lobbied, we engaged, and we explained.
“We showed the evidence, pointed to the law, and asked our leaders to do the right thing. Our pleas fell on deaf ears. We’ve been met with nothing but indifference.”
The open letter said:
“Dear fellow Fijians,
“As we gathered tonight in Suva at the Fiji Women’s Crisis Centre compound, Israel has maintained an eight-week blockade on food, medicine and aid entering Gaza, while continuing to bomb homes and tent shelters.
“At least 52,000 people in Gaza have been killed since October 2023, which includes more than 18,000 children. The death toll means that one out of every 50 people has been killed in Gaza. We all know that the real number of those killed is far higher.
“Today, at least 13 people were killed in Israeli attacks. Among the dead were three children in a tent near Nuseirat in central Gaza, and a woman and four children in a home in Gaza City.
“Also reportedly killed in a recent attack was local journalist Saeed Abu Hassanein, whose death adds to at least 232 reporters killed by Israel in Gaza in this genocide.
“For the past 18 months, we have made repeated requests to our government to do the bare minimum and enforce the basic tenets of international law on Israel. We have been calling upon the Fiji Government to uphold the principles of peace, justice, and human rights that our nation cherishes.
“We campaigned, we lobbied, we engaged, and we explained. We showed the evidence, pointed to the law, and asked our leaders to do the right thing. Our pleas fell on deaf ears. We’ve been met with nothing but indifference.
“Instead our leaders met with Israeli Government representatives and declared support for a country accused of the most heinous crimes recognised in international law.
“Fijian leaders and the Fiji Government must not be supporting Israel or planning to set up an Embassy in Israel while Israel continues to bomb refugee tents, kill journalists and medics, and block the delivery of aid to a population under relentless siege.
“No politician in Fiji can claim ignorance of what is happening.
“Tens of thousands of Palestinians have been killed.
“Many more have been maimed, traumatised and displaced. Hospitals, clinics, refugee camps, schools, universities, residential neighbourhoods, water and food facilities have been destroyed.
“We must loudly name what’s happening in Gaza – a GENOCIDE.
“We should name the crime, underline our government’s complicity in it, and focus our efforts on elevating the voices of Palestinians.
“We know that our actions cannot magically put an end to the GENOCIDE in occupied Palestine, but they can still make a difference. We can add to the global pressure on those who have the power to stop the genocide, which is so needed.
“The way our government is responding to the genocide in Gaza will set a precedent for how they will deal with crises and emergencies in the future — at home and abroad.
“It will determine whether our country will be a force that works to uphold human rights and international law, or one that tramples on them whenever convenient.
“There are already ongoing restrictions against protests in solidarity with Palestine including arbitrary restrictions on marches and the use of Palestine flags.
“We have had to hold gatherings in the premises of the FWCC office as the police have restricted solidarity marches for Palestine since November 2023, under the Public Order (Amendment) Act 2014.
“Today, we must all fight for what is right, and show our government that indifference is not acceptable in the face of genocide, lest we ourselves become complicit.
“History will judge how we respond as Fijians to this moment.
“Our rich cultural heritage and shared values teach us the importance of always standing up for what is right, even when it is not popular or convenient.
“We stand in solidarity with the Palestinian people out of a shared belief in humanity, justice, and the inalienable human rights of every individual.”
In Solidarity Fijians for Palestine Solidarity Network
Michelle Grattan and Amanda Dunn discuss the fourth week of the 2025 election campaign. While the death of Pope Francis interrupted campaigning for a while, the leaders had another debate on Tuesday night and the opposition (belatedly) put out its defence policy.
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.
Whatever the result on May 3, even people within the Liberals think they have run a very poor national campaign. Not just poor, but odd.
Nothing makes the point more strongly than this week’s release of the opposition’s defence policy.
As events played out, its Wednesday launch in Perth was overshadowed by the death of Pope Francis on Monday. But regardless of that unforeseeable event, the timing was extraordinarily late. Early birds had started voting at pre-poll places on Tuesday. The popularity of pre-polling means that, for many voters, the tail end of the formal campaign is irrelevant.
The Coalition regards defence and national security as its natural territory. It is pledging to boost defence spending to 2.5% of GDP within five years – $21 billion extra – and to 3% within a decade. The policy set up a contrast with Labor.
So why leave its release until the campaign’s penultimate week? The opposition’s line is that it wanted to see what money was available. Dutton said, “It would have been imprudent for us to announce early on, without knowing the bottom line”. The explanation doesn’t wash. If defence is such a priority, it should have been towards the front of the queue for funds.
That wasn’t the whole of the problem. The announcement consisted literally of only these two figures, wrapped in rhetoric. It didn’t come with any meat, any policy document setting out how a Coalition government would rethink or redo defence.
Shadow minister Andrew Hastie was at the launch, but he has been hardly seen nationally in recent months. He says he’s been working behind the scenes, and also he has a highly marginal Western Australian seat (Canning) to defend.
But Hastie, 42, has been underused. From the party’s conservative wing, he is regarded as one of the (few) bright young things in the Liberal parliamentary party. He has been touted as a possible future leader. Given the general weakness of the Coalition frontbench, wasting Hastie has been strange.
A captain in the Special Air Service Regiment who served in Afghanistan, Hastie has seen his share of combat. In 2018, he expressed the view that women shouldn’t serve in combat roles, saying “my personal view is the fighting DNA of close combat units is best preserved when it’s exclusively male”.
This week he was peppered with questions about his opinion (questioning triggered by a similar view being expressed by a disqualified Liberal candidate). But the issue is a red herring.
Hastie, a former assistant minister for defence, says he accepts the Coalition’s position that all defence roles are and should be open to qualified women. In the Westminster system, the obligation is for ministers to adhere to the agreed policy – that doesn’t mean someone might not have a different personal view.
Putting together an election campaign requires judgements at many levels, ranging from how big or small a target to be, and the balance between negative and positive campaigning, to candidate selection and which seats the leader visits.
The length of the formal campaign is in the prime minister’s hands. Anthony Albanese has sensibly kept this one to the typical five weeks, but a couple of past PMs made bad decisions, by running very long campaigns: Bob Hawke in 1984 and Malcolm Turnbull in 2016. Both lost seats, while retaining power.
While keeping the formal campaign short, Albanese was canny in hitting the road as the year started with a series of announcements. That gave him
momentum and some clear air. This also became more important when Easter and the Anzac holiday weekend intruded on the formal campaign. The Coalition looked dozy in January.
In the event of a Coalition loss, the nuclear policy will be seen as a drag. In campaigning terms, it has been a bold throw of the dice, although admittedly not nearly as bold as the Coalition’s sweeping Fightback blueprint for economic reform in the early 1990s. That looked for a while as if it might fly, but was eventually demolished by Labor Prime Minister Paul Keating.
Elections are not conducted in vacuums. Context can be important, and it has been particularly so in this campaign.
As has repeatedly been said, Donald Trump hovers over these weeks, and it’s the Coalition that is disadvantaged. This is not just because Dutton struggles to deal with the government’s barbs that he is Trump-like – more generally, some voters who might have been willing to change their vote appear to be thinking now is not the time.
If the Coalition defies the current apparent trend to Labor and scores a win in minority government, critics of its campaign will be eating humble pie. Seasoned election watchers remember the salutary lessons of 1993 and 2019, when the polls were wrong. In those elections, the government was returned.
Dutton and Nationals leader David Littleproud have both suggested the Coalition’s internal polling, which concentrates on marginal seats, is better for it than the media’s national polls.
If Labor loses this election, it will be left wondering how an apparently textbook campaign failed to nail the votes.
If the Liberals lose, their post-mortem reviewers will home in on various faults. One will be the policy lateness (not just the defence policy), meaning voters didn’t have time to absorb the offerings. Another will be the fact some policies were not fully thought through, or road tested. The consequences of the foray on working-from-home should have been anticipated. “Shadows” have often put policy preparedness behind going for a political hit on the day.
Even now, the opposition is struggling when quizzed about its plan to cut 41,000 from the public service. Dutton says the numbers will only go (by attrition or voluntary redundancy) from those working in Canberra. The Coalition also says frontline services and national security areas will be protected.
A source familiar with the public service points out, “If you sacked 41,000 in Canberra, you would decimate the national security bureaucracy and if you exempted national security you would barely have 41,000 public servants to sack”.
If the Coalition has a disastrous loss, with few or no net gains, the criticism of its campaign will be scarifying. If it loses by only a little, the critics will say that a better planned and organised campaign, preceded by a lot more policy work, might have pushed it across the line.
To be successful, an opposition needs a great deal of elbow grease, and so far the Coalition doesn’t look as though it has used enough of that.
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.
Carole Cusack 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.
For each Australian federal election, there are two different ways you get to vote.
Whether you vote early, by post or on polling day on May 3, each eligible voter will be given two ballot papers: one for the House of Representatives (the “lower house”) and one for the Senate (the “upper house”). Each of these two ballots uses a slightly different system, so it’s worth understanding how your numbered boxes translate into real results.
Knowing how preferences work is key to making your vote count, before you get to enjoy your hard-earned democracy sausage.
The House of Representatives (lower house)
Australia is divided into 150 electorates, each of which is represented by one member in the House of Representatives. To elect them, we use a system called full preferential voting.
On your green lower house ballot paper, all the candidates will be listed in a random order. You write a “1” in the box beside the candidate who is your first choice. This is called your first preference. You then write a “2” beside your second-choice candidate (your “second preference”), and so on until every candidate has a number.
To make sure your vote counts, you need to number every box. If you skip a number, use the same number twice, or leave a box blank, your vote becomes informal and won’t count. So, it’s important to double-check. If you do make a mistake, don’t worry – you can just ask for a new ballot paper from a polling official.
Once voting closes, the counting part is where things get interesting.
First, officials from the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) – an independent and impartial body – sort the ballot papers into piles according to each ballot paper’s first preference, then count them. If any candidate receives more than 50% of the votes, they win and are declared elected.
If no one gets over 50%, the candidate with the lowest number of first preferences is knocked out (the technical term is “excluded”). Their ballot papers are then “redistributed” to the second preference candidate marked. This continues – eliminating the lowest-polling candidates and redistributing their preferences – until someone crosses the 50% threshold. This preference distribution process helps ensure the winner has majority support.
But what does this look like? You can find out by numbering your preferences in the great farm animal election.
As you’ll see, your first pick may be knocked out during vote counting, but maybe your second or third preference will get across the line.
The Senate (Upper House)
There are 76 members of the Senate: 12 from each state and two from each territory. Voting for senators is a bit different from the lower house in that it is partial preferential, and you can vote either “above the line” or “below the line”.
Your white senate ballot paper will have several columns listing parties and groups. Party names appear above the thick black line, and individual candidates appear below it.
If you vote above the line, you must number at least six boxes. When it comes to counting the votes, your preferences will then be distributed to candidates in the party in the order that their party has listed them. Parties decide this order beforehand.
So, say you put a 1 next to the Liberal Party, which has three candidates, a 2 next to Labor, which also has three candidates, then number four more boxes. Your first three preferences would be for the three Liberal candidates, then your fourth to sixth preferences would be for the Labor candidates because you put them second. This then continues for each of the six boxes you numbered.
You can try voting above or below the line with this sample senate ballot. It will tell you to keep numbering boxes to ensure your vote is valid.
If you vote below the line, for individual candidates, you must number at least 12 boxes. But you can number all of them if you want – it can be satisfying to put someone last!
Just like in the House of Representatives, you put 1 beside your first choice, 2 beside your second, and so on. You don’t have to stay within the same column – you could have a Greens candidate as your first choice, a Liberal as your second, then another Greens candidate as your third, for example.
Because the upper house elects multiple candidates per state, using a combination of voting methods and a quota system, the Senate count is more complex.
One thing to be mindful of is the “exhausted” vote. If you only number the minimum (six above the line or 12 below) and all your preferred candidates are excluded, your vote can no longer be redistributed. But any of your preferences used to elect a candidate before that point still count.
Make your vote count
Australia’s voting system is designed to make sure your vote has an impact, even if your first-choice candidate doesn’t win. That’s why understanding how preferences flow is so important.
For those of us who have grown up here, it’s easy to think of voting as a chore rather than a privilege. But we’re so lucky to be able to go to a polling place without fearing violence or intimidation.
To be able to cast a vote in a system that – despite some flaws – is free and fair is a global rarity. So make sure you double-check your numbers, and think carefully about where your preferences are going – then enjoy that democracy sausage knowing you’ve made your vote count.
The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
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
Every election cycle the media becomes infatuated, even if temporarily, with preference deals between parties. The 2025 election is no exception, with many media reports about preference “deals” being made.
However, it is important to remember that voters are not required to follow the how to vote cards of the parties they vote for, and only major party voters have a significant percentage who follow the cards.
Other than the Greens and One Nation, minor parties lack resources to put people at every polling place who will give voters how to vote cards. As a result, how to vote follow rates for most minor parties are low.
At the 2022 Victorian state election, for example, seven seats had preferences for all voters data entered into a computer system. The Poll Bludger said Sunday that in these seven seats, about 30% of Labor voters exactly followed their party’s how to vote card.
In seats where the Liberals were making an effort by staffing polling places, over 50% of their voters followed the card. But in Preston, a Labor vs Greens contest, only 29% of Liberals followed the card.
The major parties will usually be the final two candidates in a seat, so their preferences are not distributed.
Despite all this, there may be political consequences of preference recommendations.
At this election, Labor is recommending preferences to the Greens ahead of the Coalition in all seats except in the Victorian Labor-held seat of Macnamara (an “open” ticket without a recommendation between the Greens and Liberals owing to concerns about the Jewish vote in that seat).
The Coalition is recommending preferences to One Nation ahead of anyone else in 139 of the 147 seats One Nation is contesting.
Recommending preferences to the Greens may make Labor seem too left-wing to some voters, and recommending preferences to One Nation may make the Coalition seem too right-wing and pro-Trump. One Nation will recommend preferences to the Coalition ahead of Labor in all seats it contests, the same recommendation they used in 2022.
The Poll Bludger said the Greens will be recommending preferences to Labor in all seats at this election. Occasionally, the Greens issue open tickets. The difference is worth about 5% of the Greens vote, so if the Greens had 10% in a seat, Labor’s two-party vote would be 0.5 points higher with a Greens recommendation to preference Labor than otherwise.
Trumpet of Patriots will put the incumbent party last in seats they contest. The Poll Bludger said Clive Palmer’s previous United Australia Party did this in 2022. But in 2022, Labor had a higher share of UAP preferences in seats it held than in Coalition-held seats, the opposite of what would be expected if these recommendations had made a difference.
Trumpet of Patriots is only getting 1% or 2% in current national polls, so their how to vote preference recommendations are not worth worrying about.
In 2022, Greens preferences (that is, voters who put the Greens as 1 on their House of Representatives ballot) went to Labor over the Coalition by 86–14. One Nation preferences went to the Coalition over Labor by 64–36. These figures are national, and use the Labor vs Coalition two-party count in seats where one major party missed the final two.
Both the Greens and One Nation are using the same preference recommendations between Labor and the Coalition as in 2022, so their voters’ preferences won’t change because of recommendations.
Seat-specific recommendations
The Liberals are recommending preferences to teal independent Kate Hullett in the Western Australian Labor-held seat of Fremantle, after they put her behind Labor in the WA state seat of Fremantle at the March 8 state election. This will increase Hullett’s chance of defeating Labor.
If the final two in Macnamara are the Greens and the Liberals, The Poll Bludger said Labor’s decision to issue an open ticket will give the Liberals about 2% of the 10% swing they would need to gain Macnamara.
The Liberals will recommend preferences to Labor in the Tasmanian Labor-held seat of Franklin ahead of an anti-salmon farming independent. They will also recommend preferences to Labor ahead of Muslim Vote-backed independents in the NSW Labor-held seats of Watson and Blaxland. These recommendations will make it difficult for any of these three independents.
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.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Daniel Ghezelbash, Professor and Director, Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law, UNSW Law & Justice, UNSW Sydney
People who apply for asylum in Australia face significant delays in having their claims processed. These delays undermine the integrity of the asylum system, erode public confidence and cause significant distress to people seeking asylum.
There are, at the time of writing, 28,691 applications for a protection visa awaiting a decision at the Department of Home Affairs. At least 43,308 applications await review at the Administrative Review Tribunal.
For people seeking asylum who have their initial applications refused and seek review in the Administrative Review Tribunal and in the Federal Circuit and Family Court, the process can often take more than ten years.
Whoever wins the upcoming election inherits the daunting task of addressing this issue.
Our research evaluated data on Australia’s previous attempts to increase efficiency of asylum processing. We also examined international best practice for designing fair and fast procedures, including lessons from recent successful asylum reforms in Switzerland.
Here are five ways to make Australia’s asylum process more efficient.
the opportunity to respond to information that undermines their claim for asylum.
But these efforts don’t just undermine fairness. They also contribute to slower processing.
Such measures tend to lead to more appeals, and more cases being overturned by courts and tribunals. This contributes to longer delays.
Our research into Australia’s now-abolished fast-track procedures demonstrates this. This policy was introduced by the Coalition government in 2014, with the aim of speeding up processing and reducing the backlog of asylum applications.
It included the creation of a new streamlined review process before the Immigration Assessment Authority. Applicants were generally not interviewed or allowed to put forward new information.
The resulting system was not only unfair; it was also excruciatingly slow.
Four in five cases were appealed to the court. About 37% of these were overturned. The delays created by increased litigation clearly counteracted any time saved.
One of the best ways to improve the efficiency of asylum processing is to ensure applicants can present their cases effectively from the outset.
2. Fund legal representation for those who can’t afford a lawyer
Lawyers can help assist people to prepare and present their case properly, and ensure that they get a fair hearing (reducing the chance of a lengthy appeal).
Promisingly, in 2023 the federal government announced A$48 million in funding for legal services for people seeking asylum.
It’s crucial this funding is maintained, and is sufficient to meet demand.
3. Invest in decision-makers
Once a person lodges their claim for asylum, it’s first assessed by the Department of Home Affairs. If the application is denied, the applicant can seek review at the Administrative Review Tribunal, which reassesses the merits of the application.
If the tribunal rejects the claim, the court can conduct a limited review focusing only on whether the decision was lawfully made.
A fast process is only possible if we have enough of all these decision-makers across the system.
This requires investment in training and hiring suitably qualified decision-makers who are equipped to handle the volume and complexity of asylum claims.
This is underway. The federal government has invested $58 million in October 2023 towards hiring additional Administrative Review Tribunal members and Federal Circuit and Family Court judges for asylum cases. It’s also hiring more staff at the Department of Home Affairs.
Australia’s next government should consider taking a data-driven approach to calculate the decision-making capacity required for existing and future caseload.
4. Prioritise simple cases for faster processing
Not all asylum cases are equally complex; some can be resolved relatively quickly.
Australia needs a robust and transparent triaging system to identify and prioritise simpler cases for faster processing.
This would significantly improve overall efficiency and allow decision-makers to focus on more complex cases.
The Department of Home Affairs’ current approach to triaging is a “last in, first out” system that prioritises new asylum applications for rapid processing.
However, this leads to substantial unfairness for applicants who lodged their claims earlier, who may face long processing delays.
The department needs an approach to streaming based on case complexity, to ensure all cases are finalised as quickly as possible.
5. Better coordination across decision-making bodies
The various bodies involved in asylum processing – including the Administrative Review Tribunal, the Federal Circuit and Family Court and the Department of Home Affairs – need to coordinate to improve efficiency and cut delays.
Any government reforms aimed at increasing the efficiency of asylum procedures must be system-wide.
By taking a holistic view, we can ensure that increased efficiency at one stage does not inadvertently create bottlenecks or inefficiencies in another.
A fundamental shift
Overall, Australia needs a fundamental shift that recognises fairness contributes to, rather than detracts from efficiency.
That shift is essential for developing a fair and fast asylum process that will serve the best interests of applicants, the government and the Australian public.
Daniel Ghezelbash receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Robert Bosch Foundation. He is a board member of Refugee Advice and Casework Services, Wallumatta Legal, and the Access to Justice and Technology Network. He is also a Special Counsel at the National Justice Project.
Keyvan Dorostkar receives an Australian government Research Training Program (RTP) Scholarship.
Mia Bridle receives an Australian government Research Training Program (RTP) Scholarship.
Once again, housing affordability is at the forefront of an Australian federal election.
Both major parties have put housing policies at the centre of their respective campaigns. But there are still concerns too little is being done to address supply.
One of the biggest hurdles is an ongoing shortage of skilled tradespeople, and difficulties attracting new workers. The construction industry accounts for 9% of Australia’s workforce. Yet an estimated 35% of workers lack formal qualifications.
On Wednesday, Labor announced an election promise to fast-track formal trade qualifications for about 6,000 experienced but unqualified tradies.
The Advanced Entry Trades Training program would start in 2026 and cost A$78 million.
This program should help address some of the skills shortages in the sector. But it will be a long time before these benefits begin flowing through the system. And Australia is still likely to fall short of the government’s ambitious new home targets.
Recognising skills we already have
The Advanced Entry Trades Training program is intended to partly bridge the gap in construction skills shortages through a process called “recognition of prior learning” – and by offering free training to fill any skill gaps.
In principle, recognition of prior learning allows individuals with substantial and relevant industry experience to attain formal qualifications without lengthy training programs.
A similar approach was adopted in the healthcare sector as an emergency response to the pandemic, to boost the number of qualified workers.
For the construction industry, it will encompass workers currently in the industry who have not completed an apprenticeship, as well as skilled migrants in Australia whose abilities remain unverified.
This process can improve pay and conditions for participants. But it can also potentially fast-track their entry into the qualified workforce, addressing immediate skills shortages.
Labor’s new initiative mirrors an existing program at the state level, the New South Wales government’s Trade Pathways for Experienced Workers Program.
According to Labor, this program saw 1,200 students earn their qualifications in an average time of seven months (as opposed to several years).
It’s important to note this includes trades from all sectors of the NSW economy. But it is much faster than the traditional process of skill recognition. The Parkinson Review of Australia’s migration system found this process can take up to 18 months for a skilled migrant and cost over $9,000.
Combined with other initiatives such as incentive payments for construction apprentices, the new Advanced Entry Trades Training program should help address some skills shortages in the sector.
Australia’s peak construction industry body, Master Builders Australia, praised the proposal, citing its own analysis suggesting for every new qualified tradie, an extra 2.4 homes can be built.
Even with these initiatives, the sector will likely fall short of the 83,000 additional skilled tradespeople needed to meet the Albanese government’s target to build 1.2 million new homes over five years.
And it may mainly solve a categorisation issue. Currently, only about 80% of employers in the construction sector in Australia require all job applicants to hold a formal qualification.
Crucially, it doesn’t address the core problem of attracting higher numbers of suitable people to a very traditional industry and helping them finish their qualifications. Almost half of construction sector apprentices do not complete their training.
Other challenges
There are other challenges for recognition of prior learning schemes more broadly.
Research into recognition of prior learning for construction sector apprentices suggests some Australian employers and training providers may be averse to fast-tracking training. About 64% of assessed apprentices had prior experience and skills, but only 30% had their training shortened.
These issues are even more complex when considering accelerated pathways for skilled migrants from a range of countries. There are some significant, well-documented challenges in transferring or recognising vocational qualifications across international boundaries.
More to be done
The Advanced Entry Trades Training program may go some way to alleviating a skills shortage in construction. But it will only partially address the broader issues of supply.
Australia’s vocational education and training systems are complex, making it difficult to predict the outcomes.
Declining productivity isn’t just down to skilled labour shortages. It has also been attributed to other factors such as complex planning approvals, limited innovation, and a predominance of small firms.
The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
