NewzIntel.com

Category: Features

  • MIL-Evening Report: Why does my kid eat so well at childcare but not at home?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nick Fuller, Clinical Trials Director, Department of Endocrinology, RPA Hospital, University of Sydney

    Maria Symchych/Shutterstock

    If you’ve ever picked up your child from childcare and wondered if they’re living a double life, you’re not alone.

    Parents often receive rave reports from educators about kids’ adventurous eating habits, only to face a different reality at home, when the child who devoured a veggie-packed curry at lunchtime morphs into a fussy eater refusing anything but dinosaur-shaped chicken nuggets.

    While this confusing behaviour is frustrating, it’s completely normal.

    Here’s why it happens and what you can do.

    How kids’ tastes and eating behaviour develops

    To understand why kids eat differently in different settings, we need first to understand two factors that shape their tastes and food preferences:

    1. Genetics. Our hunter-gatherer ancestors developed physiological responses for survival that are embedded in our genes and influence taste preferences from birth. These include developing “food fussiness” – a natural aversion to unfamiliar foods and bitter flavours to avoid ingesting toxins – and learning to seek palatable foods rich in natural sugars, fat and protein to avoid starvation.

    2. Eating environment. As kids grow, their surroundings at mealtimes – namely carers’ eating habits, feeding practices, routines and social cues conveyed – shape what they actually eat and enjoy.

    The interaction between these two factors drives how fussy kids will be, their likes and dislikes and how open they are to new foods.

    Why eating behaviour differs between childcare and home

    The simple reason kids may eat differently at childcare comes down to the eating environment. Here’s what typically makes childcare different to home:

    1. Childcare has strict routines

    Childcare runs to a strict schedule, teaching kids to expect meals and snacks at set times and places. Meals are also planned to ensure kids sit down to eat when they’re hungry, and food is offered for a limited time – factors that help kids focus on eating.

    When mealtimes are less structured at home, it often leads to kids snacking, reducing their appetite at dinnertime. Distractions, like screens, also take kids’ attention away from eating.

    2. Kids are exposed to peer influence and different role models

    Kids are natural copycats, so seeing friends enjoying healthy food makes them more willing to try it. This behaviour is supported by a study showing that seating a preschooler who dislikes a vegetable next to a peer who enjoys it can gradually shift their preference, leading them to eat the previously disliked vegetable.

    Additionally, the social nature of eating in a group setting encourages kids to try new foods and eat more.

    Research also shows carers – who are trained to model enthusiasm for nutritious foods – shape healthy eating habits and help kids learn other valuable behaviours like table manners.

    At home, time constraints and limited knowledge can make it harder for parents to model these same behaviours.

    3. Childcare regularly exposes kids to new foods

    At childcare, meals are carefully planned according to Australian Dietary Guidelines and are focused on exposing kids to new foods regularly and repeatedly to get them comfortable with different tastes and textures.

    At home, busy family lives often lead to repetitive meal routines.

    4. Kids are offered limited choices

    At childcare, meals are planned with military precision and served without negotiation, teaching kids to try to eat what’s provided.

    At home, mealtimes can involve high-stakes negotiations when kids refuse certain foods, leading parents to surrender and offer alternatives – a tactic that only reinforces fussy eating and teaches kids to hold out for favourite foods.

    5. Kids are given some control over what they eat

    Kids have very little control over their daily lives – we’re constantly telling them what to do and when they’ll do it.

    However, one way kids assert control is by refusing to eat certain foods at home.

    Childcare cleverly gives kids the control they seek, encouraging them to serve themselves from shared platters, making them more willing to try new foods.

    6. Kids experience less attention and pressure

    At home, we naturally focus on what our child is eating (and not eating) which makes mealtimes stressful for kids.

    At childcare, kids don’t have an audience watching their every bite, so they feel less pressure, eat more freely and are more willing to try different foods.



    Read more:
    5 picky eating habits – and how to help your child overcome them

    Six ways to bring childcare eating habits home

    1. Stick to a strict routine

    Serve meals around the same time each day and establish snack times, ensuring they’re two hours before mealtimes so your child sits down hungry and ready to eat. Your routine should include putting devices away so your child’s full attention is on eating.

    2. Be a positive role model

    Because kids observe and mimic what they see, if you show enthusiasm for trying new foods and healthy eating your child will do the same.

    3. Get creative

    Take a leaf out of childcare’s book and ensure your child’s plate features different colours, textures and flavours presented in fun ways to capture and hold their interest in new foods.

    And just like childcare, do this regularly, as repeated exposure is key – it can take eight to ten exposures before your child will accept eating a new food.

    4. Limit food choices (but in a fun way)

    Offer limited choices but in a way that gives your child some control, like serving platter-style meals where they can choose what they want.

    Don’t give into food demands. While it’s tempting to offer alternatives when meals are refused, this creates more problems than it solves, reinforcing food fussiness and narrowing their diet.

    5. Encourage independence

    Actively involve your child in meal preparation, asking them to pick healthy recipes, help you shop and complete simple tasks like washing veggies and mixing ingredients. This can make them curious to taste the meal they’ve helped prepare.

    6. Make mealtimes stress-free

    Prioritise sitting down to eat as a family and ensure mealtimes are relaxed and fun – especially when you’re introducing new foods – to create positive associations with healthy eating.

    Nick Fuller is the author of Healthy Parents, Healthy Kids – a clinically proven blueprint to overcoming food fussiness.

    A/Professor Nick Fuller works for the University of Sydney and RPA Hospital and has received external funding for projects relating to the treatment of overweight and obesity. He is the author and founder of the Interval Weight Loss program, and the author of Healthy Parents, Healthy Kids with Penguin Books.

    – ref. Why does my kid eat so well at childcare but not at home? – https://theconversation.com/why-does-my-kid-eat-so-well-at-childcare-but-not-at-home-247447

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Nerve-wracking twists, remarkable stardom and jet-black comedy: the 5 best films of the 2025 French Film Festival

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ben McCann, Associate Professor of French Studies, University of Adelaide

    The Divine Sarah Bernhardt.
     Memento

    This year’s Alliance Française French Film Festival showcases a diverse selection of films from blockbusters and biopics to comedies and gripping thrillers for Australian audiences.

    I’ve written before about how this annual event, now in its 36th edition, is, in terms of tickets sold and films screened, the largest film festival dedicated to contemporary French cinema outside of France.

    The 2025 program once more shines a spotlight on the established icons and rising stars of French cinema.

    In the this year’s festival, 30% of the films are directed by women and thorny issues such as slavery, consent and caregiving are presented sensitively and provocatively.

    But from a competitive bunch, here are the best five films I saw this year.

    How To Make A Killing

    It’s Christmas in the Jura, France’s picturesque eastern region full of mountains, snow and pine trees. When Michel (Frank Dubosc) accidentally crashes his truck into a car, killing its driver and passenger, his wife Cathy (Laure Calamy) tells him he may have left fingerprints at the crime scene.

    They return – and discover two million euros in the car boot, and a loaded gun in the glove box.

    From this point on, How To Make A Killing features one improbable but amusingly nerve-wracking twist after another. There’s a local policeman in over his head and drug lords and contract killers who want their money back.

    Oh, and a black bear is on the loose.

    Writer-director Dubosc pays homage to the Coen brothers and sprinkles in a typically Gallic dose of black humour. What really gives the film zip and pizzazz is the fabulous Calamy. She has risen to the apex of contemporary French stardom and her performance is a delight.

    The Divine Sarah Bernhardt

    Sarah Bernhardt can lay claim to being the first film celebrity. Born in Paris in 1844, Bernhardt was first a legendary stage actress, performing Shakespeare and Racine across the world (including Melbourne and Sydney in 1891) before gravitating to silent cinema.

    Known for her extraordinary talent and intense stage presence (hence “divine”), she refused to play just female roles, famously playing Hamlet. Her eccentricity was equally renowned: she often travelled with an extensive menagerie of exotic pets.

    Guillaume Nicloux’s sumptuous biopic unfolds in a radical way. Rather than tracing Bernhardt’s career in the fairly bog-standard biopic way, Nicloux jumps around, focusing on key events from her life – the amputation of a leg, her death, her bisexuality, her hedonistic lifestyle.

    Through this bold achronological prism comes another daring choice: we never see Bernhardt act on stage or film. Her stardom emerges through the extraordinary effect she has on people who enter her orbit.

    At the centre is a remarkable performance by Sandrine Kiberlain. She captures Bernhardt’s glamour and narcissism but also taps into her vulnerability to reveal her gradual hollowing out as the vagaries of fame take their toll.

    It’s a cautionary tale that speaks to our current ambivalence towards stage-managed celebrity and “stardom at all costs”.

    My Brother’s Band

    Ever since its Cannes debut last May, Emmanuel Courcol’s My Brother’s Band has received rave reviews. It is sure to be an instant classic.

    Two brothers are separated at birth and are only reunited decades later when Thibaut (Benjamin Lavernhe) needs a bone marrow transplant. The only suitable donor is long-lost Jimmy (rising star Pierre Lottin).

    All that bonds the two is a shared love of music. Thibaut is an esteemed orchestra conductor while Jimmy plays the trombone in a local brass band.

    Lavernhe’s and Lottin’s scenes together are wonderfully wry and tender as the two brothers learn to appreciate each other’s lifestyles and ways of seeing the world. We also see how music can bind communities together during times of personal and collective crisis.

    Courcol shuttles between the stuffy, cathedral-like spaces of a Paris conservatorium and the cramped parish halls of northern France. Think Brassed Off meets Tár. My Brother’s Band brings the feel-good to the festival.

    When Fall is Coming

    When Fall is Coming, the latest work by prolific auteur François Ozon, is a broody family drama set in Burgundy.

    Behind the autumnal landscapes and off-the-beaten-track villages lies hidden trauma. Michelle (the outstanding Hélène Vincent, now 81) nervously awaits the arrival of her grandson and the daughter from whom she is long estranged (for reasons we don’t understand until much later).

    An innocuous first night meal turns to tragedy, and kickstarts a deeply engrossing, often menacing film. Pierre Lottin features again, this time as an ex-con slowly drawn into this unsettling web of secrets and lies.

    The “fall” in the title can be read any number of ways. Suffice to say, this slow-burner reminds us of Ozon’s knack in withholding plot points and revealing them gradually. With its blend of spiteful intimacy and startling revelations, When Fall is Coming quietly chills. You’ll not look at mushrooms in the same way again.

    Lucky Winners

    French filmgoers love to laugh. The top ten grossing French films in history are all comedies.

    Lucky Winners is a jet-black comedy about four different winners of France’s national lottery. Each becomes a millionaire overnight – but that’s when their troubles begin. Romain Choay and Maxime Govare’s witty film features a fine ensemble cast and a healthy dose of cruelty and squabbling.

    The dream sours. Money does not bring happiness, only guilt, revenge and greed. Feel-good quickly descends into feel-bad. I imagine Hollywood will be remaking this very soon.

    The Alliance Française French Film Festival is in cinemas around Australia on various dates until April 27.

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

    – ref. Nerve-wracking twists, remarkable stardom and jet-black comedy: the 5 best films of the 2025 French Film Festival – https://theconversation.com/nerve-wracking-twists-remarkable-stardom-and-jet-black-comedy-the-5-best-films-of-the-2025-french-film-festival-250153

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: What’s the difference between freckles, sunspots and moles?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mike Climstein, Associate Professor, Faculty of Health, Southern Cross University

    Cottonbro Studio/Pexels

    You’ve got a new brown spot on your face, but is it a freckle or a sunspot? Or perhaps you’ve found a spot on your back that looks like a mole but is flatter than your other ones – is it a mole or a dark freckle?

    Here’s how to tell the difference between freckles, sunspots and moles – and when you need to get a spot checked to see if it’s skin cancer.

    Freckles

    Freckles, known as ephelides, are small, flat, light brown spots that appear on people with fair skin, or red or light-coloured hair.

    These people are more likely to have the MC1R gene, which leads to freckles forming.

    Freckles are caused by sun exposure and are more noticeable in summer. When sunlight hits the skin, cells called melanocytes produce melanin, the pigment that gives skin its colour.

    In people prone to freckles, the melanin doesn’t spread evenly. Instead, it clumps together, creating freckles.

    Melanin doesn’t spread evenly in people prone to freckles.
    Chermiti Mohamed/Unsplash

    Freckles generally appear in childhood and may fade with age, especially if sun exposure reduces. As we age we produce less melanin, or it can break down or disperse, resulting in lighter or fewer freckles.

    Using sunscreen and wearing protective clothing can help prevent new freckles from developing, especially on the face and arms.

    While freckles are completely harmless, they are a sign that someone is genetically at higher risk of developing skin cancer.

    Sunspots

    Sunspots are also called age spots or actinic keratoses (or liver spots, but they have nothing to do with the liver). They are larger than freckles: sometimes the size of a small coin, and appear as flat brown spots.

    Sunspots develop over time due to long-term sun exposure, which leads to excessive melanin production. They tend to appear on skin with greater sun exposure, such as the face, hands, shoulders and arms.

    Sunspots develop after years of sun exposure.
    Zay Nyi Nyi/Shutterstock

    Unlike freckles, which tend to get lighter with less sun exposure, sunspots will not fade with time, and may further darken with continued sun exposure.

    However, some people try to remove their sunspots for cosmetic reasons using either a laser, chemical peel or a prescription topical cream.

    While sunspots are not dangerous, they do increase your risk of other skin cancers in that area.

    It’s also important to monitor them, as slow-growing melanomas may initially look like sunspots. If you see the spot changes in size, shape or colour, see your doctor to rule out skin cancer.

    Moles

    Moles are often dark, raised or flat skin growths that can appear anywhere on your body.

    Although moles can exist from birth, they typically grow during childhood, adolescence and early adulthood (including during pregnancy, when hormones are changing), until around the age of around 40. Moles can increase in size, and new ones can also appear.

    Most adults have between ten and 40 moles on their body. A person with a high mole count has 50 or more, while someone with a very high mole count has 100 or more.

    Some moles are raised while others are flat.
    Pixel-Shot/Shutterstock

    Moles form when melanocytes grow in clusters instead of spreading evenly throughout the skin.

    Moles can either be raised or flat, depending upon their type, depth and age.

    Raised moles, referred to as compound nevi, have both flat and raised portions and typically have pigment that is deeper in the skin.

    Dermal nevi are skin-coloured or light brown moles that are also raised.

    Most moles are harmless. Some may have hair growing from them and some may disappear, whereas other moles may darken or alter with age or hormonal changes.

    However, some moles can develop into melanoma, a dangerous form of skin cancer.

    When to see your doctor

    While freckles and sunspots are completely harmless, moles do require more attention, especially if they change in size, shape, colour or texture.

    If a mole shows any of the following warning signs, see your doctor, who will use the ABCDE rule to detect if a lesion is a skin cancer:

    • asymmetry: if one half of the mole looks different from the other half

    • border: if your mole is shaped irregularly, jagged or has poorly defined edges

    • colour: varied shades or sudden changes in colour of the mole

    • diameter: if it is larger than 6 millimeters (about the size of a pencil eraser)

    • evolving: if your mole has any changes in its size, shape, colour, or sensation such as itching or bleeding for more than a few weeks.

    Our research shows only 21.7% of people can correctly identify melanoma on their own, so professional checks are essential.

    How to prevent skin damage

    Since freckles, sunspots and some moles are influenced by exposure to the sun, you can protect your skin by:

    • avoiding the sun when ultraviolet rays are strongest

    • wearing sunscreen with SPF 50 every day, even when it’s cloudy. Apply it 20 minutes before going outside and reapply every two hours

    • wearing protective clothing, including a wide-brimmed hat to cover your face, neck and ears, and long-sleeved shirts and pants to protect your arms and legs.

    Mike Climstein received funding from Johnson & Johnson

    Jeremy Hudson receives funding from Agaibey Enterprises Ltd.

    Michael Stapelberg receives funding from Johnson & Johnson.

    Nedeljka Rosic received research funding from Johnson & Johnson

    – ref. What’s the difference between freckles, sunspots and moles? – https://theconversation.com/whats-the-difference-between-freckles-sunspots-and-moles-250768

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Breast cancer screening is ripe for change. We need to assess a woman’s risk – not just her age

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Carolyn Nickson, Associate Professor, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne; Adjunct Associate Professor, Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney

    Pablo Heimplatz/Unsplash

    Australia’s BreastScreen program offers women regular mammograms (breast X-rays) based on their age. And this screening for breast cancer saves lives.

    But much has changed since the program was introduced in the early 90s. Technology has developed, as has our knowledge of which groups of women might be at higher risk of breast cancer. So how we screen women for breast cancer needs to adapt.

    In a recent paper, we’ve proposed a fundamental shift away from an age-based approach to a screening program that takes into account women’s risk of breast cancer.

    We argue we could save more lives if screening tests and schedules were personalised based on someone’s risk.

    We don’t yet know exactly how this might work in practice. We need to consult with all parties involved, including health professionals, government and women, and we need to begin Australian trials.

    But here’s why we need to rethink how we screen for breast cancer in Australia.

    Why does breast screening need to change?

    Australia’s BreastScreen program was introduced in 1991 and offers women regular mammograms based on their age. Women aged 50–74 are targeted, but screening is available from the age of 40.

    The program is key to Australia’s efforts to reduce the burden of breast cancer, providing more than a million screens each year.

    Women who attend BreastScreen reduce their risk of dying from breast cancer by 49% on average.

    Breast screening saves lives because it makes a big difference to find breast cancers early, before they spread to other parts of the body.

    Despite this, around 75,000 Australian women are expected to die from breast cancer over the next 20 years if we continue with current approaches to breast cancer screening and management.

    Who’s at high risk, and how best to target them?

    International evidence confirms it is possible to identify groups of women at higher risk of breast cancer. These include:

    • women with denser breasts (where there’s more glandular and fibrous tissue than fatty tissue in the breasts) are more likely to develop breast cancer, and their cancers are harder to find on standard mammograms

    • women whose mother, sisters, grandmother or aunts have had breast or ovarian cancer, especially if there are multiple relatives and the cancers occurred at young ages

    • women who have been found to carry genetic mutations that lead to a higher risk of breast cancer (including women with multiple moderate risk mutations, as indicated by what’s known as a polygenic risk score).

    For some higher-risk women, could MRI be an option?
    VesnaArt/Shutterstock

    Women in these and other high-risk groups might warrant a different form of screening. This could include screening from a younger age, screening more frequently, and offering more sensitive tests such as digital breast tomosynthesis (a 3D version of mammography), MRI or contrast-enhanced mammography (a type of mammography that uses a dye to highlight cancerous lesions).

    But we don’t yet know:

    • how to best identify women at higher risk

    • which screening tests should be offered, how often and to whom

    • how to staff and run a risk-based screening program

    • how to deliver this in a cost-effective and equitable way.

    The road ahead

    This is what we have been working on, for Cancer Council Australia, as part of the ROSA Breast project.

    This federally funded project has estimated and compared the expected outcomes and costs for a range of screening scenarios.

    For each scenario we estimated the benefits (saving lives or less intense treatment) and harms (overdiagnosis and rates of investigations in women recalled for further investigation after a screening test who are found to not have breast cancer).

    Of 160 potential screening scenarios we modelled, we shortlisted 19 which produced the best outcomes for women and were the most cost effective. The shortlisted scenarios tended to involve either targeted screening technologies for higher-risk women or screening technologies other than mammography for all screened women.

    For example, in our estimates, making no change to the target age range or screening intervals but offering a more sensitive screening test to the 20% of women deemed to be at highest risk would save 113 lives over ten years.

    Alternatively, commencing targeted screening from age 40 and offering a more sensitive screening test annually to the 20% of women at highest risk, and three-yearly screening (of the current kind) to the 30% of women at lowest risk, would save 849 lives over ten years.

    However, less frequent screening of the lower risk group was expected to lead to small increases in breast cancer deaths in that group.

    How do we best assess women for their risk of breast cancer? At this stage, there’s no one answer.
    Tint Media/Shutterstock

    We also outlined 25 recommendations to put into action, and set out a five-year roadmap of how to get there. This includes:

    • a large scale trial to find out what is feasible, effective and affordable in Australia

    • making sure women at higher risk in different parts of Australia are offered suitable options regardless of where they live and who they see

    • better data collection and reporting to support risk-based screening

    • testing how we assess women for their risk of breast cancer, including whether these assessments work as intended and make sense to women from a range of backgrounds

    • clinical studies of screening technologies to determine the best delivery models and associated costs

    • ongoing engagement with groups including women, health professionals and government.

    Breast cancer screening review out soon

    Federal health minister Mark Butler said a review of the BreastScreen program would consider our recommendations. The results of this review are expected soon.

    We’re not alone in calling for a move towards risk-based breast cancer screening. This is backed by national and international submissions to government, policy briefing documents and the Breast Cancer Network Australia.

    We’ve provided an evidence-based roadmap towards better screening for breast cancer. Now is the time to commit to this journey.

    We acknowledge Louiza Velentzis from the Daffodil Centre, and Paul Grogan and Deborah Bateson from the University of Sydney, who co-authored the paper mentioned in this article.

    Carolyn Nickson led the ROSA Project for Cancer Council Australia. She receives funding from the Australian government Department of Health and Aged Care, the Medical Research Future Fund, the National Health and Medical Research Council and Melbourne Health.

    Bruce Mann works as a surgeon at Northwestern BreastScreen in Melbourne. He was a board member of the Breast Cancer Network Australia, which has improved screening as a key strategic objective. He is director of research at Breast Cancer Trials.  If trials are done in this space, Breast Cancer Trials may be involved. He was a member of the ROSA Project coordination group and jointly chaired the project advisory groups.

    Karen Canfell was executive lead for the ROSA Project discussed in this article. She has received grants from the Australian government’s Department of Health and Aged Care and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, the National Health and Medical Research Council and Medical Research Future Fund, the US National Cancer Institute and CDC, Cancer Research UK, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and government agencies in several countries. She co-leads an investigator-initiated trial of cervical screening, Compass, run by the Australian Centre for Prevention of Cervical Cancer (ACPCC), which is a government-funded not-for-profit charity. Compass receives infrastructure support from the Australian government and the ACPCC has received equipment and a funding contribution from Roche Molecular Diagnostics, USA.  She also co-leads an implementation program Elimination of Cervical Cancer in the Indo-Pacific which has received support from the Australian government and the Minderoo Foundation, and equipment donations from Cepheid and Microbix.  

    – ref. Breast cancer screening is ripe for change. We need to assess a woman’s risk – not just her age – https://theconversation.com/breast-cancer-screening-is-ripe-for-change-we-need-to-assess-a-womans-risk-not-just-her-age-252182

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Will $1 on your ticket help save Australian live music? A UK model is much more ambitious

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sam Whiting, Vice-Chancellor’s Senior Research Fellow in Music Industries and Cultural Economy, RMIT University

    iam_os/Unsplash

    The Australian Music Venue Foundation launched this month to advocate for and potentially administer an arena ticket levy to support grassroots live music venues. Funds would be raised through a small levy, approximately A$1 per ticket, on the price of tickets to large music events, over 5,000 capacity.

    The foundation is partly modelled on the United Kingdom’s Music Venue Trust, a charity and advocacy body founded in 2014 that has advocated for a big ticket levy.

    While the proposed levy would certainly help to level the playing field between grassroots music venues and the big end of touring, the Music Venue Trust was founded on much more radical principles and ambitions than simple redistribution.

    Socialising live music

    Although the Music Venue Trust has moved into advocacy and policy work, such as vocal support for the big ticket levy, the trust’s original and continuing mission is to socialise grassroots music venues. This means they work to help venues transition away from for-profit models and towards alternative ownership structures.

    The trust’s “Own Our Venues” campaign spawned Music Venue Properties, a charitable landlord funded by the broader music community. The scheme has now purchased five grassroots venues around the UK, leased on the condition they continue to run as live music venues.

    The goal is to take the profit motive out of running a venue. Surplus is reinvested into venue spaces, ensuring their long-term sustainability.

    As the trust’s founder and CEO Mark Davyd states, “[the community] is the best person to own a venue”.

    We don’t want money going to private landlords, we want it in the cultural economy because that’s the way we generate more great artists and give more people the opportunity to be involved in music.

    Acknowledging that such radical ambitions require funding, the trust have been long term advocates for a big ticket levy. However, this advocacy has always accompanied their greater goal of socialising live music venues.

    The trust have helped to change the broader cultural understanding of grassroots venues in the UK. Between 2014 and 2022, the proportion of music venues in the country run as not-for-profit ventures increased from 3% to 26%.

    The Australian context

    Melbourne’s Gasometer Hotel and Brisbane’s The Bearded Lady are the latest small, but culturally significant, live music venues to face closure. The number of venues licensed for live music in Australia is falling, with the greatest reductions in the small-to-medium range.

    The recent parliamentary inquiry into the live music industry found costs like insurance and rent have risen sharply in the last five years. Meanwhile, income from alcohol sales – a core revenue source for smaller venues – has dropped in connection with changing youth culture, the cost-of-living crisis, and excises hitched to inflation.

    Costs to run music venues have increased, while income from avenues like alcohol sales have fallen.
    Frankie Cordoba/Unsplash

    Surveys of young people and other groups affirm that Australians value live music, and most people would like to attend more. The most commonly cited barrier is cost, followed by distance from appropriate venues, especially in regional areas.

    An arena ticket levy was a key recommendation of the inquiry, with the committee recommending government agency Music Australia should manage the funds.

    The committee proposed a levy could enable Music Australia to fund:

    • performances with minimum pay rates for musicians

    • capital improvements to venues, such as sound-proofing or disability access

    • festivals promoting regional, all-ages, First Nations and community participation.

    Neither the Labor government nor the opposition have indicated a position on this recommendation, which would require legislation.

    The industry proposal

    The Australian Music Venue Foundation is asking big music businesses to opt in to an industry-managed ticket levy to fund grassroots live music.

    While there has been advocacy for such a voluntary arrangement in the UK, this is yet to come to fruition. The UK government’s deadline for the arrangement of a voluntary scheme by the end of March is approaching, opening up the alternative scenario of a legislated mandatory levy.

    Australian advocates believe they may have the relationships to create a different outcome, arguing all industry players have a stake in a healthy music ecosystem.

    In the proposed Australian scheme, the recipients and use of funding would be decided by a board of industry professionals. This raises questions around potential conflicts of interest. The foundation has applied for charity status, which requires transparency around operations and finances. However, there are broader questions about priorities.

    The foundation argues all levels of the industry have a stake in their being a healthy ecosystem of venues.
    Austin/Unsplash

    If the scheme gets up, the foundation will need to consider whether to restrict its support to Australian-owned, independent venues of a certain size. Alternatively, funds may be available to venues that are part-owned by the same major, for-profit, international companies paying into the scheme.

    To replace the proposed government levy, the foundation would also need to find ways of supporting access to live music for regional, all-ages, First Nations, and other disadvantaged communities, as recommended by the inquiry’s report.

    To ensure benefits flow to artists, venue support could also be made conditional on paying a minimum performer’s fee, something venue’s have previously opposed.

    The foundation could promote social objectives such as performer diversity, patron safety, and environmental sustainability, but there are no guarantees of this under an industry-led scheme.

    These examples demonstrate the issues that can arise when economic redistribution is managed within an industry, rather than by government.

    Lofty ambitions

    The Music Venue Trust has successfully argued for grassroots music venues as a public good, worthy of longterm community and public investment as well as a structural approach to support.

    Through their work, they have provided a new narrative for live music in the UK, supporting innovative ownership and operating models that go beyond the default of a commercially-leased space run as a for-profit small business.

    Ambition and innovation has made the trust much more than another industry association advocating for the interests of a particular group of businesses. The Australian Music Venue Foundation should aspire to similar heights if it is to have the same level of influence and impact.

    Sam Whiting receives funding from RMIT University and the Winston Churchill Trust.

    Ben Green receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

    – ref. Will $1 on your ticket help save Australian live music? A UK model is much more ambitious – https://theconversation.com/will-1-on-your-ticket-help-save-australian-live-music-a-uk-model-is-much-more-ambitious-252733

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Academic publishing is a multibillion-dollar industry. It’s not always good for science

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lucy Montgomery, Dean of Research, Humanities, Curtin University

    Mykhailo Kopyt/Shutterstock

    In December 2024, the editorial board of the Journal of Human Evolution resigned en masse following disagreements with the journal’s publisher, Elsevier. The board’s grievances included claims of inadequate copyediting, misuse of artificial intelligence (AI), and the high fees charged to make research articles publicly available.

    The previous year, more than 40 scientists who made up the entire academic board of a leading journal for brain imaging also walked off the job. The journal in question, Neuroimage, is also published by Elsevier, which the former board members accused of being “too greedy”.

    Elsevier has previously denied using AI and has disputed that its business practices are untoward.

    Mass resignations of journal editors are becoming more frequent. They highlight the tension between running a for-profit publishing business and upholding research integrity.

    From a niche to a multibillion-dollar business

    The world’s first academic journal was called Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society. It was established in 1665 as a publication that allowed scientists to share their work with other scientists.

    For a long time, academic journals were a niche branch of publishing. They were run by and for research communities. But this started to change from the second world war onwards.

    The expansion of research, combined with an influx of commercial publishing players and the rise of the internet in the 1990s, have transformed journal publishing into a highly concentrated and competitive media business.

    Elsevier is the biggest player in this business. It publishes roughly 3,000 journals and in 2023 its parent company, Relx, recorded a profit of roughly A$3.6 billion. Its profit margin was nearly 40% – rivalling tech giants such as Microsoft and Google.

    Along with Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley, SAGE, and Taylor & Francis make up what are known as the “big five” in academic publishing. Collectively, these publishers are responsible for roughly 50% of all research output.

    Many of the most trusted and prestigious research journals are owned by commercial publishers. For example, The Lancet is owned by Elsevier.

    A key factor in their profitability is volunteer labour provided by researchers. Traditional models of peer review are a good example of this. Academics provide publishers with content, in the form of journal articles. They also review their peers’ work for free. University libraries then pay for access to the final published journal on behalf of their research community.

    Alongside the pressure on academics to publish, the push to “speed up science” through these systems of peer-review only contribute to issues of trust in research.

    In 2023, academic publisher Elsevier recorded a profit of roughly $3.6 billion.
    T.Schneider/Shutterstock

    Profit at the expense of research integrity

    The increasing frequency of editorial board resignations reflects the tension between researchers trying to uphold scientific and research integrity, and publishers trying to run a for-profit business answerable to shareholders.

    Research is most often built on spending taxpayers’ money.

    Yet there is often little alignment between the profit imperatives of large, multinational publishers and the expectations of the communities and funding bodies that pay for the costs of research.

    For example, for-profit publishing models mean the results of research often end up locked behind paywalls. This has implications for the dissemination of research findings. It also means the public may not be able to access information they need most, such as medical research.

    The business of academic publishing also doesn’t always sit comfortably with the values and motives of scholarly inquiry and researchers.

    Publishers may focus on maximising shareholder gains by publishing research outputs, rather than on the content of the research or the needs of the research community.

    As Arash Abizadeh, a former editor of Philosophy & Public Affairs – a leading political philosophy journal – wrote in The Guardian in July 2024:

    Commercial publishers are incentivised to try to publish as many articles and journals as possible, because each additional article brings in more profit. This has led to a proliferation of junk journals that publish fake research, and has increased the pressure on rigorous journals to weaken their quality controls.

    The world’s first academic journal, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, was established in 1665.
    Henry Oldenburg/Philosophical Transactions, CC BY

    Better publishing practices

    What could alternative academic publishing practices that safeguard the integrity of research look like?

    The “publish-review-curate” model is one example.

    This model has been adopted by community research
    initiative MetaROR. It involves authors publishing their work as “preprints” which are immediately accessible to the community.

    The work then goes through an open peer review process. Finally, an assessment report is produced based on the reviews.

    This model aims to accelerate the dissemination of knowledge. It also aims to encourage a more transparent, collaborative, and constructive review process.

    Another important advantage of preprints is that they are not locked behind paywalls. This makes it faster and easier for research communities to share new findings with other researchers quickly.

    There are some drawbacks to this model. For example, preprints can cause confusion if they are publicised by the media too early.

    The question of who should pay for and maintain online preprint servers, on which global research communities depend, is also a subject of continuing debate.

    As the academic ecosystem continues to evolve, we will need publishing models that can adapt to the changes and needs of the research community and beyond.

    Lucy Montgomery is part of the Curtin Open Knowledge Initiative, and serves on Advisory Boards for several not-for-profit organisations involved in scholarly publishing and open access. She is a member of the UWA Press Board; as well as Chair of the Scientific Committee for the Directory of Open Access Books. She has received funding from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, the Arcadia Fund, and has previously consulted to both commercial and non-commercial scholarly presses.

    Emilia Bell receives funding from an Australian Government Research Training Program (RTP) Scholarship for their doctoral research. They are a non-executive director of the Australian Library and Information Association (ALIA) and Manager, Research and Digital Services at Murdoch University Library. Emilia is also affiliated with several organisations in the wider not-for-profit, higher education, and library sectors.

    Karl Huang is affiliated with the Curtin Open Knowledge Initiative (COKI) project, which receives or has received funding from Curtin University, Mellon Foundation, and Arcadia Fund. COKI also works closely with non-profit partners internationally and in Australia. Karl is also affiliated with the Centre for Culture and Technology, as its current Director, at Curtin University.

    – ref. Academic publishing is a multibillion-dollar industry. It’s not always good for science – https://theconversation.com/academic-publishing-is-a-multibillion-dollar-industry-its-not-always-good-for-science-250056

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Plants breathe with millions of tiny mouths. We used lasers to understand how this skill evolved

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tim Brodribb, Professor of Plant Physiology, University of Tasmania

    Stomata – the breathing ‘mouths’ of leaves – under the microscope. Barbol / Shutterstock

    Plant behaviour may seem rather boring compared with the frenetic excesses of animals. Yet the lives of our vegetable friends, who tirelessly feed the entire biosphere (including us), are full of exciting action. It just requires a little more effort to appreciate.

    One such behaviour is the dynamic opening and closing of millions of tiny mouths (called stomata) located on each leaf, through which plants “breathe”. In this process they let out water extracted from the soil in exchange for precious carbon dioxide from the air, which they need to produce sugar in the sunlight-powered process of photosynthesis.

    Opening the stomata at the wrong time can waste valuable water and risk a catastrophic drying-out of the plant’s vascular system. Almost all land plants control their stomata very precisely in response to light and humidity to optimise growth while minimising the damage risk.

    How plants evolved this extraordinary balancing act has been the subject of considerable debate among scientists. In a new paper published in PNAS we used lasers to find out how the earliest stomata may have operated.

    Tiny valves, global consequences

    Much depends on the way stomata behave: plant productivity, sensitivity to drought, and indeed the pace of the global carbon and water cycles.

    However, they are difficult to observe in action. Each stomata is like a tiny, pressure-operated valve. They have “guard cells” surrounding an opening or pore which lets water vapour out and carbon dioxide in.

    When pressure increases in stomata guard cells, the pore opens – and vice versa.
    Artemide / Shutterstock

    When fluid pressure increases inside the stomata’s guard cells, they swell up to open the pore. When pressure drops, the cells deflate and the pore closes. To understand stomata behaviour, we wanted to be able to measure the pressure in the guard cells – but it’s not easy.

    Lasers, bubbles and evolution

    Enter Craig Brodersen of Yale University with a newly developed microscope-guided laser. It can create microscopic bubbles inside the individual cells that operate the stomatal pore.

    When Brodersen spent a sabbatical at the University of Tasmania (where I am based), we found we could determine the pressure inside stomatal cells by tracking the size of these bubbles and how quickly they collapsed. This involved theoretical calculations guided by bubble expert Philippe Marmottant, of the French National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS) in Grenoble.

    This new tool gave us the perfect opportunity to explore how the behaviour of stomata is different among major plant groups. The aim was to test our hypothesis that the evolution of stomatal behaviour follows a predictable trajectory through the history of plant evolution.

    We argue it began with a relatively simple ancestral passive control state, currently represented in living ferns and lycophytes, and developed to a more active hormonal control mechanism seen in modern conifers and flowering plants.

    Against this hypothesis, some researchers have previously reported complex behaviours in some of the most ancient of stomata-bearing plants, the bryophytes. We wanted to test this finding using our newly developed laser instrument.

    400 million years of development

    What we found was firstly that our laser pressure probe technique worked extremely well. We made nearly 500 measurements of stomatal pressure dynamics in the space of a few months. This was a marked improvement on the past 45 years, in which fewer than 30 similar measurements had been made.

    Secondly, we found that the stomata of our representative bryophytes (hornworts and mosses) lacked even the most basic responses to light found in all other land plants.

    The stomata of hornworts and mosses showed no response to changes in light.
    Gondronx Studio / Shutterstock

    This result supported our earlier hypothesis that the first stomata found in ancestors of the modern bryophytes 450 million years ago should have been very simple valves. They would have lacked the complex behaviours seen in modern flowering plants.

    Our results suggest that stomatal behaviour has changed substantially through the process of evolution, highlighting critical changes in functionality that are preserved in the different major land plant groups that currently inhabit the Earth.

    How plants will survive the future

    We can now say with confidence that stomata in mosses, ferns, conifers and flowering plants all behave in very different ways. This has an important corollary: they will all respond differently to the heaving changes in atmospheric temperature and water availability that they face now and into the near future. Predicting stomatal behaviour in the future will help us to predict these impacts and highlight plant vulnerability.

    In terms of agricultural benefit, our new laser method should be fast and sensitive enough to reveal even small differences in the the behaviour of closely related plants. This may help to identify crop variants that use water in a more efficient or productive way, which will assist plant breeders to find varieties that better translate increasingly unpredictable soil water supplies into food.

    So next time you look upon a leaf, consider the frantic pace of dynamic calculation and adjustment of millions of little mouths, reacting as your breath falls upon them. Realise that our own fate, tied to the performance of forests and crops in future climates, hangs on the behaviour of the stomata of different species. A good reason for us to understand these unassuming little valves.

    Tim Brodribb receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

    – ref. Plants breathe with millions of tiny mouths. We used lasers to understand how this skill evolved – https://theconversation.com/plants-breathe-with-millions-of-tiny-mouths-we-used-lasers-to-understand-how-this-skill-evolved-249362

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Trump silences the Voice of America: end of a propaganda machine or void for China and Russia to fill?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Valerie A. Cooper, Lecturer in Media and Communication, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington

    Getty Images

    Of all the contradictions and ironies of Donald Trump’s second presidency so far, perhaps the most surprising has been his shutting down the US Agency for Global Media (USAGM) for being “radical propaganda”.

    Critics have long accused the agency – and its affiliated outlets such as Voice of America, Radio Free Europe and Radio Free Asia – of being a propaganda arm of US foreign policy.

    But to the current president, the USAGM has become a promoter of anti-American ideas and agendas – including allegedly suppressing stories critical of Iran, sympathetically covering the issue of “white privilege” and bowing to pressure from China.

    Propaganda is clearly in the eye of the beholder. The Moscow Times reported Russian officials were elated by the demise of the “purely propagandistic” outlets, while China’s Global Times celebrated the closure of a “lie factory”.

    Meanwhile, the European Commission hailed USAGM outlets as a “beacon of truth, democracy and hope”. All of which might have left the average person understandably confused: Voice of America? Wasn’t that the US propaganda outlet from World War II?

    Well, yes. But the reality of USAGM and similar state-sponsored global media outlets is more complex – as are the implications of the US agency’s demise.

    Public service or state propaganda?

    The USAGM is one of several international public service media outlets based in western democracies. Others include Australia’s ABC International, the BBC World Service, CBC/Radio-Canada, France Médias Monde, NHK-World Japan, Deutsche Welle in Germany and SRG SSR in Switzerland.

    Part of the Public Media Alliance, they are similar to national public service media, largely funded by taxpayers to uphold democratic ideals of universal access to news and information.

    Unlike national public media, however, they might not be consumed – or even known – by domestic audiences. Rather, they typically provide news to countries without reliable independent media due to censorship or state-run media monopolies.

    The USAGM, for example, provides news in 63 languages to more than 100 countries. It has been credited with bringing attention to issues such as protests against COVID-19 lockdowns in China and women’s struggles for equal rights in Iran.

    On the other hand, the independence of USAGM outlets has been questioned often, particularly as they are required to share government-mandated editorials.

    Voice of America has been criticised for its focus on perceived ideological adversaries such as Russia and Iran. And my own research has found it perpetuates stereotypes and the neglect of African nations in its news coverage.

    Leaving a void

    Ultimately, these global media outlets wouldn’t exist if there weren’t benefits for the governments that fund them. Sharing stories and perspectives that support or promote certain values and policies is an effective form of “public diplomacy”.

    Yet these international media outlets differ from state-controlled media models because of editorial systems that protect them from government interference.

    The Voice of America’s “firewall”, for instance, “prohibits interference by any US government official in the objective, independent reporting of news”. Such protections allow journalists to report on their own governments more objectively.

    In contrast, outlets such as China Media Group (CMG), RT from Russia, and PressTV from Iran also reach a global audience in a range of languages. But they do this through direct government involvement. CMG subsidiary CCTV+, for example, states it is “committed to telling China’s story to the rest of the world”.

    Though RT states it is an autonomous media outlet, research has found the Russian government oversees hiring editors, imposing narrative angles, and rejecting stories.

    A Voice of America staffer protests outside the Washington DC offices on March 17 2025, after employees were placed on administrative leave.
    Getty Images

    Other voices get louder

    The biggest concern for western democracies is that these other state-run media outlets will fill the void the USAGM leaves behind – including in the Pacific.

    Russia, China and Iran are increasing funding for their state-run news outlets, with China having spent more than US$6.6 billion over 13 years on its global media outlets. China Media Group is already one of the largest media conglomerates in the world, providing news content to more than 130 countries in 44 languages.

    And China has already filled media gaps left by western democracies: after the ABC stopped broadcasting Radio Australia in the Pacific, China Radio International took over its frequencies.

    Worryingly, the differences between outlets such as Voice of America and more overtly state-run outlets aren’t immediately clear to audiences, as government ownership isn’t advertised.

    An Australian senator even had to apologise recently after speaking with PressTV, saying she didn’t know the news outlet was affiliated with the Iranian government, or that it had been sanctioned in Australia.

    Switched off

    Trump’s move to dismantle the USAGM doesn’t come as a complete surprise, however. As the authors of Capturing News, Capturing Democracy: Trump and the Voice of America described, the first Trump administration failed in its attempts to remove the firewall and install loyalists.

    This perhaps explains why Trump has resorted to more drastic measures this time. And, as with many of the current administration’s legally dubious actions, there has been resistance.

    The American Foreign Service Association says it will challenge the dismantling of the USAGM, while the Czech Republic is seeking EU support to keep Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty on the air.

    But for many of the agency’s journalists, contractors, broadcasting partners and audiences, it may be too late. Last week the New York Times reported some Voice of America broadcasts had already been replaced by music.

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

    – ref. Trump silences the Voice of America: end of a propaganda machine or void for China and Russia to fill? – https://theconversation.com/trump-silences-the-voice-of-america-end-of-a-propaganda-machine-or-void-for-china-and-russia-to-fill-252901

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: 4 key changes you may have missed in the new school funding agreement

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rachel Wilson, Professor of Social Impact, University of Technology Sydney

    Queensland and the federal government have reached an agreement on school funding. This means all Australian states and territories are now signed up to new arrangements, which officially began at the start of 2025.

    The agreement follows more than a year of negotiations between the federal and state governments.

    The agreements mean government schools will receive 25% of funding from the federal government, up from 20%. Cash-strapped state and territory governments now only have to find 75% (down from 80%).

    In some good news for schools, it also means there is now a firm plan to “fully fund” public schools by 2034. This means they will get 100% of the funding recommended by the schooling resource standard (or school funding mechanism) – albeit more than a decade after it was first recommended by the Gonski review in 2011.

    Much of the debate about the agreements has understandably focused on the funding split between federal and state governments.

    But the agreements also tie vital funding for schools to specific targets and reforms for the next ten years. There is plenty of fine print.

    Here are four major changes we can expect to see in schools and classrooms around Australia.



    Read more:
    Underfunded? Overfunded? How school funding works in Australia

    1. A ‘unique’ identifier for all students

    The new agreement will see all students receive a “unique student identifier” as part of a national system.

    This is a number all students will have from the time they start school. It would follow them through school to tertiary education or any other further study or training.

    The idea was first agreed to by the former Council of Australian Governments in 2009 and is already in place for university and vocational education students.

    A long time in the planning, it was included in the last school funding agreement, which expired at the end of 2024, despite little progress.

    At the moment, education systems can easily lose track of students. For example, pre-COVID an estimated 50,000 children and young people were not officially tracked by education authorities.

    The identifier number means governments will be able to track students across school systems. For example, if they move from the public system to the private system. Or if they move states or begin homeschooling.

    The identifier will also provide a greater understanding of the pathways taken by young people after school and potentially make it easier to link senior high schooling with TAFE and other vocational studies.

    Introducing a bill to set up architecture for the indentifier last year, federal Education Minister Jason Clare said it would have “robust privacy measures”, including protection under the Privacy Act.



    Read more:
    NSW has finally struck a school funding deal. What does this mean for schools and students?

    2. A new numeracy check

    Along with rolling out a well-publicised national phonics check for Year 1 (which some states are already doing), the new agreements include a numeracy check for young students.

    While numeracy is checked as part of NAPLAN in Year 3, the test was not designed to provide diagnostic data on individual students.

    The new checks will be used to identify students and schools in need of extra support.

    So far, we have few details on the design or time frames. The checks may also need significant research and development to work effectively. But existing programs (such as in South Australia) show screening checks have the potential to provide better monitoring and resourcing for student needs.

    3. A review of how school funding is calculated

    The new agreement also flags two more significant reviews.

    One will be on the way school funding is calculated – the first review since the current system was devised in 2011.

    The schooling resource standard is an estimate of how much total public funding a school needs to meet its students’ educational needs.

    In 2025, the base rates are A$13,977 for primary students and $17,565 for high school students. On top of these, there are six loadings to provide extra funding for students and schools with additional needs. This includes students with disability, Indigenous students and students in remote areas.

    But as a 2023 Productivity Commission review noted, some individual students qualify under multiple categories, and “the effects can be compounding”. This means this level of disadvantage needs more understanding and policy adjustment.

    The review will examine the methodology behind the base rate and loadings. As part of this, it will hopefully look at transparency around school funding arrangements. The Australian National Audit Office identified this as an issue as far back as 2017.

    4. A review of how schools are measured

    There will also be a review of the national Measurement Framework for Schooling in Australia. This details key performance measures for schooling, such as attendance, NAPLAN results and school completion.

    This framework usually has just minor adjustments about every couple of years. But a more significant overhaul is now in the works, with states agreeing a review will look at “possible new and updated measures”.

    These could include indicators for students’ engagement and learning growth, as well as outcomes for students with disability and the teaching workforce.

    An improved national data set holds enormous potential for addressing educational challenges, like declining participation rates, school refusal and teacher shortages.

    Elsewhere in the new agreement, states and territories also agreed to “better understand” how socioeconomic diversity and school attendance are impacting student learning. This can be seen as high-level acknowledgement the current reporting mechanisms and data on students need to improve.

    Now we need to see progress

    The new schools agreement contains some promising new measures to improve outcomes for students and teachers. But we now need to see them implemented.

    As the Productivity Commission and National Audit Office have previously noted, just because something is included in a school funding agreement, does not necessarily mean it will happen on time or as planned.

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

    – ref. 4 key changes you may have missed in the new school funding agreement – https://theconversation.com/4-key-changes-you-may-have-missed-in-the-new-school-funding-agreement-252291

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Federal budget 2025: here’s what we know so far

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Erin Cooper-Douglas, Deputy Politics + Society Editor

    The federal budget will be handed down by Treasurer Jim Chalmers at 7:30PM AEDT on Tuesday March 25.

    While the official budget papers are under lock and key until then, the government has been making spending announcements for weeks. Here’s what we know.

    Total promised spending is $29.3 billion, excluding off-budget spending on education, and over a range of forward years. Data is sourced from federal government announcements.

    – ref. Federal budget 2025: here’s what we know so far – https://theconversation.com/federal-budget-2025-heres-what-we-know-so-far-252925

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Why isn’t there an opposition leader to unite Democrats in the US?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Samuel Garrett, Research Associate, United States Studies Centre, University of Sydney

    In just two months back in the Oval Office, President Donald Trump has tested the limits of the US Constitution, from overhauling immigration to drastically reducing the federal workforce and dismantling government agencies.

    With Republicans now in control of both the Senate and House of Representatives, Congress has so far shown little sign it will stand in Trump’s way.

    The judiciary is the other branch of government that can check the power of the president. However, the Trump administration has appeared increasingly willing to simply ignore decisions handed down by judges.

    There has also been a notable lack of unified opposition from the Democratic Party.

    Congressional Democrats are demoralised and deeply divided over how to respond to Trump. They face criticism, too, over their apparent lack of strategy.

    This has led some to ask why the United States lacks a formal political opposition leader.

    How opposition leaders operate in other countries

    In the American political system, the loser of the presidential election doesn’t retain a position as leader of the party in opposition. Instead, they tend to disappear from view.

    Kamala Harris is considering a run for governor of California — and could well attempt another run for president in 2028 or beyond. But she hasn’t remained a vocal counterpoint to Trump since he took office.

    By contrast, in countries with Westminster-style parliamentary systems, such as Australia, the United Kingdom, Canada and India, the main party not in power selects an opposition leader from among their ranks. In most countries, this position is defined by convention, not law.

    The opposition leader in many countries serves as the main face — and voice — of the party not in power. They work to keep the government accountable and are seen as the leader of an alternative government-in-waiting.

    What it takes to lead the opposition in the US

    During Trump’s first term, the Democratic speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, was widely recognised as the de facto Democratic opposition leader.

    A skilled negotiator, Pelosi was largely able to unite the Democrats behind her to lead the opposition to Trump’s legislative agenda — famously ripping up a copy of Trump’s State of the Union address on the House podium in 2020.

    As Senate majority and minority leader, Republican Senator Mitch McConnell successfully blocked swathes of legislation during Barack Obama’s presidency. He even thwarted a US Supreme Court nomination.

    In the 1980s, then-Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill led the Democratic opposition to Republican President Ronald Reagan’s domestic agenda, without resorting to obstructionism.

    However, for an opposition figure to have this level of influence, they usually need decades of experience, political skill, and a party in control of the House or Senate.

    The Democrats no longer have a majority in either chamber and are no longer led by Pelosi. Hakeem Jeffries has been the House minority leader since 2023, but without the speaker’s gavel or control of any committees, he has limited influence.

    Party discipline is typically far more unwieldy in the United States compared to other countries. In Australia, for instance, crossing the floor to vote against your own party is very rare.

    Unruly party caucuses make it significantly more difficult for a single party figurehead to emerge unless they command near-universal party loyalty and respect among their members in both chambers.

    Will Democratic cracks shatter the party?

    The Democratic caucus, already strained by Joe Biden’s late withdrawal from the 2024 presidential race, is now even more fractured.

    The Democrats continue to grapple with their resounding defeat in November, which saw the party lose ground with almost every demographic across the country. Polling shows public support for the Democrats has slumped to unprecedented lows, with just over a quarter of voters holding a positive view of the party.

    Most dramatically, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer defied fellow Democrats (including Jeffries) by voting in favour of a resolution in recent weeks to avoid a government shutdown. His decision sparked an uproar from his party colleagues.

    Visual images of the party’s disarray were also on clear display during Trump’s joint address to Congress earlier this month. While some representatives protested loudly, others followed leadership instruction to remain silent.

    Democrats were in near lock-step on almost all issues during Trump’s first term, as well as Biden’s presidency. Now, some are calling on Schumer to step aside as minority leader — and for the Democrats to coalesce behind a younger, more outspoken leader such as Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

    Where next for the party?

    In the fractious debates now consuming the party, some see parallels with the emergence of the Tea Party movement within the Republican Party during Barack Obama’s first term in office.

    The current Democratic division could result in the emergence of a stronger dissident faction within the party. And this could push a harder line in opposition to Trump, no longer toeing the line from party leadership.

    Yet, while the political outlook for Democrats may appear bleak, electoral turnarounds can happen quickly in the United States.

    Few expected a demoralised Democratic party to turn John Kerry’s heavy defeat to George W Bush in 2004 into a generational victory just four years later. Similarly, after Obama decisively won reelection against Mitt Romney in 2012, few Republicans could have predicted they’d soon be back in power with Trump.

    But, as was the case 20 years ago, the soul-searching process will be painful for the Democrats. Whether it’s Ocasio-Cortez or another figure, the 2026 midterm elections are likely to be the best opportunity for a new central leader to emerge on the national stage.

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

    – ref. Why isn’t there an opposition leader to unite Democrats in the US? – https://theconversation.com/why-isnt-there-an-opposition-leader-to-unite-democrats-in-the-us-252384

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Mystery solved: our tests reveal the tiny algae killing fish and harming surfers on SA beaches

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Shauna Murray, Professor; Faculty of Science, University of Technology Sydney

    Anthony Rowland

    Confronting images of dead seadragons, fish and octopuses washed up on South Australian beaches – and disturbing reports of “more than 100” surfers and beachgoers suffering flu-like symptoms after swimming or merely breathing in sea spray – attracted international concern last week.

    Speculation about the likely cause ranged from pollution and algae to unusual bacterial infections or viruses. Today we can reveal the culprit was a tiny – but harmful – type of planktonic algae called Karenia mikimotoi.

    The SA government sent us water samples from Waitpinga Beach, Petrel Cove Beach, Encounter Bay Boat Ramp and Parsons Headland on Tuesday. We studied the water under the microscope and extracted DNA for genetic analysis.

    Our results revealed high numbers of the tiny harmful algal species – each just 20 microns in diameter (where one micron is one thousandth of a millimetre). While relatively common in Australian coastal waters, blooms of K. mikimotoi occur only sporadically. But similar harmful algal blooms and fish kills due to K. mikimotoi have happened in the past, such as the 2014 bloom in Coffin Bay, SA. And this latest one won’t be the last.

    Sick surfers and dead marine life from strange sea foam (ABC News)

    Harmful algal blooms

    Single-celled, microbial algae occur naturally in seawater all over the world.

    They are also called phytoplankton, because they float in the water column and photosynthesise like plants. “Phyto” comes from the Greek word for plant and “plankton” comes from the Greek word for wanderer, which relates to their floating movement with ocean currents and tides.

    Like plants on land, the microalgae or phytoplankton in the ocean capture sunlight and produce up to half the oxygen in our atmosphere. There are more than 100,000 different species of microalgae. Every litre of seawater will normally contain a mixed group of these different microalgae species.

    But under certain conditions, just a single species of microalgae can accumulate in one area and dominate over the others. If we are unlucky, the dominant species may be one that produces a toxin or has a harmful effect.

    This so-called “harmful algal bloom” can cause problems for people and for marine life such as fish, invertebrates such as crabs, and even marine mammals such as whales and seals.

    There are hundreds of different species of harmful algae. Each produces its own type of toxin with a particular toxic effect.

    Most of these toxic chemical compounds produced by harmful algae are quite well known, including neurotoxins that affect the brain. But others are more complicated, and the mechanisms of toxicity are poorly understood. This can make it more difficult to understand the factors leading to the deaths of fish and other marine life. Unfortunately, the toxins from K. mikimotoi fall into this latter category.

    Introducing Karenia mikimotoi

    Karenia mikimotoi under the microscope.
    Shauna Murray

    The species responsible for recent events in SA beaches, K. mikimotoi, causes harmful algal blooms in Asia, Europe, South Africa and South America, as well as Australia and New Zealand. These blooms all caused fish deaths, and some also caused breathing difficulties among local beachgoers.

    The most drastic of these K. mikimotoi blooms have occurred in China over the past two decades. In 2012, more than 300 square kilometres of abalone farms were affected, causing about A$525 million in lost production.

    Explaining the toxic effects

    Microalgae can damage the gills of fish and shellfish, preventing them from breathing. This is the main cause of death. But some studies have also found damage to the gastrointestinal tracts and livers of fish.

    Tests using fish gill cells clearly show the dramatic toxic effect of K. mikimotoi. When the fish gill cells were exposed to intact K. mikimotoi cells, after 3.5 hours more than 80% of the fish cells had died.

    Fortunately, the toxin does not persist in the environment after the K. mikimotoi cells are dead. So once the bloom is over, the marine environment can recover relatively quickly.

    Its toxicity is partly due to the algae’s production of “reactive oxygen species”, reactive forms of oxygen molecules which can cause the deaths of cells in high doses. K. mikimotoi cells may also produce lipid (fat) molecules that cause some toxic effects.

    Finally, a very dense bloom of microalgae can sometimes reduce the amount of dissolved oxygen in the water column, which means there is less oxygen for other marine life.

    The human health effects are not very well known but probably relate to the reactive oxygen species being an irritant.

    K. mikimitoi cells can also produce “mucilage”, a type of thick, gluey substance made of complex sugars, which can accumulate bacteria inside it. This can cause “sea foam”, which was evident on beaches last week.

    South Australia’s marine emblem, the leafy seadragon, washed up dead on the beach.
    Anthony Rowland

    Unanswered questions remain

    A question for many people is whether increasing water temperatures make blooms of K. mikimotoi more likely.

    Another concern is whether nutrient runoff from farms, cities and aquaculture could cause more harmful algal blooms.

    Unfortunately, for Australia at least, the answer to these questions is we don’t know yet. While we know some harmful algal blooms do increase when nutrient runoff is higher, others actually prefer fewer nutrients or colder temperatures.

    We do know warmer water species seem to be moving further south along the Australian coastline, changing phytoplankton species abundance and distribution.

    While some microalgal blooms can cause bioluminescence that is beautiful to watch, others such as K. mikimotoi can cause skin and respiratory irritations.

    If you notice discoloured water, fish deaths or excessive sea foam along the coast or in an estuary, avoid fishing or swimming in the area and notify local primary industry or environmental authorities in your state.

    Shauna Murray receives funding from the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation, the New South Wales Recreational Fisheries Trust, the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research, and the Storm and Flood Industry Recovery Program. She is President of the Austalasian Society of Phycology and Aquatic Botany and past chair of the NSW Shellfish Committee.

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

    – ref. Mystery solved: our tests reveal the tiny algae killing fish and harming surfers on SA beaches – https://theconversation.com/mystery-solved-our-tests-reveal-the-tiny-algae-killing-fish-and-harming-surfers-on-sa-beaches-252810

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Synchronised bleaching: Ningaloo and the Great Barrier Reef are bleaching in unison for the first time

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Zoe Richards, Senior Research Fellow in Marine Biology, Curtin University

    Ningaloo Reef from the air. Violeta Brosig/Shutterstock

    This summer, an intense marine heatwave struck off northwestern Australia, driving sea surface temperatures up to 4°C above the summer average. The large mass of warm water has slowly moved south from the Kimberley region and through the Pilbara, leaving a wave of underwater destruction behind. Now Ningaloo Reef is bleaching in earnest.

    The Great Barrier Reef is bleaching too in the waters from Cape York down to Townsville.

    This appears to be the first time these two World Heritage-listed reefs have bleached in unison. Bleaching may also hit the World Heritage reef at Shark Bay in Western Australia.

    How bad is it? I have just returned from Ningaloo Reef, where I saw widespread bleaching and the first signs of coral mortality. Up to 90% of the coral found in shallow areas of the northern lagoon had bleached. Bleaching doesn’t automatically mean death, but it severely weakens the coral and jeopardises survival.

    At Ningaloo and further south, the heatwave is still unfolding. In coming months, we can expect to see some coral mortality, while other corals will survive the bleaching in poor health only to succumb to disease or other threats such as Drupella (coral-eating snails). Other corals may survive but struggle to reproduce, but some particularly hardy corals with the right combination of genes for surviving this event are expected to live on.

    Why is this happening? No surprises here: our greenhouse gas emissions trap more heat in the atmosphere. Over 90% of the heat pours into the oceans, pushing surface and deep water temperatures higher for longer periods of time.

    How bad has the heat been?

    Coral can tolerate brief periods of higher temperatures. But in response to prolonged heat stress, coral polyps expel their symbiotic zooxanthellae algae. They appear to do this to avoid further tissue damage from toxic reactive oxygen molecules which build up as the coral begins to stress. But these microalgae supply sugary food to the coral polyps in exchange for a home. Without these nutrients, the coral can starve.

    Heat stress is tracked using a measure called “degree heating weeks” (DHW) – essentially, how much above-average heat has built up in an area over the previous three months. Bleaching can begin at four DWH, while eight DHW can kill some corals.

    At Ningaloo, the heat has been off the charts – levels of up to 16 DHW have been recorded, the highest on record for this location.

    On the Great Barrier Reef, bleaching is underway in the northernmost section. This is the sixth bleaching event on the Great Barrier Reef this decade. Early data suggests there is severe heat in places, ranging from six to 13 DHW in intensity and alerts remain for more heat and bleaching to come.

    Bleaching is usually worst for corals growing in shallow water, such as the calm lagoons created by fringing or barrier reefs. Lagoons often have clear waters with high light penetration and limited flushing of water.

    Ningaloo in hot water

    Over ten days, we recorded the health and type of every coral we saw at 21 sites along Ningaloo Reef, from Coral Bay to the northern tip of North West Cape and into Exmouth Gulf.

    The worst affected area that we observed was a 30 km stretch at the northern end of the North West Cape, the peninsula along which Ningaloo Reef runs. Here, we saw mass bleaching – up to 90% of corals partly or fully bleaching and some corals were already dying.

    Fast-growing corals from the Acroporid and Pocilloporid families were hard hit, as often seen in other bleaching events. But we also saw slower-growing and normally hardy corals bleaching, such Lobophyllia, Favites and Goniastrea.

    Even the massive Porites corals in the lagoons were suffering. These giant boulder-like corals are the old growth and sentinels of the reef. Many of these ordinarily resilient corals are hundreds of years old and have survived past smaller bleaching events. But this time, they too are severely suffering.

    Not even ocean-facing corals exposed to more water flow were safe. We found 30 to 50% of the corals on the reef slope were bleached to some degree. Coral diseases such as white band disease were already affecting many flat plate corals. These diseases often follow marine heatwaves, as they take advantage of coral’s weakened immune systems and the disruption of the symbiotic relationship between coral polyps and their algae.

    The timing is especially bad for Ningaloo’s corals, which usually spawn around five days after the March full moon, which fell on March 19 this year. By contrast, corals on the Great Barrier Reef tend to spawn between October and December.

    For the reef to recover quickly, it needs yearly influxes of new coral recruits. But if corals are struggling to survive, there is a risk they will not be fit enough to reproduce. Corals take three to six years to become reproductively viable and if bleaching impedes reproduction, it could greatly reduce the number of larvae available to replenish the reef. In addition to that, if immature corals bleach and die, there’s a risk several generations of corals could be lost before reaching maturity.

    Fortunately we did observe healthy and reproductive corals along the outer rim of the lagoon at Coral Bay, and locals have recently reported seeing spawning near Coral Bay. This suggests some coral were indeed healthy enough to spawn.

    What will happen next?

    As the southern hemisphere heads towards winter, the oceans will begin to cool off. That doesn’t mean the threat is over – oceans are only getting hotter.

    If we continue on our current path, simultaneous east and west coast bleaching events could become the new normal – and that would be devastating for our reefs, marine biodiversity, the blue economy and the wellbeing of Australians.

    Zoe Richards receives funding from the Minderoo Foundation. This work was undertaken by the Coral Conservation and Research Group at Curtin University in partnership with the Minderoo Exmouth Research Laboratory.

    – ref. Synchronised bleaching: Ningaloo and the Great Barrier Reef are bleaching in unison for the first time – https://theconversation.com/synchronised-bleaching-ningaloo-and-the-great-barrier-reef-are-bleaching-in-unison-for-the-first-time-252906

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Tennis pros rally for better pay and less punishing schedules, amid wider power struggles in world sport

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Eric Windholz, Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, Monash University

    Last week, the Novak Djokovic-led Professional Tennis Players Association (PTPA) announced it was suing the sport’s governing bodies – the men’s (ATP) and women’s (WTA) tours, the International Tennis Federation (ITF) and the International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA).

    The lawsuit:

    • seeks to change the prize money formula designed by the men’s and women’s tours (the PTPA says too little of the sport’s revenue goes to players)
    • aims to improve the “unsustainable” 11-month calendar and match schedules that often keep players on court well past midnight
    • alleges a “heavy-handed approach” by the ITIA
    • criticises the sport’s rankings system
    • wants to boost the number of combined men’s-women’s events.

    The union, cofounded by Djokovic five years ago, also alleges “anti-competitive practices and a blatant disregard for player welfare”.

    The lawsuit is just one example of a battle for control of international sport – the outcome of which will shape sport for years to come.

    The power of sport governing bodies

    Sport’s international governing bodies – such the International Olympic Committee, soccer’s governing body the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) and, in the case of tennis, the ATP, WTA and ITF – are masters of their domains.

    These bodies exercise great power and autonomy over the competitions they administer. They determine who competes in their competitions, when and where, as well as rules and policies.

    These rules cover tournament schedules, player eligibility and anti-doping policies. Players, teams and even countries that breach these rules are subject to penalties including expulsion from competitions.

    Governments have largely been willing partners in this. They have respected the autonomy of these governing bodies and assisted them where necessary by, for example, hosting their mega-events such as the Olympics, World Cups and Grand Slam tournaments.

    However, this is changing.

    A changing landscape

    As shown by the PTPA lawsuit, players are seeking a greater share of sports’ economic pie, better working conditions, more freedom in selecting where and when they play, and a greater say in how their sports are run.

    Private investors also are seeking to share in the money being made from sport by establishing rival competitions.

    These include the Wall Street-backed, but ultimately ill-fated, European Super League (soccer); the International Swimming League, funded by billionaire swimming fan Konstantin Grigorishin; and the Saudi-Arabia backed LIV Golf tour.

    In response, some fans and lower-level teams are organising to protect their clubs from the influx of private money.

    In the United Kingdom, this has resulted in proposed legislation to establish an independent regulator of football.

    And all of this is occurring in the shadow of a broader geopolitical restructuring in which the West’s traditional hegemony over sport is being challenged by the wealth of the Gulf states, the assertiveness of authoritarian regimes, and the emerging economies of the Global South.

    The result is a contest for control between actors and forces, both powerful and passionate.

    The outcome of this contest is important because sport is a generator of significant economic activity (a recent study estimated the global sport industry to be the ninth largest industry on earth) and an important vehicle for driving social change – both of which also make it politically important.

    What does the future hold?

    When confronted with forces for change, sport governing bodies generally go through a three-stage process of denial (rejecting the need for change), resistance (fighting the change), and adaptation (conceding some autonomy while retaining ultimate control).

    The tennis dispute is travelling this well-worn path. Tennis’s governing bodies have denied the PTPA a seat at the table, so the PTPA is now taking the matter to court (early indications are tennis’s governing bodies will fight it vigorously).

    Predicting the outcome of litigation is fraught. However, sport governing bodies do not have a strong record defending the use of their power before the courts.

    Courts are more independent and less deferential towards sport governing bodies than the political arms of government.

    Recent decisions from the Court of Justice of the European Union offer evidence of this. It applied EU competition law to constrain the power of sport governing bodies to:

    Another example comes from the United States, where the Supreme Court struck down as an antitrust (competition) law violation, rules that limited the benefits student-athletes can receive for playing.

    This litigation led the governing body of collegiate sport, the National Collegiate Athletic Association, to propose a US$2.8 billion (A$4.45 billion) settlement that will allow colleges to pay their student-athletes.

    As for tennis, settlement of the PTPA litigation is possible, notwithstanding the current rhetoric.

    Indeed, some form of adaptation of sports’ governing bodies to accommodate the various forces and interests at play is the most likely outcome.

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

    – ref. Tennis pros rally for better pay and less punishing schedules, amid wider power struggles in world sport – https://theconversation.com/tennis-pros-rally-for-better-pay-and-less-punishing-schedules-amid-wider-power-struggles-in-world-sport-252721

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Silicosis is ruining the lungs of construction workers. An AI-powered breath test can detect it in minutes

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By William Alexander Donald, Professor of Chemistry, UNSW Sydney

    Irene Miller/Shutterstock

    Silicosis is an incurable but entirely preventable lung disease. It has only one cause: breathing in too much silica dust. This is a risk in several industries, including tunnelling, stone masonry and construction.

    Just last week, ABC reported that 13 workers from tunnelling projects in Sydney have been diagnosed with silicosis. It’s yet another reminder that current diagnostic methods are limited. They often detect the disease only after the lungs already have significant damage.

    Our new study, published in the Journal of Breath Research, provides the latest results on a breath test for detecting silicosis powered by artificial intelligence (AI). It’s non-invasive and measures dozens of molecules to identify silicosis in just minutes.

    The test we’ve developed achieved over 90% accuracy in differentiating silicosis patients from healthy individuals. This is better than traditional lung function tests.

    While our test is yet to be trialled in real-world clinics, our results so far suggest breath testing could become a crucial tool in workplace health screening. Early detection would prevent suffering and disease progression, and reduce healthcare costs.

    Silicosis is a growing problem – but hard to detect

    Currently, more workers in New South Wales, elsewhere in Australia and internationally are being diagnosed with silicosis at younger ages. The Australian government has responded by banning engineered stone, but that doesn’t address ongoing risks in other industries.

    Patients with silicosis often describe a feeling like they are slowly being strangled, with every breath becoming more difficult over time. In advanced stages, silicosis can be fatal unless patients can access a lung transplant.

    The only way to stop the progression of silicosis is removing affected workers from further silica exposure. This is why diagnosing patients in the early stages – before irreversible lung damage occurs – is critical.

    However, this isn’t easy to achieve. Lung function testing and chest X-rays only identify the problem once irreversible lung damage has occurred. In some cases, patients also need CT scans and invasive biopsy to confirm diagnosis. But CT scans, although much higher resolution, also rely on visible signs of silicosis.

    And these methods are costly and take time, making it harder to easily screen the thousands of workers who could be at risk.

    This is where breath testing comes in.

    Research team members Merryn Baker (left) and Dr Laura Capasso supervise a study participant providing a breath test sample for analysis.
    Richard Freeman/UNSW

    How breath tests can detect disease

    Human breath contains hundreds of volatile organic compounds – small gas molecules that come from metabolic processes in the body, as well as the environment.

    The composition of these molecules changes in response to physiological conditions like disease. However, volatile organic compounds are often present in extremely low concentrations – we need highly sensitive technology to detect them reliably.

    Our team has developed tools that can detect volatile organic compounds at concentrations as low as parts per trillion. This is equivalent to detecting a single drop of liquid diluted in multiple Olympic-sized swimming pools.

    This level of sensitivity allows us to identify very small biochemical changes in breath. AI is key to this approach. Our machine learning model analyses breath samples to tell apart healthy individuals and those with silicosis.

    This builds on our previous work using AI to analyse blood plasma for early Parkinson’s disease detection with high accuracy and interpretability, which allows us to determine the chemical features that contribute the most to model accuracy. Interpretability refers to the ability to understand and explain how the AI model arrives at its predictions, providing insights into which data inputs are most important.

    Now, we have applied similar methods to breath analysis. Thanks to the sensitivity of our test, we could potentially detect silicosis at very early stages.

    Breath samples could be collected at scale at workplaces to monitor the health of at-risk workers.
    Richard Freeman/UNSW

    How well does it work?

    In our new study, the breath test was trialled on 31 silicosis patients and 60 healthy controls. The AI-powered model successfully distinguished silicosis cases with over 90% accuracy.

    The test takes less than five minutes per sample, making it feasible for large-scale health screening. Additionally, the test doesn’t require subjects to fast or undergo any special preparation beforehand.

    An important question in breath analysis is whether external factors, such as diet or smoking, influence test results. Our study included smokers and non-smokers in both silicosis and healthy control groups, and the test maintained high accuracy.

    Our results show great promise, but there are challenges to overcome. The test relies on highly sensitive instrumentation that, while compact (less than a cubic metre), still requires technical expertise to operate.

    The AI-powered breath test involves specialised tools to perform the analysis.
    Richard Freeman/UNSW

    Currently, breath samples are collected in clinics and transported to a lab for analysis. We hope future iterations could allow for testing in workplace settings, creating routine screening programs. Further validation in larger, diverse worker populations is also necessary before full implementation.

    The next phase of research will involve refining the AI model and expanding real-world testing to thousands of silica-exposed workers who might be at risk.

    While routine medical evaluations will still be necessary for at-risk workers, the addition of breath analysis could enable more continuous monitoring than what is currently practical. It could help detect silicosis earlier, before the symptoms become irreversible, reducing long-term health risks.

    Acknowledgements: Aruvi Thiruvarudchelvan and Jeff Gordon also contributed to this research.

    William Alexander Donald receives funding from the Australian Research Council, iCare Dust Diseases Board, Coal Services NSW Health & Safety Trust, US National Institutes of Health and several industry research contracts. He is an advisor to Preview Health and Mass Affinity. He is president of the Australian & New Zealand Society for Mass Spectrometry.

    Deborah Yates is an occupational respiratory physician and a director of Thomas-Yates Pty Ltd, a medical services company, and an expert advisor to the Asbestos & Dust Diseases Research Institute, Concord, NSW. She is an independent director of the board of the Royal Australasian College of Physicians, a global advisor to the Royal College of Physicians of London, independent member of the NSW Mine Safety Advisory Council and Councillor to the Australian Society of Salaried Medical Officers (ASMOF) of NSW, the doctors’ union. She acts also as an advisor to Tuberous Sclerosis Australia and LAM Australasia. She receives no funding for any of these roles. She has recently received funding for investigator-initiated grants from Boehringer Ingelheim and iCare NSW as well as the Coal Services Trust, and has previously participated in several industry initiated research studies into asthma and chronic cough. She is a member of the iCare Medical Advisory Panel. She has in the past acted in an advisory capacity and given paid lectures for Glaxo Smith Klein, Astra Zeneca and Boehringer Ingelheim. She has no shares in mining companies or pharmaceutical companies and is not a member of any political parties.

    Merryn Baker’s PhD research was funded by UNSW through the Scientia Scheme.

    – ref. Silicosis is ruining the lungs of construction workers. An AI-powered breath test can detect it in minutes – https://theconversation.com/silicosis-is-ruining-the-lungs-of-construction-workers-an-ai-powered-breath-test-can-detect-it-in-minutes-252640

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: What is hyaluronic acid – and is it OK for kids and teens to use this common skincare ingredient?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Zoe Porter, Lecturer, Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Science, Monash University

    Sabinayro/Shutterstock

    Earlier this month, Kmart pulled a “hyaluronic acid cleansing balm” from its shelves, after a teen who used the skincare product was hospitalised, reporting eye pain and blurred vision. It’s unclear what ingredient caused this reaction.

    In a statement, Kmart said it was removing the product while conducting an investigation. The retailer also said:

    We want to assure our customers that our cosmetics are designed to ensure that they comply with both Australian and European requirements on ingredients.

    Hyaluronic acid – despite the name – is a gentle ingredient commonly used in skincare products.

    But what does hyaluronic acid do to your skin as a skincare ingredient? And is it safe for tweens and teens?

    What is hyaluronic acid?

    Hyaluronic acid is a glycosaminoglycan – a sugar-based molecule found naturally in the skin, eyes, joint fluid and connective tissue.

    It plays a key role in hydrating the skin and tissues, lubricating our joints and supporting tissue repair.

    Beyond cosmetics, hyaluronic acid is used in drug delivery, regenerative medicine, wound repair, and to treat conditions such as atherosclerosis (where the arterial walls harden and narrow) and osteoarthritis (a degenerative joint disease).

    It is also a key ingredient in many eye drops and contact lens care solutions.

    How is it used in skincare?

    While the word “acid” might suggest it is harsh and potentially damaging to the skin, hyaluronic acid is not used in its acidic form in skincare products. It is usually used in its salt form, sodium hyaluronate.

    In skincare, active acids such as salicylic acid usually lower the skin’s pH and exfoliate it by breaking the bonds between dead skin cells.

    Hyaluronic acid, in contrast, is used to hydrate the skin. It is a humectant, an ingredient that attracts and retains water molecules.

    Hyaluronic acid has three qualities that make it suitable for skincare: it’s soluble (can be dissolved in water), biocompatible (meaning it’s not harmful to the body), and biodegradable (naturally breaks down into non-toxic, simpler substances).

    It is usually safe and well-tolerated, meaning it has very few side effects.

    In skincare products, hyaluronic is used in different forms. Smaller hyaluronic molecules can penetrate deeper into the skin and hydrate the lower levels. In products this is often advertised as “anti-ageing”, because it stimulates the production of collagen (a structural protein in the skin), and helps to improve elasticity and reduce the appearance of fine lines.

    Larger hyaluronic acid molecules remain on the skin’s surface and have an immediate hydrating effect, preventing water evaporation from the skin.

    Hyaluronic acid helps the skin attract and retain water molecules for hydration.
    Art_Photo/Shutterstock

    Any risks?

    Hyaluronic acid is generally a safe ingredient, even for sensitive skin. But products advertised as “hyaluronic acid skincare” may contain other ingredients which can cause irritation.

    In particular, fragrances, preservatives and surfactants (ingredients that produce foam and help wash away oil and dirt) may be safe for skin but burn or otherwise irritate the eyes.

    This is because the cornea and conjuctiva (the thin membrane covering the eye) are much more sensitive than the skin.

    How are skincare ingredients regulated?

    Unlike medicines and products used for therapeutic reasons, which are regulated by the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), general cosmetic products do not require pre-market safety testing or approval.

    Instead, companies need to register their business with the Australian Industrial Chemicals Introduction Scheme and verify that their ingredients are not banned or restricted in Australia.

    This creates a potential gap where defective products remain on the market, only to be recalled after adverse reactions occur.

    Are these products appropriate for children?

    Most scientific research on active ingredients – including hyaluronic acid – has been evaluated in older populations. This leaves a gap in understanding how they affect teen and preteen skin.

    Many products are designed for ageing and/or specific skin types, and are largely unnecessary for children and younger people.

    In some cases, they can potentially be harmful to their skin. For example, unless prescribed by a dermatologist, it’s advisable for young people to avoid retinoid products (containing retinol or retinal) as they can cause redness, peeling and drying.

    Similarly, products with alpha hydroxy acids can cause irritation, itching, redness and may worsen acne in young skin.

    So, what should younger people look for?

    Preteens and teens should avoid products containing active ingredients such as retinol, vitamin C, alpha- and beta- hydroxy acids, and peptides, as well as those labelled with terms such as anti-ageing, wrinkle-reducing, brightening, or firming.

    To keep skin clean and protected, teenagers can use a good cleanser, a simple moisturiser and a broad spectrum SPF 30 or 50 sunscreen.

    It’s best to opt for gentle, fragrance-free cleansers and moisturisers suitable for all skin types. Consulting with a pharmacist can provide personalised recommendations based on individual skin needs.

    Laurence Orlando is a council member with the Australian Society of Cosmetic Chemists.

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

    – ref. What is hyaluronic acid – and is it OK for kids and teens to use this common skincare ingredient? – https://theconversation.com/what-is-hyaluronic-acid-and-is-it-ok-for-kids-and-teens-to-use-this-common-skincare-ingredient-252296

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Giving rivers room to move: how rethinking flood management can benefit people and nature

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christina McCabe, PhD Candidate in Interdisciplinary Ecology, University of Canterbury

    Shutterstock/S Watson

    When we think about flood management, higher stop banks, stronger levees and concrete barriers usually come to mind. But what if the best solution – for people and nature – isn’t to confine rivers, but to give them more space?

    This alternative is increasingly being considered as an approach to mitigating flood risk. But allowing rivers room to move also delivers ecological benefits far beyond flood risk reduction. It supports biodiversity, improves water quality and stores carbon.

    As climate change increases the frequency and intensity of extreme floods, rethinking our approach to managing floodplain rivers has never been more urgent.

    Climate change, floods and river confinement

    Climate change is amplifying flood risks worldwide, and Aotearoa New Zealand is no exception. Large floods are expected to become much more frequent and severe, threatening communities, infrastructure and ecosystems.

    Many of these risks are made worse by past management decisions that have artificially confined rivers within narrow channels, cutting them off from their natural floodplains.

    Floodplain river systems have historically been dynamic, shifting across landscapes over time. But extensive stop banks, modification of river channels and land development have restricted this natural variability.

    Strangling rivers in this way transfers and heightens flood risks downstream by forcing water through confined channels at greater speeds. It also degrades ecosystems that rely on the natural ebb and flow of river processes.

    The Waiau River, a gravel-bed braided river in the South Island, has been constrained by land development, primarily for agriculture.
    Background satellite image: Google (c) 2025 Airbus, CC BY-SA

    Giving rivers space to roam

    The idea of allowing rivers to reclaim space on their floodplains is not new.

    In the Netherlands, the Room for the River programme was a response to flooding in 1995 that led to large-scale evacuations of people and cattle. In England, predictions that economic risks associated with flooding will increase 20-fold within this century ignited the Making Space for Water strategy.

    However, these initiatives typically remain focused on flood protection, overlooking opportunities to maximise ecological benefits. Our new research shows that well-designed approaches can deliver ecological gains alongside flood protection.

    This is crucial because floodplain river systems are among the most valuable ecosystems. They provide about a quarter of all land-based ecosystem services such as water retention and pollutant filtration, as well as educational, recreational and cultural benefits.

    Managing rivers for variability

    A fundamental shift in river management involves acknowledging and accommodating natural variability. Floodplain rivers are not static: they change across landscapes and through time, responding to seasonal flows, sediment movement and ecological processes.

    Braided rivers are an example of floodplain rivers that have natural variability and diverse habitat types.
    Angus McIntosh, CC BY-SA

    Our research synthesises the ecological processes that are enabled when floodplain rivers have room to move.

    Rivers that are not unnaturally confined are typically more physically complex. For instance, along with the main river channel, they might have smaller side channels, or areas where the water pools and slows, springs popping up from below ground to re-join the surface waters, or ponds on the floodplain.

    A diverse range of habitats supports a rich variety of plant and animal life. Even exposed gravel, made available in rivers that flow freely, provides critical nesting sites for endangered birds.

    Biodiversity is not one-dimensional. Instead, it exists and operates at multiple scales, from a small floodplain pond to a whole river catchment or wider. In a dynamic, ever-changing riverscape, we might find the genetic composition of a species varying in different parts of the river, or the same species of fish varying in their body size, depending on the habitat conditions.

    These examples of natural biological variability enable species and ecosystems to be resilient in the face of uncertain future conditions.

    Rivers that have room to move on their floodplains are highly dynamic. This diagram shows the main types of ecological variability in a free-flowing river: physical variability, habitat heterogeneity and variable ecosystem processes.
    Adapted from McCabe et al. 2025 Nature Water, CC BY-SA

    At a larger scale, the type and number of species that live in different floodplain river habitats also varies. This diversity of biological communities produces variation in the functions ecosystems perform across the river, such as the uptake of nutrients or processing of organic matter. This can even help to diversify food webs.

    These variations mean not all species or groups of species in the river will be vulnerable to the same disturbances – such as droughts or floods – at the same time. This is because plants and animals in rivers have evolved to take advantage of long-term rhythms of floods and droughts in different ways.

    For instance, the cottonwood poplars of the southwest United States time their seed release with the highly predictable rhythms of snowmelt-driven spring floods in that part of the world. In Aotearoa New Zealand, whitebait fish species typically deposit their eggs during high autumn flows, which then get transported to sea as larvae during high winter flows.

    Some animals need multiple habitats within the river for different stages of life. Other creatures travel from afar to use river floodplains for only a short time. The latter includes the banded dotterel (Charadrius bicinctus), endemic to Aotearoa New Zealand. This bird travels as far as 1,700km to nest on braided-river gravels each spring. Banded dotterels are in decline, and they rely on habitats provided by rivers that have space to roam.

    The endangered black-fronted tern (Chlidonias albostriatus) uses gravel bar habitats on river floodplains for nesting.
    Angus McIntosh, CC BY-SA

    A call for more sustainable river management

    As climate change accelerates, we must rethink how we manage our waterways. Reinforcing levees and deepening channels may seem like logical responses to increased flood risk, but these approaches often exacerbate long-term vulnerabilities and transfer risk elsewhere.

    We call for practitioners to broaden the scope of values included in river management policy and programmes to include ecological variability.

    Nature-based solutions are approaches that seek to benefit both people and nature. By working with nature rather than against it, we can create landscapes that are more resilient, adaptive, and supportive of both people and biodiversity.

    It’s time to embrace a new paradigm for river management – one that sees rivers not as threats to be controlled, but as lifelines to be protected and restored.

    Christina McCabe receives funding through an Aho Hīnātore doctoral research scholarship at the University of Canterbury.

    Jonathan Tonkin receives funding from a Rutherford Discovery Fellowship and the Centre of Research Excellence Te Pūnaha Matatini. He also receives funding from the Antarctic Science Platform and the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment.

    – ref. Giving rivers room to move: how rethinking flood management can benefit people and nature – https://theconversation.com/giving-rivers-room-to-move-how-rethinking-flood-management-can-benefit-people-and-nature-251225

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Labor gains big lead in a Morgan poll, but drops back in YouGov

    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

    A national Morgan poll, conducted March 10–16 from a sample of 2,097, gave Labor a 54.5–45.5 lead by headline respondent preferences, a three-point gain for Labor since the March 3–9 Morgan poll. This is Labor’s largest lead in a Morgan poll since August 2023.

    Primary votes were 34% Coalition (down three), 32.5% Labor (up 2.5), 13.5% Greens (steady), 5% One Nation (steady), 10.5% independents (steady) and 4.5% others (up 0.5). By 2022 election flows, Labor led by 54.5–45.5, a 2.5-point gain for Labor.

    By 50.5–35, respondents thought the country was going in the wrong direction (51.5–33 previously). However, Morgan’s consumer confidence index slid 3.1 points to 83.8, its lowest this year.

    Voters were blaming Donald Trump for the stock market falls, and this was hurting the Coalition. The stock market had a better week last week, but Trump is likely to impose more tariffs on April 2.

    Morgan is a volatile poll that reacts more to news events than other polls. This poll was taken in the week Trump imposed his steel and aluminium tariffs on Australia. It’s likely that this poll is a pro-Labor outlier, with other polls not giving Labor big leads. Here is the poll graph.

    The ABC’s Patricia Karvelas wrote on March 17 that a Talbot Mills poll, conducted March 6–12 from a sample of 1,051, asked about Trump’s ratings with Australians for his performance as US president.

    Trump was down six points since February to net -14 approval (51% disapprove, 37% approve). There was a six-point increase in strongly disapprove to 40%, with strongly approve down one to 15%. By 65–22, respondents disapproved of the US imposing tariffs on Australia.

    Coalition gains in YouGov poll for a 50–50 tie

    A national YouGov poll, conducted March 14–19 from a sample of 1,500, had a 50–50 tie, a one-point gain for the Coalition since the March 7–13 YouGov poll.

    Primary votes were 37% Coalition (up one), 31% Labor (steady), 13% Greens (down 0.5), 7% One Nation (down 0.5), 1% Trumpet of Patriots (steady), 8% independents (down one) and 3% others (up one). YouGov is using weaker preference flows for Labor than occurred in 2022, and this poll would give Labor about a 51.5–48.5 lead by 2022 flows.

    Albanese’s net approval was down three points to -9, with 50% dissatisfied and 41% satisfied. Dutton’s net approval was up one point to -5. Albanese led Dutton as better PM by 45–40 (45–39 previously).

    Essential poll tied at 47–47 but Albanese’s ratings jump

    A national Essential poll, conducted March 12–16 from a larger than normal sample of 2,256, had a 47–47 tie including undecided by respondent preferences (48–47 to the Coalition in early March).

    Primary votes were 35% Coalition (steady), 29% Labor (steady), 12% Greens (down one), 8% One Nation (steady), 1% Trumpet of Patriots (steady compared with UAP), 9% for all Others (down one) and 6% undecided (up one). By 2022 preference flows, this poll would give Labor about a 50.5–49.5 lead, a 0.5-point gain for the Coalition.

    Albanese’s net approval jumped nine points to +1, with 46% approving and 45% disapproving. This is Albanese’s first positive net approval in Essential since October 2023. Dutton’s net approval dropped two points to -5, his worst since January 2024.

    By 48–35, respondents thought Australia was on the wrong track (49–34 previously).

    On climate change, 54% (down five since October 2021) said “climate change is happening and is caused by human activity”, while 35% (up five) thought “we are just witnessing a normal fluctuation in the earth’s climate”. This is the lowest lead for human activity in Essential’s graph which goes back to 2016.

    On addressing climate change, 35% (up two since November) thought Australia is not doing enough, 34% (down three) doing enough and 19% (steady) doing too much.

    By 39–30, voters opposed the Coalition’s policy of removing working from home provisions for public service workers. By 39–33, voters opposed Australia sending troops to Ukraine.

    By 53–33, voters thought Trump’s presidency would have a negative impact on the US economy, by 62–24 negative for the global economy and by 61–20 negative for the Australian economy.

    Labor gains lead in a Redbridge poll

    A national Redbridge poll, conducted March 3–11 from a sample of 2,007, gave Labor a 51–49 lead, a 2.5-point gain for Labor since the previous Redbridge poll in early February. Primary votes were 37% Coalition (down three), 32% Labor (up one), 12% Greens (up one) and 19% for all Others (up one).

    By 51–29, respondents thought things were headed in the wrong direction (49–32 in November 2024).

    There has been more criticism of AUKUS from the left since Trump’s election, but by 51–19 respondents said AUKUS makes Australia safer (49–19 in July 2024). There was pro-AUKUS movement on other questions.

    Polls in Greens target seats

    The Poll Bludger reported last Tuesday on polls of seats either held by the Greens or plausible targets for them. These polls were taken by Insightfully for the right-wing Advance, and first reported by the News Corp tabloids. Sample sizes were 600 per seat with no fieldwork dates provided. Seat polls are unreliable.

    The Greens hold three Queensland federal seats (Griffith, Ryan and Brisbane), and one Victorian seat (Melbourne). On the primary votes provided, the Greens would retain Griffith, Ryan would be line-ball between the Greens and Liberal National Party. Brisbane would be gained by Labor.

    In Victoria, the Greens would hold Melbourne and gain Macnamara from Labor, while Labor would retain Wills against a Greens challenge.

    Unemployment steady despite jobs fall

    The Australian Bureau of Statistics reported last Thursday that the unemployment rate was 4.1% in February, unchanged from January. This was despite a 52,800 decrease in jobs that didn’t affect unemployment owing to a lower participation rate.

    The employment population ratio (the percentage of eligible Australians that are employed) was down 0.3% since a record high in January to 64.1%.

    WA election final lower house seats

    At the March 8 Western Australian election, Labor won 46 of the 59 lower house seats (down seven from the record landslide in 2021), the Liberals seven (up five) and the Nationals six (up two). Comparing this election with 2017, which was a big win for Labor, Labor is up five seats, the Liberals down six and the Nationals up one.

    In 2017, Labor won 69.5% of lower house seats, in 2021 90% and in 2025 78%. If the WA lower house had as many seats as the federal House of Representatives (150), Labor would have won over 100 seats in all three elections.

    In the upper house, 75.7% of enrolled voters has been counted, compared with 82.7% in the lower house. On current figures, Labor is likely to win 16 of the 37 seats, the Liberals ten, the Greens four, the Nationals two, and One Nation, Legalise Cannabis and Australian Christians one each.

    Two seats are unclear, with an independent group (0.47 quotas) and Animal Justice (0.45) just ahead of One Nation’s second candidate (0.40). As the count has progressed, the Liberals have dropped and the Greens have risen. ABC election analyst Antony Green said the inclusion of below the line votes could put Labor’s 16th seat in doubt, with the Greens possibly winning five seats.

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

    – ref. Labor gains big lead in a Morgan poll, but drops back in YouGov – https://theconversation.com/labor-gains-big-lead-in-a-morgan-poll-but-drops-back-in-yougov-252380

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: I was a music AI sceptic – until I actually used it

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alexis Weaver, Associate Lecturer in Music Technology, University of Sydney

    Shutterstock

    With artificial intelligence programs that can now generate entire songs on demand, you’d be forgiven for thinking AI might eventually lead to the decline of human-made music.

    But AI can still be used ethically to help human musicians challenge themselves and grow their music-making abilities. I should know. As a composer and music educator, I was an AI sceptic until I started working with the technology.

    Two sides of the argument

    If you can write a text prompt, you can use AI to create a track in any genre, for almost any musical application.

    Besides generating full tracks, music AI can be used in sound analysis, noise removal, mixing and mastering, and to create entire sound palettes (such as for use in video games and podcasts). Suno, Beatoven, AIVA, Soundraw and Udio are some of the companies currently leading in the AI music space.

    In many cases, the outputs don’t have to be excellent, they just have to be good enough, and they can undercut the services of real musicians and sound designers.

    The music industry is understandably concerned. In April 2024, the US-based Artist Rights Alliance published an open letter, signed by more than 200 artists, calling for developers to stop training their AIs with copyrighted work (as this would allow companies to emulate artists’ music and image, and therefore deplete the royalties paid to artists).

    At the same time, music AI companies claim to lower the barrier to making music, such as by removing the need for physical equipment and traditional music education.

    In an interview from January, Suno’s chief executive Mikey Shulman said:

    it’s not really enjoyable to make music now. It takes a lot of time. It takes a lot of practice […] the majority of people don’t enjoy the majority of the time they spend making music.

    This is far from the message I want to send my students. However, it does unfortunately reflect the increasing pressure musicians feel to master their craft as soon as possible, in an increasingly fast-paced world that’s geared towards an intangible end goal, rather than enjoying the process of making mistakes and learning.

    From a sceptic to a reluctant advocate

    In 2023, I was commissioned by the Sydney Opera House create a new work with Sydney-based design company Kopi Su, and to develop a new generative music AI tool in the process. This tool, called Koup Music, is now in beta testing.

    I accepted the opportunity – but with quite a few hesitations, as I wasn’t really interested in working with AI. Would this be a huge waste of time, or end with my data added to some mysterious AI data pool? Or would it open up new creative directions for me?

    The tool was based on a text-to-image diffusion model called Riffusion. It takes a text prompt and generates a spectrogram, which is a visual representation of the various frequencies in an audio signal as they change through time. This is then converted to audio.

    First, I would upload my own recorded sample to the AI, and then choose a text prompt to transform it into a new five-second sample.

    For example, I could upload a short vocal melody and ask the AI to turn it into an insect, or re-contextualise it for a “hip hop” style. Sometimes the generated samples sounded very similar to my own voice (due to the vocals I uploaded).

    The following insect voice output became the subject of the musical piece below it.

    Somewhere between a voice and an insect.
    ·

    At the time of the project, the outputs could only be 5 or 10 seconds long – not long enough to make a full track. I considered this a positive, as it meant I had to incorporate the samples into my own larger work.

    Some samples were catchy. Some were funny. Others were boring. Some came out with scratchy, harsh timbres. The imperfection of it all gave me permission to have fun.

    I focused on generating separate musical elements with my text prompts, rather than fully arranged samples. A generated drum beat or melody line could be enough to inspire a completely new musical track in a style I would never have attempted otherwise.

    This output was used in the track How Things Grow.
    ·

    Sometimes, one generated sample was enough. Other times, I challenged myself to use only AI-generated sounds to create a full track. In these cases, I used techniques such as filtering and looping small snippets to tease out the sounds I wanted.

    For instance, I used the following audio samples to create the track below:

    These snippets were used in the track Boom Boom Boom.
    ·

    The process felt like a collaboration – like I was making music with a kooky colleague. This took away the pressure to make “perfect” music, and instead allowed me to focus on new creative possibilities.

    My takeaways

    I’ve concluded it’s not a bad idea to know what large music AIs are capable of. We can use them to further our own musical understanding, such as by studying how they use stylistic trends and mixing techniques, or how they translate musical ideas to suggest different genres.

    For me, the key to quashing my AI scepticism was using an AI that didn’t take over the entire working process. I remained flexible to its suggestions, while using my own knowledge to retain creative control.

    My experience isn’t isolated. Multiple studies have found that users of music AIs reported feeling satisfied with programs that allowed them to retain a sense of ownership over the composing process.

    The connecting factor across these projects was that the AI did not generate entire musical works in one go. Instead, a limited amount of musical information was generated (such as rhythms, melodies or chords), allowing the user to dictate the final result.

    The beauty in human imperfection

    Despite Shulman’s claims, the key to a meaningful relationship with music AI is to work alongside it – not to let it do all the work.

    Do I think every music student should start incorporating AI into their daily practice? No. But under the right circumstances, it can provide the tools to produce something truly creative.

    Making “imperfect” art that takes time – and hard work – is the price of being human. And I’m grateful for that.

    ·

    The author received a once-off financial commission from the Sydney Opera House to develop musical work made using the Koup Music AI, which premiered at the Sydney Opera House through a livestream broadcast on July 15th, 2023. After this initial performance the author continued to test the AI model for artistic research purposes. No funding was received to help prepare the manuscripts or research associated with this article. The author will not benefit financially from any promotion of the Koup Music tool, and has never received payment from Kopi Su.

    – ref. I was a music AI sceptic – until I actually used it – https://theconversation.com/i-was-a-music-ai-sceptic-until-i-actually-used-it-252499

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: This week’s federal budget will focus on cost-of-living measures – and a more uncertain global economy

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Hawkins, Senior Lecturer, Canberra School of Politics, Economics and Society, University of Canberra

    Treasurer Jim Chalmers will bring down the federal budget on Tuesday.

    It’s likely most of the major spending initiatives have already been announced. An extra A$8.5 billion in spending on Medicare will aim to ensure nine out of ten GP visits will be bulk billed by 2030. Queensland’s Bruce Highway is to be upgraded with the Albanese Government providing $7.2 billion of the $9 billion cost.

    In a speech last week, Chalmers promised “meaningful and substantial” cost-of-living relief.

    He also stressed the global economy is more volatile and unpredictable. He said the budget bottom line would be little changed from the mid-year update released in December, when the deficit was forecast to be $26.9 billion this financial year.

    It was a comprehensive dress rehearsal for tomorrow evening’s budget speech.

    No rabbits out of the hat

    Australian budgets today are well signposted in advance in speeches such as this. That is deliberate. It is seen as a mark of responsible fiscal management to have few surprises, either positive or negative.

    In past decades, treasurers were prone to announcing surprise spending measures. No longer. The rationale for rejecting the “rabbit out of a hat” approach was spelled out by former treasurer Wayne Swan in his 2008 budget lockup press conference: he said the budget had to be “responsible”. Chalmers was Swan’s deputy chief of staff at the time.

    This means calls by economists such as Chris Richardson and Ken Henry for major tax reform are unlikely to be heeded.

    Bracket creep (increases in tax revenues as taxpayers move into higher tax brackets) will do most of the work in the very gradual windback of the budget deficit. In the mid-year budget update, it was projected to take a decade to return the budget to balance.



    Read more:
    If Treasury forecasts are right, it could be a decade before Australia is ‘back in black’

    Good luck rather than good management

    Not that a balanced or surplus budget is a sign of good budgeting. The driver of recent budget surpluses under both Labor and Coalition governments has not been government policy but stronger than expected commodity prices and exports. They have been accidental, not deliberate.

    While deficits add to debt, imposing costs on future generations, what matters is whether the debts can be paid. If the economy grows faster than the rate of debt, the situation is manageable. So we are likely to see a chart in Tuesday’s budget papers showing this, with debt gradually declining as a share of Gross Domestic Product over time.

    However, these forecasts for the bottom line do not include off-budget items such as special green energy funds or student debt write-offs that total close to $100 billion, according to Deloitte Access Economics.

    This is because the budget covers only the “general government sector” – public service departments and agencies and the defence force. It is not the whole of the public sector, which includes commercial or financial entities like government business enterprises, the Reserve Bank of Australia, and various funds.

    On Sunday, the government announced further cost-of-living relief with an extension of electricity rebates, giving households another $150 this year. This will avoid headline inflation rebounding above 3%, as the Reserve Bank is currently forecasting.

    The energy rebate last year cost the budget an estimated $3.5 billion in 2024-25. Extending it for six months will cost $1.8 billion. Chalmers has also promised another reduction in the maximum cost of prescription medicines to $25.

    In December’s budget update, the unemployment rate was forecast to be around 4½% in mid-2025 and stay around that level for the next couple of years. Given the unemployment rate was steady at 4.1% in February, that forecast may be lowered.

    Inflation was forecast to stay below 3%.

    The increasing risk of a global trade war will see some reduction in forecasts for global and Australian economic growth. The OECD has lowered its forecasts for global growth and emphasised the international outlook is highly uncertain.

    This means the Australian budget forecasts are more likely than usual to be wrong. We just don’t know in which direction they will be wrong – will they be too optimistic or pessimistic?

    What will it mean for interest rates?

    The Reserve Bank board is unlikely to feel it has enough additional information to cut interest rates again at the April 1 meeting.

    Nonetheless, the government will be constrained in how much support it can provide households. It does not want undermine its narrative of future interest rate cuts by stimulating household spending too much.

    Something to watch for will be “decisions taken but not yet announced”. These are additional initiatives the government will announce during the election campaign. They will be able to answer the “where’s the money coming from?” question by saying they are already included in the budget.

    Finally, will there be increases in defence spending? US President Donald Trump is pressing US allies to do this. Trouble is, defence spending does not address the political problem of cost-of-living pressures – if anything it adds to them.

    A potential way out is for government to support more defence spending, but only “in principle”, leaving the details for future budgets. That would help manage both domestic and international pressures.

    John Hawkins was a formerly a senior economist at the Treasury and Reserve Bank.

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

    – ref. This week’s federal budget will focus on cost-of-living measures – and a more uncertain global economy – https://theconversation.com/this-weeks-federal-budget-will-focus-on-cost-of-living-measures-and-a-more-uncertain-global-economy-252515

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Trouble at Tesla and protests against Trump’s tariffs suggest consumer boycotts are starting to bite

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Erin O’Brien, Associate Professor, School of Government and International Relations, Griffith University

    Getty Images

    When the United States starts a trade war with your country, how do you fight back? For individuals, one option is to wage a personal trade war and boycott products from the US.

    President Donald Trump has said no nation will be exempt from his tariffs, and this includes both Australia and New Zealand. His tariffs on all steel and aluminium imports, in particular, could hurt the sector in Australia, while New Zealand’s meat and wine exports to the US could also feel the effect.

    So far, political leaders have responded differently. Canada, Mexico and the European Union have imposed reciprocal tariffs on the US, while Australia has indicated it will not retaliate.

    But whether governments choose to push back or not, citizens in those and other countries are making their own stands. This includes artists such as renowned pianist András Schiff, who has cancelled his upcoming US tour.

    Most notably, collective outrage at the US president has led to a growing global boycott of Elon Musk’s Tesla due to his role in the Trump administration. Sales of new Tesla vehicles are down 72% in Australia and 76% in Germany. The share price has dropped by more than 50% since December 2024, with calls for Musk to step down as chief executive.

    Some governments are even encouraging consumer boycotts. The Canadian government, for example, has urged citizens to “fight back against the unjustified US tariffs” by purchasing Canadian products and holidaying in Canada.

    Canadians are clearly embracing this advice. Road trips to the US have dropped by more than 20% in the past month and US liquor brands have been removed from some Canadian stores altogether.

    This rise in calls for boycotts of American brands and companies is unsurprising in the Trump 2.0 era, where the lines between government and corporate America have become increasingly blurred.

    Political change by proxy

    When people want to protest a government policy, but have no political leverage because they’re not citizens of that country, boycotting corporations or brands gives them a voice. These actions are sometimes called “surrogate” or “proxy” boycotts.

    This form of “political consumerism”, where individuals align their consumption choices with their values, is now one of the most common forms of political participation in western liberal democracies.

    When France opposed the war in Iraq in 2003, US supporters of the war aimed boycotts at French imports. Consumers in the US, United Kingdom and elsewhere have boycotted Russian goods over the invasion of Ukraine, and targeted Israel over its military action and policies in Gaza and the West Bank.

    Most famously, protests against the apartheid regime in South Africa from the 1950s through to the 1990s helped isolate and eventually change its government.

    The current boycotts are not just protesting Trump’s trade war, of course. They are also about the role of unelected leaders from the corporate world, such as Musk and the heads of the Big Tech and social media companies, and their perceived self-interest and influence.

    Trump has responded angrily to consumer boycotts, calling the actions against Tesla “illegal”, which they are not. Indeed, political leaders like Trump often argue that consumer action, rather than government regulation, should be relied on to ensure corporations conform to social expectations.

    Ukrainians demonstrate in front of the Lukoil headquarters in Belgium over European imports of Russian fossil fuels, 2022.
    Getty Images

    How to wage a personal trade war

    Consumer boycotts do create change under certain conditions – typically when there is a contained problem that the targeted corporation has the power to solve.

    For example, consumer boycotts against Nestlé in the 1970s over false and dangerous marketing of powdered milk for infants led to changes in the firm’s marketing approaches. Boycotts of Nike products over sweatshop conditions for workers had a direct impact on the company’s bottom line and led to improvements.

    Things may still need to improve at Nestlé and Nike, but these boycotts show consumer pressure can catalyse corporate action. However, it is much harder – though not impossible – for boycott campaigns to succeed when the target is a government.

    Consumers boycotting American products can amplify the impact of their protest by also lobbying retailers. For example, if enough consumers stop buying a bottle of soft drink from the US, major supermarkets like Woolworths and Foodstuffs will stop buying thousands of bottles.

    There are also other ways to “vote with your wallet”. People can engage in “political investorism” by using their power as a shareholder, bank customer or pension-fund member to express their political views.

    After Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, for example, investors sought to divest from Russian companies, and superannuation funds were pressured by their members to do the same.

    As consumers and investors, individuals can wage a personal trade war, sending a clear message. Trump may not be willing to listen to the leaders of allied nations, but if consumer and investor pressure is sustained and spreads globally, he may yet hear the voice of corporate America.

    Erin O’Brien receives funding from the Australian Research Council to examine consumer and investor activism for social change. She is affiliated with the Australian Political Studies Association.

    Justine Coneybeer receives funding from the Australian Research Council to investigate ethical investment.

    – ref. Trouble at Tesla and protests against Trump’s tariffs suggest consumer boycotts are starting to bite – https://theconversation.com/trouble-at-tesla-and-protests-against-trumps-tariffs-suggest-consumer-boycotts-are-starting-to-bite-252489

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Adelaide Hills water crisis: a local problem is a global wake-up call

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kate Holland, Principal Research Scientist, Water Security, CSIRO

    A dry farm dam in Montacute, Adelaide Hills, March 2025. Ilan Sagi.

    The Adelaide Hills are experiencing severe water shortages. The root cause? A prolonged dry period and not enough water tankers to meet unprecedented demand from people not connected to the mains water supply.

    Thousands of residents and farmers are hurting as dams, tanks and streams dry up. Water tankers are becoming a common sight, carting in desperately needed water. People are waiting weeks for expensive water deliveries.

    The South Australian government has set up emergency water collection points to cope with the demand from off-grid families. More water tankers have been secured. But despite recent rain, the situation is far from over.

    We found rainfall and flows into Adelaide’s reservoirs are at their lowest levels in 40 years. Reservoir levels have dropped to 44% – the lowest for more than 20 years.

    Adelaide is not currently at risk of running out of water; the state government built a desalination plant after the Millennium Drought. Production at the desal plant is four to six times higher than usual to meet demand. Without the desal plant and water from the River Murray, the city would be under severe water restrictions.

    But the crisis shows many off-grid families, farms and businesses need new options to plan for the future.

    Over the past 12 months, rainfall in parts of South Australia has been the lowest on record.
    Commonwealth of Australia 2025, Bureau of Meteorology

    Global water stress

    This is not the first time entire communities have run out of water.

    Cape Town in South Africa nearly ran out of water in 2018. The city of nearly 4 million people was weeks away from “Day Zero”.

    In Australia, several regional and rural country towns have hit their own Day Zero. Stanthorpe in Queensland officially ran out of water in January 2020. Truckloads of water were carted into town every day to meet residential demand.

    Scientists have coined a new term, “hydroclimate whiplash”, to describe the rapid swings between intensely wet and dangerously dry weather currently occurring across the globe. This climate volatility amplifies natural hazards such as flash floods, wildfires, landslides and disease.

    The January wildfires in Los Angeles happened when two wet winters were followed by an extremely dry autumn and winter, providing plenty of dry fuel for fire.

    These aren’t isolated events. The global water crisis didn’t go away.

    The bigger picture

    What’s happening in the Adelaide Hills – and in other very dry places worldwide – demonstrates the need for careful, long-term water security planning.

    The United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 6 is to “ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all”. Water stress already affects more than 2 billion people – more than a quarter of the world’s population.

    By 2030, the UN predicts 2 billion people will still be living without safely managed drinking water, 3 billion without safely managed sanitation, and 1.4 billion without basic hygiene services.

    For many, this is literally a life-or-death matter.

    Investing in water security

    CSIRO is collaborating with industry, government and research organisations on research to overcome drought and build resilience for regional Australia. Our researchers are testing how well each of these strategies might work in different regions during extended dry periods. We calculate how much water can be collected and stored during the driest periods on record.

    Rainfall over Norfolk Island, a subtropical island in the Pacific Ocean roughly 1,500km southeast of Brisbane, has declined by 11% since 1970, with long runs of dry years in recent decades. The future is likely to be drier still.

    Our Norfolk Island Water Resource Assessment explored ways to help the community determine how to adapt and build resilience to drought.

    Since this project finished in 2020, residential and commercial rainwater tanks have been upgraded and a new seawater desalination plant installed. Other options to diversify water supplies included sharing groundwater bores, capturing runoff in gully dams, managing vegetation water use, and storing water underground.

    Excess water from rainwater or recycled wastewater can sometimes be stored underground in natural reservoirs called aquifers for use during drought. This is called “water banking” or “managed aquifer recharge”. The technique has been developed over the past 20 years and used to safely store water underground across Australia and overseas.

    Brackish (salty) groundwater is a potential water source that could be unlocked during drought. A National Water Grid funded project is investigating ways to use groundwater that would normally be too salty, along with renewable energy to power inland desalination plants. The project is investigating the prospect of using brackish groundwater across Western Australia for the first time.

    Future generations are likely to face more severe water shortages.
    Rosie Sheba

    A call to action

    The Adelaide Hills water crisis is a microcosm of a global issue. It’s a reminder action is needed now to secure our water future. Not when the water runs out.

    Deeper groundwater bores, water tankers on standby and bigger water storages are all potentially part of the portfolio of emergency plans. And due to climate change, the Adelaide Hills water crisis will happen again if we are unprepared. It is a question of when, not if.

    We have also seen the catastrophic effects of drought in Los Angeles – a tinderbox waiting to burn, and insufficient water on hand to fight the fires. We can and must prepare for natural disasters today. These are not unforeseen consequences. They are not “unknown unknowns”. We know them today. We will have no excuse when this happens.

    By adopting more sustainable water management policies and practices in the longer term, we can make sure the spectre of Day Zero does not become real for more communities around the world.

    With thanks to CSIRO Senior Research Scientist and Hydrologist Matt Gibbs and Principal Experimental Scientist in Hydrogeology Andrew Taylor.

    Kate Holland receives funding from the Australian Government Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water, and Department of Industry, Science and Resources.

    Craig T. Simmons has received funding for water research from various government and non-government organisations in the past. He is currently serving as Chief Scientist for South Australia.

    – ref. Adelaide Hills water crisis: a local problem is a global wake-up call – https://theconversation.com/adelaide-hills-water-crisis-a-local-problem-is-a-global-wake-up-call-251265

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: ‘Better than nothing’: clinicians and hospital heads accept lower standards of care outside metro hospitals

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Olivia Fisher, Senior Research Fellow, Applied Implementation Science, Charles Darwin University

    Seven million Australians live in rural and remote areas and many struggle to access the same quality of health care as those in metropolitan areas.
    More than 18,000 Australians have no access to primary health care services within an hour’s drive time from their home, and many are hours or even multiple days’ drive from their closest major hospital. Travel to a major city to access health care is costly and time-consuming.

    Rural Australians have almost A$850 less spent on their health per year than those in major cities.

    People living in rural and remote Australia have substantially higher levels of preventable hospitalisations, burden of disease, and avoidable deaths. This leaves a gap in median life expectancy between people in very remote areas and major cities of 13 years for men and 16 years for women.

    Our new research shows clinicians and health care decision-makers are willing to accept a lower standard of care for people outside of major cities because they consider it better than nothing.

    Relying on what they have

    Our research investigated Queensland clinicians’ and health care decision-makers’ perspectives on virtual health care as a means to improve access to care.

    We also asked about what constitutes acceptable quality and standards for rural patients.

    Although we used virtual health care as an example, the results are indicative of a broader issue.

    What is virtual health care? What are its pros and cons?

    “Virtual health care” is more than just telehealth. It includes:

    • hospital in the home. A nurse will visit a patient in their home to provide treatments such as intravenous antibiotics, coupled with telehealth consultations with a doctor. This model of care can achieve similar outcomes to those at traditional hospitals

    • virtual wards, such as influenza or COVID wards. These wards involve a patient in their home, and combination of telehealth, remote monitoring devices such as pulse oximeters, and face-to-face care from visiting clinicians if required.

    • virtual emergency departments. These support patients who can be safely and effectively managed at home. Emergency doctors and nurses provide guidance and identify which patients need to present to a traditional emergency department.

    Virtual health care can minimise travel time to major cities, keeping patients better connected with their family and community while undergoing treatment.

    Virtual health care often involves nurse care and doctor telehealth.
    PeopleImages.com – Yuri A/Shutterstock

    However, virtual health care is not currently suitable for patients who require intensive care, some types of physical procedures, or for patients at high risk of complications.

    Virtual services need to be well-designed, with appropriately trained clinicians, and consider what can and cannot be accomplished remotely.

    When virtual health care isn’t well designed, and clinicians aren’t adequately trained, it can result in poor patient outcomes. As one doctor explained:

    I can catalogue just over the last month, I’ve seen errors in telehealth […] They’ve missed pneumonia, they’ve missed kidney stones, they’ve missed a bowel obstruction, they’ve missed an ischaemic valve, they’ve missed an MI [myocardial infarction]. You know, all because they think they can do all these things on telehealth […].

    Our research

    We interviewed 26 clinicians (such as doctors and nurses) and executive leaders from private, not-for-profit hospitals and aged care services in metropolitan, regional, rural and remote Queensland in 2023.

    Most participants expressed reticence towards using telehealth and other forms of virtual health care for people in major cities who can readily access traditional hospitals and providers face-to-face.

    They felt safety and care standards would be inferior to traditional inpatient care.

    However, they said virtual health care – even if it was a lower standard to traditional hospitals – was better than nothing. As one doctor and health service leader said:

    there’s no other choice is there, so you just do it that way.

    Another doctor and health service leader explained:

    But we would use it for sure. I mean especially those days when we get, you know, which is becoming more and more common where the hospital rings down there’s no beds. There’s no beds and you’re like, well, what do I do now I’ve got ten people here and nowhere to send them.

    Sometimes patients can’t be cared for in other settings and need to go to hospital.
    Gorodenkoff/Shutterstock

    Towards more equitable care for rural patients

    Sub-standard health care will not bring health outcomes and life-expectancy of people in rural and remote areas up to parity – it will merely reinforce current inequities.

    We need to design health services that improve both quality and access. Taking health-care models that work in our major cities and rolling them out in rural areas doesn’t work. We need tailored, creative solutions that meet the same standards we would expect in a city.

    In addition to increasing and improving access to virtual health care, we also need to:

    • attract and retain a rural health workforce of experienced practitioners to provide face-to-face services

    • design health services in conjunction with the community to ensure they suit local needs and conditions

    • address state and federal government funding issues that impact the sustainability and capacity for innovation of rural health services.

    An unconscious willingness to accept better than nothing is simply not good enough for the millions of Australians who live outside of major cities.

    Olivia Fisher receives funding from UnitingCare Queensland.

    Caroline Grogan receives funding from UnitingCare Queensland and the Irene Patricia Hunt Memorial Trust.

    Kelly McGrath receives funding from the Australian Government Department of Industry, Science and Resources via an Elevate Scholarship, Wesley Research Institute, UnitingCare Queensland, Mitsubishi Development, and the Catalano Family Foundation.

    – ref. ‘Better than nothing’: clinicians and hospital heads accept lower standards of care outside metro hospitals – https://theconversation.com/better-than-nothing-clinicians-and-hospital-heads-accept-lower-standards-of-care-outside-metro-hospitals-251063

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Despite some key milestones since 2000, Australia still has a long way to go on gender equality

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Janeen Baxter, Director, ARC Life Course Centre and ARC Kathleen Fitzpatrick Laureate Fellow, The University of Queensland

    Australia has a gender problem. Despite social, economic and political reform aimed at improving opportunities for women, gender gaps are increasing and Australia is falling behind other countries.

    The World Economic Forum currently places Australia 24th among 146 countries, down from 15th in 2006. At the current rate of change, the forum suggests it will take more than 130 years to achieve gender equality globally.

    Australia has taken important steps forward in some areas, while progress in other areas remains painfully slow. So how far have we come since 2000, and how much further do we have to go?

    The good stuff

    There are now more women in the labour market, in parliament, and leading large companies than at any other time.

    Over the past 25 years, there have been major social and political milestones that indicate progress.

    These include the appointment of Australia’s first female governor-general in 2008 and prime minister in 2010, the introduction of universal paid parental leave in 2011, a high-profile inquiry into workplace sexual harassment in 2020, and new legislation requiring the public reporting of gender pay gaps in 2023.

    Timeline of equality milestones

    • 2000

      Child Care Benefit introduced, subsidising cost of children for eligible families

    • 2008

      First female Governor-General (Dame Quentin Bryce)

    • 2010

      First female Prime Minister elected (Julia Gillard)

      First Aboriginal woman from Australia elected to UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (Megan Davis)

      Australia’s first national paid parental leave scheme

    • 2012

      Julia Gillard misogyny speech

      Workplace Gender Equality Act becomes law, Workplace Gender Equality Agency established

    • 2013

      Dad or Partner Pay Leave commenced

    • 2016

      First Indigenous woman elected to House of Representatives (Linda Burney)

    • 2017

      Launch of Women’s Australian Football League

      #metoo movement spreads globally to draw attention to sexual harassment and assault

    • 2020

      Respect@Work National Inquiry into sexual harassment in the Australian workplace chaired by Kate Jenkins released.

    • 2021

      Grace Tame named Australian of the Year for her advocacy in sexual violence/harassment campaigns

      Independent review into Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces launched

    • 2022

      National plan to end violence against women is finalised

    • 2023

      Closing the Gender Pay Gap Bill passes parliament

    • 2024

      Superannuation on government-funded paid parental leave from July 1, 2025

      Parental leave to be increased to 26 weeks from July 2026.

    There are, however, other areas where progress is agonisingly slow.

    Violence and financial insecurity

    Women are more likely to be in casual and part-time employment than men. This is part of the reason women retire with about half the superannuation savings of men.

    This is also linked to financial insecurity later in life. Older women are among the fastest-growing groups of people experiencing homelessness.

    The situation for First Nations women is even more severe. The most recent Closing the Gap report indicates First Nations women and children are 33 times more likely to be hospitalised due to violence compared with non-Indigenous women.

    They are also seven times more likely to die from family violence.

    Improving outcomes for Indigenous women and children requires tackling the long-term effects of colonisation, removal from Country, the Stolen Generations, incarceration and intergenerational trauma. This means challenging not only gender inequality but also racism, discrimination and violence.

    At work, the latest data from the Workplace Gender Equality Agency suggests the gender pay gap is narrowing, with 56% of organisations reporting improvements.

    On average, though, the pay gap is still substantial at 21.8% with women earning only 78 cents for every $1 earned by men. This totals an average yearly shortfall of $28,425.

    There are also some notable organisations where the gender pay gap has widened.

    The burden of unpaid work

    Another measure of inequality that has proved stubbornly slow to change is women’s unequal responsibilities for unpaid domestic and care work.

    Without real change in gender divisions of time spent on unpaid housework and care, our capacity to move towards equality in pay gaps and employment is very limited.

    Australian women do more unpaid and domestic work after having children.
    Shutterstock

    Australian women undertake almost 70% of unpaid household labour. The latest Australian Bureau of Statistics time use data show that of those who participate in domestic labour, women spend an average of 4.13 hours per day on unpaid domestic and care work, compared with men’s 2.14 hours.

    This gap equates to more than a third of a full-time job. If we add up all work (domestic, care and paid), mothers have the longest working week by about 10 hours. This has changed very little over time.

    These charts, based on analyses of data from the Households, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) study, show what drives this gap.

    Women respond to increased demand for care and domestic work by doing more, while men do not. Parenthood significantly increases the time women spend on unpaid care and housework, while also reducing their time in employment.

    Men increase their time in unpaid care after a birth, but the jump is minor compared with women, and there is no change to men’s employment hours.

    Not surprisingly given these patterns, parenthood is associated with substantial declines in women’s employment hours, earnings, career progression, and mental health and wellbeing.

    The way forward

    Current policy priorities primarily incentivise women to remain in employment, while continuing to undertake a disproportionate share of unpaid family work, through moving to part-time employment or making use of other forms of workplace flexibility. This approach focuses on “fixing” women rather than on the structural roots of the problem.

    There is limited financial or cultural encouragement for men to step out of employment for care work, or reduce their hours, despite the introduction of a two-week Dad and Partner Pay scheme in 2013 and more recent changes to expand support and access.

    Fathers who wish to be more actively involved in care and family life face significant financial barriers, with current schemes only covering a basic wage. If one member of the family has to take time out or reduce their hours, it usually makes financial sense for this to be a woman, given the gender earning gap.

    The benefits of enabling men to share care work will not only be improvements for women, but will also improve family relationships and outcomes for children.

    Research shows relationship conflict declines when men do more at home. Time spent with fathers has been found to be especially beneficial for children’s cognitive development.

    Fixing the gender problem is not just about helping women. It’s good for everyone.

    Gender inequality costs the Australian economy $225 billion annually, or 12% of gross domestic product.

    Globally, the World Bank estimates gender inequality costs US$160.2 trillion. We can’t afford to slip further behind or to take more than a century to fix the problem.

    This piece is part of a series on how Australia has changed since the year 2000. You can read other pieces in the series here.

    Janeen Baxter receives funding from the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Children and Families over the Life Course (CE200100025) and an Australian Research Council Kathleen Fitzpatrick Laureate Fellowship (FL230100104).

    – ref. Despite some key milestones since 2000, Australia still has a long way to go on gender equality – https://theconversation.com/despite-some-key-milestones-since-2000-australia-still-has-a-long-way-to-go-on-gender-equality-250250

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Should Australia increase its defence spending? We asked 5 experts

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Justin Bergman, International Affairs Editor

    Both Labor and the Coalition are considering an increase to defence spending ahead of the federal election.

    Defence spending is currently at about 2% of gross domestic product (GDP), or around A$56 billion per year. The Coalition is reportedly eyeing an increase to 2.5% of GDP by 2029.

    The Albanese government’s current spending plan is expected to reach 2.33% of GDP by 2034. And in this week’s budget, it is expected to bring forward some of its already announced $50 billion increase in defence spending.

    Why do these percentages matter? US President Donald Trump has made it very clear he expects America’s allies to pay more on defence, at least 3% of GDP.

    We asked five experts if defence spending should be increased, and if so, by how much. They agreed more money is needed, albeit with caveats.

    – ref. Should Australia increase its defence spending? We asked 5 experts – https://theconversation.com/should-australia-increase-its-defence-spending-we-asked-5-experts-252374

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: View from The Hill: 5 things to look for in the budget – and why we really need another budget soon

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

    Jim Chalmers likes to boast, or marvel, that he is the first treasurer since Ben Chifley to deliver four budgets in a term.

    If Labor wins the May election, the treasurer will reckon the budget will be done and dusted for this year. But actually, we really need another budget post election.

    That’s for two reasons. First, because this one will be short on any hard reforms or big savings, because it is all about chasing votes.

    From roads to health, this year has been give, give, give from the government. Much of the spending has been matched by the opposition. Just in recent days, the Coalition has said yes to the government’s initiatives to boost bulk billing and to reduce the price of pharmaceutical scripts. At the weekend, it instantly embraced the announcement to extend energy bill relief (A$150 dollars off bills in the second half of 2025).

    Secondly, the budget could, to an extent, be quickly overtaken because it is being delivered days before the Trump administration’s April 2 tariff announcement. That announcement could have big implications for the world economy, which would flow through to the outlook for Australia.

    The international fallout would be more serious for Australia than any direct hits we might take – there are worries around beef exports and pharmaceuticals – although the politics would centre on what happened to our industries.

    Given the election context, you will have to look hard for specific “nasties” in this budget. The main negative is likely to be the overall uncertainty about the future.

    So specifically, what should we look for on Tuesday? Independent economist Chris Richardson suggests, in an interview with The Conversation, five things to track.

    1. The big ‘off-budget’ number

    This is where the cost of initiatives does not directly show up in the underlying bottom line (which will be deficits through the forward estimates).

    Putting large commitments off budget has increased over the years. Richardson says the Albanese government inherited about $33 billion off-budget spending (over the forward estimates), and in this budget it could be more than $100 billion. This includes spending on student debt relief, the NBN, some housing areas, and infrastructure programs.

    Putting lots of items off budget “means less scrutiny and accountability,” Richardson says.

    2. Tax reform (or lack thereof)

    Richardson’s second item won’t involve much of a search. He asks rhetorically, “Will there be any hint the government is trying to do anything about the narrowing base of the tax take?” That is, anything to lighten the very heavy weight we place on personal and company taxes to raise revenue. As an advocate for tax reform, Richarson expects the budget will contain zero in this area.

    3. NDIS spending

    What is really happening with reining in spending on the National Disability Insurance Scheme? The government has made much of its progress towards bringing the growth in its share of spending on the scheme down to a projected 8% annually.

    But Richardson says this is looking at only part of the story. Considerable responsibility is being pushed back onto the states; the federal government agreed to finance half the cost of new services to be delivered through state education and health systems for children with developmental disabilities to curb the burden on the NDIS. “To focus only on the federal spend on the NDIS is to miss the wider cost picture,” he says.

    4. The mid-year mystery

    How will the budget deal with the “mystery” that existed in its December mid-year update? That update did not seem to account for a rise in wages for public servants, even this was clearly in the pipeline.

    5. The Trump factor

    The budget will discuss the risks on the downside for the economy, but how will it deal with what is to come from Donald Trump? What assumptions will it contain on the likely actions of an unpredictable president?

    With the election so close, there will be almost as much interest in Peter Dutton’s Thursday budget reply as in the budget itself.

    The understanding is it will contain some new policy. It could hardly do otherwise. But will whatever Dutton announces stand up to scrutiny? If it is too thin, it will reinforce an impression the opposition is not presenting a credible alternative. In last year’s budget reply Dutton announced his proposed migration cuts and that quickly became mired in an argument about whether his numbers fitted together.

    Under the spotlight in budget week, the opposition also has to be careful with precisely what is being said and committed to. We’ve seen the confusion over its divestiture policy and about a possible referendum to facilitate the removal of dual citizens.

    On Sunday finance spokeswoman Jane Hume gave Labor some material for a scare campaign on the NDIS.

    She told Sky, “The NDIS, for instance, is one of those areas in the budget that has run out of control; it was growing at 14% per annum.

    “It’s been brought under control somewhat. We think that there’s more that can be done.”

    Chalmers immediately jumped on her comments, demanding detail. Labor’s spinners and ad team would have been rubbing their hands.

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

    – ref. View from The Hill: 5 things to look for in the budget – and why we really need another budget soon – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-5-things-to-look-for-in-the-budget-and-why-we-really-need-another-budget-soon-252513

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: What are non-tariff barriers – and why is agriculture so exposed?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alan Renwick, Professor of Agricultural Economics, Lincoln University, New Zealand

    Since the return to power of US President Donald Trump, tariffs have barely left the front pages.

    While the on-off-on tariff sagas have dominated the headlines, a paper released this week by the government’s Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences (ABARES) has highlighted other barriers. These non-tariff measures could actually be having a greater impact in terms of preventing trade.

    The report says these non-tariff measures are equivalent to Australian agricultural exporters facing a tariff of 19%.

    What are non-tariff measures?

    The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) defines a non-tariff barrier as

    any kind of “red tape” or policy measure, other than tariffs or tariff-rate quotas, that unjustifiably restricts trade.

    ABARES use a broader definition of “non-tariff measures”. This circumvents the tricky problem of trying to ascertain whether a non-tariff measure is justified or unjustified.

    Non-tariff measures can be separated into categories, such as sanitary and phytosanitary (food safety and plant/animal health-related), technical barriers to trade (food standards, labelling, and so on) and quantitative restrictions (such as quotas).

    It should be emphasised that these measures have a legitimate role to play in our trading systems.

    As noted by DFAT, enshrined in the rules of the World Trade Organization is the fact that all nations have the right to set trade rules to ensure the health, safety and wellbeing of their citizens and to protect animal and plant health. Australia makes full use of these measures.

    How do they become a barrier to trade?

    So when does a measure become a barrier? According to DFAT, this is when they are:

    • unclear or unevenly applied
    • more trade-restrictive than necessary to meet their stated objective, or
    • introduced to provide an unfair advantage to domestic industries.

    Both justified and unjustified measures can work to prevent free trade. But the report also shows how non-trade measures can facilitate trade – for example, by providing assurances to customers in one country about the quality and safety of products from another country.

    Why agriculture is so exposed

    Non-tariff measures are particularly prevalent in agriculture because of the biological nature of food production and the potential risks to human, animal and plant health.

    Importing a faulty phone may lead to some losses to consumers. But infected agricultural products could severely disrupt a whole sector or even destroy ecosystems. For example, a large foot-and-mouth disease outbreak in Australia could cost the Australian economy more than A$26 billion over ten years.

    However, the existence of so many of these measures in the agricultural and food sectors may also be a political issue. Agricultural lobby groups are powerful in many countries and continually push for protection from imports. In this case, the measures can be viewed as barriers.

    The next wave of tariff announcements is coming on April 2.
    Bienvenido Velasco/Shutterstock

    What did the research say?

    The ABARES research highlights that non-tariff measures have proliferated in recent years as overall tariff rates have been declining. It also estimates that these measures have an increasingly negative impact on Australia’s agricultural export volumes.

    However, we do have to be careful in interpreting these results.

    An increase in justified measures is very different from an increase in unjustified measures.

    The ABARES report is not able to distinguish between the two. It may be questioned whether it is fair to include justified measures in a calculation of the headline tariff-equivalent measure.

    The report also highlights the costs of the measures, but does not consider the benefits. The example of foot and mouth shows that the benefits of non-tariff measures can be very large.

    It cuts both ways

    The ABARES report focuses on the impact of these measures on Australian export trade – but questions can also be raised about the use of them by Australia itself.

    Australia is in the crosshairs of Trump’s trade war. On April 2 the United States is set to implement a new wave of tariffs under its Fair and Reciprocal Trade Plan. These will target both tariffs and non-tariff measures.



    Read more:
    The next round in the US trade war has the potential to be more damaging for Australia

    Australia’s food security measures relating to beef are being explicitly called out by the US farm lobby. A US beef trade organisation called the Australia-US free trade agreement “by far the most lopsided and unfair trading deal” for its farmers.

    According to a press report on Friday, California winemakers have also complained to Trump about an Australian tax on wine sales, calling it “unfair”.

    There is no doubt there are significant gains to be had from disentangling genuine measures that protect human, plant and animal health from those that hinder trade purely to protect inefficient domestic producers or favour certain countries over others. Once this is done, work can be undertaken to reduce the unjustified barriers.

    However, the difficulty is how to achieve this – especially as what is often seen as justified by an importer may be the seen as the opposite or unjustified by an exporter.

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

    – ref. What are non-tariff barriers – and why is agriculture so exposed? – https://theconversation.com/what-are-non-tariff-barriers-and-why-is-agriculture-so-exposed-252739

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Australia’s ‘coercive’ news media rules are the latest targets of US trade ire

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rob Nicholls, Senior Research Associate in Media and Communications, University of Sydney

    As the United States recalibrates its trade policies to combat what the Trump administration sees as “unfair” treatment by other countries, two significant industries have complained to US regulators about their treatment in Australia.

    The tech industry – particularly Big Tech platforms such as Google and Meta – says it is being “coerced” into handing cash to Australian media companies. And the pharmaceutical industry is upset about low prices and delays in getting new treatments into the Australian market.

    Why are we hearing about these complaints now? And what will they mean for Australia?

    The US Trade Representative requests a pile-on

    In February, the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) invited comments from the public to help it review and identify any unfair trade practices by other countries. The call was made “pursuant to the America First Trade Policy Presidential Memorandum and the Presidential Memorandum on Reciprocal Trade and Tariffs”.

    The aim was to use this consultation to investigate potential harm to the US from any non-reciprocal trade arrangements. The consultation was designed to help the USTR recommend appropriate actions to remedy any such practices.

    Essentially, it was an invitation to complain about any and all countries, including Australia. All the relevant industry associations have taken up this opportunity with a high degree of enthusiasm.

    There have been 766 submissions.

    Big Tech has complaints

    A tech industry group called the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA) made a submission raising concerns about the digital policies of several countries, including Australia.

    The submission emphasised policies with what it calls “extractionary and redistributive characteristics” that force one set of market participants to subsidise the economic activities of another.

    The association’s Australian concern focuses on the News Media Bargaining Code. This requires tech companies to pay for news that appears on their platforms.

    The CCIA characterises the News Bargaining Code as:

    a coercive and discriminatory tax that requires US technology companies to subsidise Australian media companies.

    The CCIA argued that the financial burden imposed by the code is substantial. It said that two companies (Google and Meta, although the CCIA does not name them) pay A$250 million annually in deals “coerced through the threat of this law”. It also mentioned the planned “news bargaining incentive”, which aims to encourage platforms to do deals with media companies.

    Regulation by default

    The CCIA is also concerned about changes in competition law that will lead to platforms being regulated by default. That is, like telecommunications and electricity companies, designated platforms will be assumed to have a substantial degree of market power. (This was a finding made by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission in 2019.)

    The industry group argued that Australia’s regulatory regime is modelled on the European Union’s Digital Markets Act (DMA). In fact, Australia is likely to look closely at both the EU and UK regimes.

    The CCIA says this default regulation would target specified US companies with discriminatory obligations.

    However, any business that is “designated” – regardless of its host country – would have these obligations. The proposed approach does not target or discriminate against US businesses.

    It is true the proposed approach will have heavy penalties for breach, and the CCIA complains about these “significant fines”. The CCIA correctly identifies that the regulations would empower the government to impose restrictions on how platforms use customers’ data, and whether they can preference their own products.

    The CCIA says it is concerned that these measures, like similar ones in other jurisdictions, disproportionately target US companies. It says they would also impose significant compliance costs, and may serve as a backdoor for industrial policy designed to advantage local competitors. They argue that such rules can require changes to operating procedures and services, and that non-compliance can result in hefty fines.

    The submission also addresses Australia’s proposed requirements for US online video providers, such as Netflix, to fund the development and production of Australian content, which could require these providers to allocate 10–20% of their local expenditure to Australian content. It does not note that the same is true for Australian streaming platforms.

    Big Pharma also has complaints – and a local ally

    Big Pharma, via the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) industry association, has also complained about various countries. Gripes about Australia include low prices under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) and delays to approval of new treatments.

    Medicines Australia – a local organisation that represents pharmaceutical companies – agrees about the delays, citing a PBS review published last year.

    Barriers to trade

    The critical submissions should come as no surprise. Any industry group that passes up such a golden opportunity to complain on behalf of its members is arguably not doing its job.

    In the case of both Big Tech and Big Pharma, Australia was only one of the targets. Yet the potential impacts are high.

    The USTR is looking at treating any regulatory barriers faced by US companies as if they were tariffs. At least one Australian industry association is joining the pile-on.

    How will the USTR respond? Given the White House’s current approach to trade, there is a significant risk it will recommend retaliatory tariffs on yet more Australian products.

    Rob Nicholls receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

    – ref. Australia’s ‘coercive’ news media rules are the latest targets of US trade ire – https://theconversation.com/australias-coercive-news-media-rules-are-the-latest-targets-of-us-trade-ire-252806

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: How will the history-making new Olympics boss shape sports worldwide, and in Australia?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Richard Baka, Honorary Professor, School of Kinesiology, Western University, London, Canada; Adjunct Fellow, Olympic Scholar and Co-Director of the Olympic and Paralympic Research Centre, Institute for Health and Sport, Victoria University

    In a surprisingly emphatic result, 41-year-old Kirsty Coventry, Zimbabwe’s Sport Minister, was selected as the new president of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) at its 144th session in Greece.

    Coventry is the first woman, the first African, and the youngest person ever to take on the role.

    So how did she rise to this position, and what should sports in Australia and globally expect?

    Unpacking the votes

    Coventry comes well-credentialed as a five-time Olympic swimmer, representing Zimbabwe from 2000 to 2016 and winning seven medals, two of them gold.

    An IOC member since 2013, Coventry was initially an athlete-elected member.

    She has taken on various IOC roles, including most recently on the Coordination Committee for the Brisbane 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games.

    Although Coventry was one of the three favourites, along with Sebastian Coe from the United Kingdom and Juan Antonio Samaranch Jr from Spain (son of the previous IOC President Juan Antonio Samaranch), she won the vote in a landslide on the first ballot, securing 49 votes of the 97.

    Having obtained the required 50% majority, no further rounds were held.

    So begins a new dawn for the IOC’s now extremely powerful inaugural woman leader, who will face several challenges.

    How did she win?

    Foremost, Coventry had longstanding president Thomas Bach’s informal endorsement and support.

    Bach no doubt had a huge sway over the voting members, many of whom were elected to the IOC during his 12-year reign.

    Bach’s appointment as Honorary President for Life from June this year means he will still have a powerful role and be able to mentor and influence Coventry.

    A lack of transparent voting for the position means we cannot know who voted for whom. Some will presume the new president garnered the majority of votes from women and African delegates, but such an observation can only be speculative.

    With women comprising 43% of IOC members, it is a reasonable assumption this cohort provided a strong support base.

    Several candidates proposed quite significant (and in some cases radical) changes, suggesting a vote for Coventry was a nod to keeping the status quo.

    Or was it just time to break the hold of male presidents?

    The 2024 Paris Olympics were the first games with equal 50-50 men-women participation. The IOC membership has also changed over the past few decades, with growing representation of women. As a result, its long-held reputation as an “old boys’ club” is slowly shifting.

    Coventry triumphed despite previous doubts about her domestic political ties, and a limited change agenda that seemed to be mainly a legacy choice for Bach.

    In this context, Bach might continue to exert his influence.

    Global challenges for the new president

    As Olympic Agenda 2020+5 draws to its end, the new president will have the opportunity to set a future-focused strategy.

    There are plenty of areas she will need to consider in taking the reins. Here are our top ten:

    1. Safeguarding athletes. The provision of safe spaces for sport is an area of global concern as the incidents of athlete harm are brought to light.

    2. Environmental, sustainability and global warming issues, such as lack of snow for the winter games, venue rationale, spending on mega events, and lack of bidders for future games.

    3. The impact of AI and digital transformation on all aspects of sport, from athlete performance and officiating to governance and management.

    4. Bidding processes for future host cities.

    5. Transgender athletes and diversity, equity and inclusion considerations.

    6. The (Australian-initiated) proposal for the pharmaceutical free-for-all Enhanced Games.

    7. Sponsorship changes – longtime sponsors Toyota and Panasonic have dropped out but others have come in, with some from China.

    8. Relations with Russia and the United States

    9. Athlete advocacy – perhaps giving the athletes more of the financial windfall the Olympics generate.

    10. Addition of new sports and culling or dropping existing less popular ones.



    Read more:
    Cricket? Lacrosse? Netball? The new sports that might make it to the 2032 Brisbane Olympic Games

    What about Australia?

    Coventry comes from an impressive swimming background, and this could work to Australia’s advantage.

    Although she will step down from her role on the Coordination Committee for the Brisbane Olympics and Paralympics to handle other pressing presidential duties, she will no doubt retain a close link to the third Australian Olympic host city.

    The Australian Olympic Commission was quick to congratulate her on her ascension to the IOC presidency.

    Coventry knows AOC President Ian Chesterman, a fellow IOC member, so we can expect a close, friendly working relationship between them.

    With the Brisbane games only seven years away, the new IOC president will certainly have a strong vested interest in Australia and aspects of the Olympic and Paralympic movement in this part of the world.

    Tracy Taylor is on the Olympic Studies Centre Grant Award committee.

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

    – ref. How will the history-making new Olympics boss shape sports worldwide, and in Australia? – https://theconversation.com/how-will-the-history-making-new-olympics-boss-shape-sports-worldwide-and-in-australia-252623

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: ACCC finds Australia’s supermarkets are among the world’s most profitable – but doesn’t accuse them of price gouging

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gary Mortimer, Professor of Marketing and Consumer Behaviour, Queensland University of Technology

    Daria Nipot/Shutterstock

    Australia’s supermarket sector has endured a long, uncomfortable moment in the spotlight. There have been six comprehensive inquiries into its conduct, pricing practices, and specifically claims of “price gouging”, over the past 18 months.

    Today, the long-awaited final report from the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) Supermarkets Inquiry has been released, more than 400 pages long.

    It finds Australia’s supermarkets are highly profitable by international standards, ranking among the highest in their peer group. But it did not find the supermarkets were price gouging. In fact, it didn’t even mention the phrase.

    How we got here

    In February 2024, the federal government formally directed the ACCC to investigate the competitiveness of retail prices in Australia’s supermarket sector. It was the first inquiry of its kind since 2008.

    The move followed widespread allegations the supermarkets had been price gouging – using the cover of high inflation to jack up prices even higher.

    The interim report from the ACCC’s inquiry, released in September, found the supermarket industry was highly concentrated, and reported many suppliers had raised concerns about “being exploited”.



    Read more:
    ‘Concerning’: ACCC interim report on supermarket inquiry tells of supplier woes and ‘oligopolistic’ market

    Highly profitable supermarkets

    The ACCC’s final report found Australian supermarkets appear highly profitable when compared with their international peers.

    ALDI’s, Coles’ and Woolworths’ average earnings before interest and tax margins were noted to be “among the highest of supermarket businesses in relevant comparator countries”.

    Average net profit after tax margins were similar to Walmart in the United States, Dutch-Belgian Ahold Delhaise, and Tesco in the United Kingdom, but below Canada’s Loblaw supermarkets.

    The inquiry found ALDI acted as a “price constraint” on Coles and Woolworths. But as a low-cost operator, ALDI does not compete with them “head-to-head” on all product offerings.

    It found while independent grocers provided a “valuable alternative”, consumers in regional areas were disadvantaged by higher freight costs and higher prices.

    ALDI’s, Coles’ and Woolworths’ store networks have expanded since the last inquiry in 2008, leading to greater “geographic overlap” and increased competition between their stores.

    Rising grocery prices

    The report notes that between late 2022 and early 2023, grocery prices were rising at more than twice the rate of wages. Supply chains took a big hit in the pandemic and its wake.

    Since March 2019, food and grocery prices have increased by about 24%, but this is still less than in many other OECD countries.

    The report notes input costs for supermarkets have increased dramatically since the pandemic. However, it says the fact supermarkets have also increased certain margins during this time means:

    at least some of the grocery price increases have resulted in additional profits for ALDI, Coles and Woolworths.

    Supermarkets often did not engage with suppliers “meaningfully” in relation to trading terms. Rebates paid by suppliers were opaque, complex and not well understood.

    The report found ALDI had been increasing its prices at a faster annual rate than Coles or Woolworths, particularly between 2022 and 2024.

    The ACCC investigated concerns suppliers lacked bargaining power when negotiating with the big supermarkets.
    Hypervision Creative/Shutterstock

    Was there any evidence of price gouging?

    Quite simply, no. And there appears to be no hard evidence of the practice from other inquiries either.

    A range of other inquiries into supermarket pricing and conduct at state and federal level have published findings in the past year, many centring on this very question:

    The ACTU report refers to price gouging 43 times, but no evidence is offered. Theories and possible economic impacts of price gouging and anti-competitive behaviour are presented.

    The Senate Select Committee report mentions “price gouging” at least 50 times, saying on whether price gouging exists in the supermarket sector – “the answer seems to be resounding yes”.

    However, a closer analysis again finds no actual evidence. Instead, the committee highlights that Australia’s “concentrated” supermarket sector, “potentially [creates] an environment for anti-competitive practices and price gouging”.

    The interim and final reports from the independent review into the Food and Grocery Code of Conduct mention “price gouging” multiple times. However, they don’t offer any evidence, instead referring to claims in the ACTU Report.

    Neither the ACCC inquiry’s interim report nor its final report mention “price gouging”.

    ACCC recommendations

    While the ACCC acknowledges there is no “silver bullet” to address competition issues in the supermarket sector, it offers 20 recommendations.

    Making it easier for smaller supermarket competitors to enter and expand in the market was one area of focus. Recommendations include simplifying planning and zoning rules, and encouraging governments of all levels to support community-owned supermarkets in remote areas.

    The ACCC also recommends supermarkets be required to publish notifications when “adverse” package size changes occur. This is commonly referred to as “shrinkflation”.

    Other notable recommendations include:

    • a requirement to provide an “independent” body weekly data about prices paid to fresh produce suppliers
    • a review of loyalty program practices in three years’ time
    • minimum information requirements for discount price promotions.

    The report did not recommend divestiture or breaking up the big supermarkets.

    Will Australians see lower grocery prices?

    The widely popular narrative of “stamping out price gouging” by dragging supermarket chief executives into public hearings and threatening them with jail time might have inferred such inquiries would lead to lower food prices. In isolation, they have not.

    The federal government says it agrees in principle with the recommendations. In its initial response, it has announced $2.9 million will be provided over three years for “targeted education programs” to help suppliers understand their rights.

    Gary Mortimer receives funding from the Building Employer Confidence and Inclusion in Disability Grant, AusIndustry Entrepreneurs’ Program, National Clothing Textiles Stewardship Scheme, National Retail Association, Australian Retailers Association.

    – ref. ACCC finds Australia’s supermarkets are among the world’s most profitable – but doesn’t accuse them of price gouging – https://theconversation.com/accc-finds-australias-supermarkets-are-among-the-worlds-most-profitable-but-doesnt-accuse-them-of-price-gouging-250503

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –