NewzIntel.com

Category: Features

  • MIL-Evening Report: Control fire and ferals in Australia’s tropical savannas to bring the small mammals back

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alyson Stobo-Wilson, Research Adjunct in Conservation Ecology, Research Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods, Charles Darwin University

    Alyson Stobo-Wilson

    In remote central Arnhem Land, finding a northern brushtail possum is encouraging for the local Indigenous rangers. Though once common, such small native mammals are now rare. Many are threatened with extinction.

    Over the past 30 years, small mammals have been disappearing from Australia’s tropical savannas. This landscape is among the nation’s most remote and seemingly untouched. But it is no longer safe from feral animals, overgrazing livestock, poor fire management and other threats.

    Despite growing awareness of the problem, a lack of consensus on the most effective management actions has hindered efforts to reverse these losses. Our new research sought to overcome this hurdle and finally reach consensus on the best way forward.

    We achieved this by working with experts from various land management groups and research institutes, including Traditional Owners and Indigenous rangers within the region.

    Building on 15 years of targeted research

    In 2010, the scale and severity of mammal declines in northern Australia became clear. Research in Kakadu National Park found the number of native mammal species at survey sites had halved, and the number of individual animals dropped by more than two-thirds.

    This prompted a major review of the causes, and more research.

    Advances in technology played a crucial role in efforts to gather further evidence. Motion-activated cameras known as camera traps enabled monitoring over vast areas.

    Extensive surveys using camera traps provided data on the distribution and abundance of small mammals and feral cats. Meanwhile, collar-mounted GPS units and video cameras provided new information about feral cat behaviour.

    Feral cat caught on a camera-trap in Arnhem Land.
    Alyson Stobo-Wilson

    What we did and what we found

    Our new research concerns the higher-rainfall tropical savannas of the Northern Territory and Western Australia. This area covers 950,000 square kilometres from the Kimberley in the west to the Gulf of Carpentaria in the east.

    First we reviewed the literature on the topic of small mammal declines in the region. We found more than 100 relevant studies had been published since 2010.

    From these research papers, we identified 11 plausible threats to small mammals. Then we asked 19 experts to score and rank each threat according to severity and scale, and whether the threat could be effectively mitigated.

    We found the most severe and widespread threat to small mammals was feral cats. But broad-scale cat control is not very effective.

    Ranked second was the habitat destruction caused by livestock (buffalo, horses, donkeys and cattle) and by inappropriate patterns of fire.

    Actions aimed at reducing feral livestock numbers and improving fire regimes would increase vital resources such as food and shelter. Such actions can also make it harder for cats to prey on small mammals.

    Feral cattle graze in the savanna woodland of the northern Kimberley.
    Ian Radford

    Future threats and research priorities

    Habitat loss from land clearing for urban, agricultural or industrial development currently affects only a small proportion of northwestern Australia. But proposed expansions — particularly for cotton and other intensive agriculture — are concerning. These developments overlap with high-rainfall areas in the Top End, where small mammal communities are still relatively intact.

    Our expert group also expressed deep concern and uncertainty about the future as the climate changes. Rising temperatures and more intense rainfall events are expected to increase the frequency, extent and severity of fires. However, managing feral livestock and improving fire regimes can make the ecosystem more resilient to change.

    Developing more effective tools to directly control feral cats remains a top research priority. It’s estimated cats kill around 452 million native mammals a year in Australia. About a third of these deaths occur in the tropical savannas. So while improved land management will alleviate some pressure, certain species will remain highly vulnerable unless cats can be better managed.

    Water buffalo were introduced to northern Australia in the early-1800s, becoming widespread by the mid-1800s.
    Alyson Stobo-Wilson

    Support Indigenous leadership on Country

    Globally, Indigenous stewardship is closely linked to improved biodiversity outcomes.

    In Australia, the historic disruption of Indigenous customary responsibilities — especially fire management — has contributed to the loss of small mammals.

    Fortunately, Indigenous ranger programs and Indigenous Protected Areas have expanded in recent years. Increasingly widespread recognition and application of Indigenous knowledge has deepened and broadened our understanding of mammal declines.

    In northern Australia, Indigenous ranger groups are global leaders in fire management. They monitor and manage some of the most remote and inaccessible parts of the continent. The land management actions needed to conserve our small mammals rely in large part on the continued support and funding of these groups.

    Unfortunately, these programs are under threat. The NT government recently cut A$12 million from its Indigenous ranger funding program.

    While the federal government has committed funding to expand ranger programs nationally, ranger groups say the investment falls short of what’s needed. Mimal Land Management Aboriginal Corporation chief executive officer Dominic Nicholls told us:

    Given the scale at which Indigenous ranger groups operate – and the critical role they play in protecting Australia’s biodiversity and leading innovation in the carbon industry – the level of allocated funding is insufficient to meet the basic delivery costs of these programs.

    A clear path forward

    Our research shows reducing feral livestock numbers and improving fire regimes in northern Australia currently offers the greatest benefit to small mammal populations — especially in the absence of effective cat controls.

    But success will depend on sustained, long-term support for Indigenous rangers, who carry out much of this work. Investing in these programs is not just essential for conserving biodiversity — it also supports cultural connection, community wellbeing and climate resilience.

    The authors gratefully acknowledge the Traditional Knowledge offered by participants from Mimal Land Management Aboriginal Corporation and Warddeken Land Management Limited as part of this research.

    This research was funded by CSIRO. The research benefited from the involvement of researchers and land managers from CSIRO, Charles Darwin University, Warddeken Land Management Limited, Australian National University, Mimal Land Management Aboriginal Corporation, Australian Wildlife Conservancy, the WA and NT governments, Kangaroo Island Landscape Board, Ground Up: Planning and Ecology Support, Dunkeld Pastoral Co Pty Ltd and Desert Support Services.

    John Woinarski has previously received funding from the Australian government’s National Environment Science Program. He is affiliated with Charles Darwin University, a member of the Biodiversity Council and a director of the Australian Wildlife Conservancy.

    – ref. Control fire and ferals in Australia’s tropical savannas to bring the small mammals back – https://theconversation.com/control-fire-and-ferals-in-australias-tropical-savannas-to-bring-the-small-mammals-back-260813

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: How safe are the chemicals in sunscreen? A pharmacology expert explains

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ian Musgrave, Senior Lecturer in Pharmacology, University of Adelaide

    aquaArts studio/Getty

    Last week, the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) released its safety review of seven active ingredients commonly used in sunscreens.

    It found five were low-risk and appropriate for use in sunscreens at their current concentrations.

    However, the TGA recommended tighter restrictions on two ingredients – homosalate and oxybenzone – to reduce how much can be used in a product. This is based on uncertainty about their potential effects on the endocrine system, which creates and releases hormones.

    This news, together with recent reports some products may have inflated their claims of SPF coverage, might make Australians worried about whether their sunscreen products are working – and safe.

    But it’s not time to abandon sunscreens. In Australia, all sunscreens must pass a strict approval process before going on the market. The TGA tests the safety and efficacy of all ingredients, and this recent review is part of the TGA’s continuing commitment to safety.

    The greatest threat sunscreen poses to Australians’ health is not using it.

    Australia has the highest incidence of melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancer worldwide, and approximately 95% of melanoma cases in Australia are linked to ultraviolet (UV) exposure.

    Still, it’s understandable people want to know what’s in their products, and any changes that might affect them. So let’s take a closer look at the safety review and what it found.

    What are the active ingredients in sunscreen?

    There are two main types of sunscreen: physical and chemical. This is based on the different active ingredients they use.

    An active ingredient is a chemical component in a product that has an effect on the body – basically, what makes the product “work”.

    In sunscreens, this is the compound that absorbs UV rays from the Sun. The other ingredients – for example, those that give the sunscreen its smell or help the skin absorb it – are “inactive”.

    Physical sunscreens typically use minerals, such as titanium dioxide and zinc oxide, that can absorb the Sun’s rays but also reflect some of them.

    Chemical sunscreens use a variety of chemical ingredients to absorb or scatter UV light, both long wave (UVA) or short wave (UVB).

    The seven active ingredients in this review are in chemical sunscreens.

    Why did the TGA do the review?

    Our current limits for the concentrations of these chemicals in sunscreen are generally consistent with other regulatory agencies, such as the European Union and the US Food and Drug Administration.

    However, safety is an evolving subject. The TGA periodically reexamines the safety of all therapeutic goods.

    Last year, the TGA revised its method of estimating sunscreen exposure to more closely model how skin is exposed to sunscreens over time.

    This model considers how much sunscreen someone typically applies, how much skin they cover (whole body versus face and hands, or just face) and how it’s absorbed through the skin.

    Given this new model – along with changes in the EU and US approaches to sunscreen regulation – the TGA selected seven common sunscreen ingredients to investigate in depth.

    Determining what’s safe

    When evaluating whether chemicals are safe for human use, testing will often consider studies in animals – especially when there is no or limited data on humans. These animal tests are done by the manufacturers, not the TGA.

    To take into account any unforeseen sensitivity humans may have to these chemicals, a “margin of safety” is built in. This is typically a concentration 50–100 times lower than the dose at which no negative effect was seen in animals.

    The sunscreen review used a margin of safety 100 times lower than this dose as the safety threshold.

    For most of the seven investigated sunscreen chemicals, the TGA found the margin of safety was above 100.

    This means they’re considered safe and low-risk for long-term use.

    However, two ingredients, homosalate and oxybenzone, were found to be below 100. This was based on the highest estimated sunscreen exposure, applied to the body at the maximum permitted concentration: 15% for homosalate, 10% for oxybenzone.

    At lower concentrations, other uses – such as just the hands and face – could be considered low-risk for both ingredients.

    What are the health concerns?

    Homosalate and oxybenzone have low acute oral toxicity – meaning you would need to swallow a lot of it to experience toxic effects, nearly half a kilogram of these chemicals – and don’t cause irritation to eyes or skin.

    There is inconclusive evidence about oxybenzone potentially causing cancer in rats and mice – but only at concentrations to which humans will never be exposed via sunscreens.

    The key issue is whether the two ingredients affect the endocrine system.

    While effects have been seen at high concentrations in animal studies, it is not clear whether these translate to humans exposed to sunscreen levels.

    No effect has been seen in clinical studies on fertility, hormones, weight gain and, in pregnant women, fetal development.

    The TGA is being very cautious here, using a very wide margin of safety under worst-case scenarios.

    What are the recommendations?

    The TGA recommends the allowed concentration of homosalate and oxybenzone be reduced.

    But exactly how much it will be lowered is complicated, depending on whether the product is intended for adults or children, specifically for face, or the whole body, and so on.

    However, some sunscreens would need to be reformulated or warning labels placed on particular formulations. The exact changes will be decided after public consultation. Submissions close on August 12.

    What about benzophenone?

    There is also some evidence benzophenone – a chemical produced when sunscreen that contains octocrylene degrades – may cause cancer at high concentrations.

    This is based on studies in which mice and rats were fed benzophenone well above the concentration in sunscreens.

    Octocrylene degrades slowly over time to benzophenone. Heat makes it degrade faster, especially at temperatures above 40°C.

    The TGA has recommended restricting benzophenone to 0.0383% in sunscreens to ensure it remains safe during the product’s shelf life.

    The Cancer Council advises storing sunscreens below 30°C.

    The bottom line

    The proposed restrictions are very conservative, based on worst-case scenarios.

    But even in worst-case scenarios, the margin of safety for these ingredients is still below the level at which any negative effect was seen in animals.

    The threat of cancer from sun exposure is far more serious than any potential negative effect from sunscreens.

    If you do wish to avoid these chemicals before new limits are imposed, several sunscreens are available that provide high levels of protection with little or no homosalate and oxybenzone. For more information, consult product labels.

    Ian Musgrave has received funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council to study adverse reactions to herbal medicines and has previously been funded by the Australian Research Council to study potential natural product treatments for Alzheimer’s disease. He is currently a member of one of the Therapeutic Goods Administration’s statutory councils.

    – ref. How safe are the chemicals in sunscreen? A pharmacology expert explains – https://theconversation.com/how-safe-are-the-chemicals-in-sunscreen-a-pharmacology-expert-explains-260802

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Australia’s census is getting a stress test – keeping it going is good for everyone

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Liz Allen, Demographer, POLIS Centre for Social Policy Research, Australian National University

    GoldPanter/Shutterstock

    The Australian Bureau of Statistics will roll out a large-scale census test next month.

    About 60,000 households will take part across the country to stress test the bureau’s collection processes and IT systems, ahead of next year’s full scale census. The survey questions change little, if at all, between the dry run and the census proper.

    The population count will offer Australians an opportunity to reflect on who we are and the stories we share.

    It comes at a time when traditional censuses are coming under threat worldwide.

    Dying days of census

    Census plays a significant part of the story of humanity. Jesus was born in a stable because a census ordered by Caesar Augusta had brought Joseph and Mary to Bethlehem.

    They have changed down the centuries. But some things remain the same: the data collected is crucial for taxation, political representation and socio-economic indicators.

    But national head counts are costly and cause enormous headaches for governments.

    Vintage census television ad.

    In other countries, censuses are being killed off, replaced with information compiled by other means, such as administrative government data and population surveys. Think of the overseas versions of Medicare, Centrelink and the Tax Office.

    National statistical offices in the United Kingdom and New Zealand have both flagged the end of traditional censuses

    The UK Office of National Statistics had been preparing for census replacement since 2011, only backtracking after a public backlash.

    Devastating under-enumeration of Maori New Zealanders in 2013 and 2018 meant administrative data was needed to supplement the 2023 NZ census. National data agency, Stats NZ, has now called it quits on traditional census altogether.

    Funding cuts in Canada saw dual short- and long-form questionnaires which resulted in the partial collection of crucial socio-economic data akin to a sample survey. Statistics Canada now uses administrative and survey data to help meet its official statistics program.

    Do we still need the census?

    Replacing the census was floated a decade ago when dwindling government funding saw the Australian Bureau of Statistics struggling to “keep the lights on”.

    Worried after 2016’s “censusfail”, the agency sought to ensure legislatively required data could be achieved even in the absence of a census. The bureau collected population and housing data using experimental administrative data, proving a national census isn’t necessarily needed for population estimates.

    Costs associated with running a five-yearly head count and the decline in the social licence to collect such data are routinely used as justifications for replacing the census. Why conduct a wartime-like undertaking when you don’t have to?

    The threat to the traditional census comes as no surprise to data scientists. Data is now ubiquitous, covering nearly every aspect of our lives – loyalty rewards, public transport cards and even frequent flyer points.

    But there’s so much heavy lifting only a census can do and it’s crucial to helping Australia understand its diverse population.

    More than just numbers

    Data helps contextualise our lives.

    Data made me feel less alone as a young person. I could see I wasn’t the only person doing it tough. Poverty wasn’t my fault, rather a wider structural problem politicians and policymakers failed to understand.

    Being missed by the 1996 census as a homeless teen drives me to ensure Australia’s national census snapshot reflects the needs of the country.

    Data holds powerful truths and has the capability to heal through information. Who we are, how and where we live, our commonalities and differences, and what might come next.

    The Australian Bureau of Statistics is finding increasingly creative ways to communicate and bring Australians along for the ride.

    Its outreach through social media makes data more accessible and fun.

    The paraphernalia promoting previous censuses make it clear how much the agency is invested in ensuring complete coverage of all people. A significant departure from the stuffy practices of national statistical offices overseas.

    Small solar powered census-at-school calculators have been given to pupils to help increase awareness among linguistically diverse communities. This is recognition children complete the census questionnaire in some families.

    Desks of cards gifted to homeless people sleeping rough attests to the bureau’s dedication to ensuring all people are counted, no matter where or how they live

    Behind The News’s take on the census.

    More inclusive family photograph

    But it hasn’t always been plain sailing for the Australian Bureau of Statistics.

    Last year’s unprecedented government interference in the independent conduct of the bureau resulted in proposed questions on sexuality and gender diversity being dumped from the 2026 census.

    Scheduled testing was cancelled and related printed materials were likely pulped.

    A public outcry forced a government back down with the sorry saga clearly demonstrating a myriad of critical data cannot be collected by other means.

    The upcoming census family photograph will be more inclusive – Australians will have the opportunity to have their gender identity and sexual orientation reflected in the tally.

    Family ancestry information will be broadened, and the questionnaire itself will better reflect Australian households overall.

    The alternative to a census is a private, behind-closed-doors collation of personal information by government.

    The good news is Australia’s census is alive and well and keeping up with the times.

    Liz Allen worked as a graduate at the Australian Bureau of Statistics in 2006. She receives funding from the Australian Research Council for work examining grandparenting in Australia. Liz is a member of the National Foundation of Australian Women Social Policy Committee.

    – ref. Australia’s census is getting a stress test – keeping it going is good for everyone – https://theconversation.com/australias-census-is-getting-a-stress-test-keeping-it-going-is-good-for-everyone-261077

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Florida is fronting the $450M cost of Alligator Alcatraz – a legal scholar explains what we still don’t know about the detainees

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mark Schlakman, Senior Program Director, The Florida State University Center for the Advancement of Human Rights, Florida State University

    Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis leads a tour of the new Alligator Alcatraz immigration detention facility for President Donald Trump and U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. Andrew Cabellero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images

    The state of Florida has opened a migrant detention center in the Everglades. Its official name is Alligator Alcatraz, a reference to the former maximum security federal penitentiary in San Francisco Bay.

    While touring Alligator Alcatraz on July 1, 2025, President Donald Trump said, “This facility will house some of the menacing migrants, some of the most vicious people on the planet.” But new reporting from the Miami Herald/Tampa Bay Times reveals that of more than 700 detainees, only a third have criminal convictions.

    To find out more about the state of Florida’s involvement in immigration enforcement and who can be detained at Alligator Alcatraz, The Conversation spoke with Mark Schlakman. Schlakman is a lawyer and senior program director for The Florida State University Center for the Advancement of Human Rights. He also served as special counsel to Florida Gov. Lawton Chiles, working as a liaison of sorts with the federal government during the mid-1990s when tens of thousands of Haitians and Cubans fled their island nations on makeshift boats, hoping to reach safe haven in Florida.

    U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has characterized the migrants being detained in facilities like Alligator Alcatraz as “murderers and rapists and traffickers and drug dealers.” Do we know if the detainees at Alligator Alcatraz have been convicted of these sorts of crimes?

    The Times/Herald published a list of 747 current detainees as of Sunday, July 13, 2025. Their reporters found that about a third of the detainees have criminal convictions, including attempted murder, illegal reentry to the U.S., which is a federal crime, and traffic violations. Apparently hundreds more have charges pending, though neither the federal nor state government have made public what those charges are.

    There are also more than 250 detainees with no criminal history, just immigration violations.

    Is it a crime for someone to be in the U.S. without legal status? In other words, is an immigration violation a crime?

    No, not necessarily. It’s well established as a matter of law that physical presence in the U.S. without proper authorization is a civil violation, not a criminal offense.

    However, if the federal government previously deported someone, they can be subject to federal criminal prosecution if they attempt to return without permission. That appears to be the case with some of the detainees at Alligator Alcatraz.

    What usually happens if a noncitizen commits a crime in the U.S.?

    Normally, if a foreign national is accused of committing a crime, they are prosecuted in a state court just like anyone else. If found guilty and sentenced to incarceration, they complete their sentence in a state prison. Once they’ve served their time, state officials can hand them over to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE. They are subject to deportation, but a federal immigration judge can hear any grounds for relief.

    DHS has clarified that it “has not implemented, authorized, directed or funded” Alligator Alcatraz, but rather the state of Florida is providing startup funds and running this facility. What is Florida’s interest in this? Are these mostly migrants who have been scooped up by ICE in Florida?

    It’s still unclear where most of these detainees were apprehended. But based on a list of six detainees released by Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier’s office, it is clear that at least some were apprehended outside of Florida, and others simply may have been transferred to Alligator Alcatraz from federal custody elsewhere.

    This calls to mind the time in 2022 when Gov. Ron DeSantis flew approximately 50 migrants from Texas to Martha’s Vineyard in Massachusetts at Florida taxpayer expense. Those migrants also had no discernible presence in Florida.

    To establish Alligator Alcatraz, DeSantis leveraged an immigration emergency declaration, which has been ongoing since Jan. 6, 2023. A state of emergency allows a governor to exercise extraordinary executive authority. This is how he avoided requirements such as environmental impact analysis in the Everglades and concerns expressed by tribal governance surrounding that area.

    For now, the governor’s declaration remains unchallenged by the Florida Legislature. Environmental advocates have filed a lawsuit over Alligator Alcatraz, and the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a decision by a federal judge temporarily barring Florida from enforcing its new immigration laws, which DeSantis had championed. But no court has yet intervened to contest this prolonged state of emergency.

    This presents a stark contrast to Gov. Lawton Chiles’ declaration of an immigration emergency during the mid-1990s. At that time, tens of thousands of Cubans and Haitians attempted to reach Florida shores in virtually anything that would float. Chiles’ actions as governor were informed by his experience as a U.S. senator during the Mariel boatlift in 1980, when 125,000 Cubans made landfall in Florida over the course of just six months.

    Chiles sued the Clinton administration for failing to adequately enforce U.S. immigration law. But Chiles also entered into unprecedented agreements with the federal government, such as the 1996 Florida Immigration Initiative with U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno. His intent was to protect Florida taxpayers while enhancing federal enforcement capacity, without dehumanizing people fleeing desperate circumstances.

    During my tenure on Chiles’ staff, the governor generally opposed state legislation involving immigration. In the U.S.’s federalist system of government, immigration falls under the purview of the federal government, not the states. Chiles’ primary concern was that Floridians wouldn’t be saddled with what ought to be federal costs and responsibilities.

    Chiles was open to state and local officials supporting federal immigration enforcement. But he was mindful this required finesse to avoid undermining community policing, public health priorities and the economic health of key Florida businesses and industries. To this day, the International Association of Chiefs of Police’s position reflects Chiles’ concerns about such cooperation with the federal government.

    Gov. Ron DeSantis outlines his plans for Alligator Alcatraz to the media on July 1, 2025.
    Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images

    Now, in 2025, DeSantis has taken a decidedly different tack by using Florida taxpayer dollars to establish Alligator Alcatraz. The state of Florida has fronted the US$450 million to pay for this facility. DeSantis reportedly intends to seek reimbursement from FEMA’s Shelter and Services Program. Ultimately, congressional action may be necessary to obtain reimbursement. Florida is essentially lending the federal government half a billion dollars and providing other assistance to help support the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement agenda.

    Florida is also establishing another migrant detention facility at Camp Blanding Joint Training Center near Jacksonville. A third apparently is being contemplated for the Panhandle.

    ICE claims that the ultimate decision of whom to detain at these facilities belongs to the state of Florida, through the Florida Division of Emergency Management. Members of Congress who visited Alligator Alcatraz earlier this week have disputed ICE’s claim that Florida is in charge.

    You advised Florida Division of Emergency Management leadership directly for several years during the administrations of Gov. Charlie Crist and Gov. Rick Scott. Does running a detention facility like Alligator Alcatraz fall within its typical mission?

    The division is tasked with preparing for and responding to both natural and human-caused disasters. In Florida, that generally means hurricanes. While the division may engage to facilitate shelter, I don’t recall any policies or procedures contemplating anything even remotely similar to Alligator Alcatraz.

    DeSantis could conceivably argue that this is consistent with a 287(g) agreement authorizing state and local support for federal immigration enforcement. But such agreements typically require federal supervision of state and local activities, not the other way around.

    Mark Schlakman served as special counsel to Florida Gov. Lawton Chiles and as a consultant to Emilio Gonzalez at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security during his tenure as U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Director during the George W. Bush administration.

    – ref. Florida is fronting the $450M cost of Alligator Alcatraz – a legal scholar explains what we still don’t know about the detainees – https://theconversation.com/florida-is-fronting-the-450m-cost-of-alligator-alcatraz-a-legal-scholar-explains-what-we-still-dont-know-about-the-detainees-260665

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: As house prices drop, will the retirement nest egg still be such a safe bet?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Claire Dale, Research Fellow, the Pensions and Intergenerational Equity (PIE) research hub, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

    MonthiraYodtiwong/Getty Images

    Changes to KiwiSaver, global economic uncertainty and predictions house prices could drop by as much as 20% by 2030 all mean retirement is looking very different to how it once did.

    A retirement strategy based on the equity held in a house is no longer as reliable as it has been in the past. Home ownership in Aotearoa New Zealand fell from 75% in 1991 to 60% in 2023 and is projected to fall to 48% in 2048.

    The average age of a first-home buyer has also risen to 36, meaning an increasing number of New Zealanders (13%) are paying off their mortgages after they reach retirement age.

    The number of retirees renting is also on the rise. By 2048, 40% of them will rent, placing pressure on New Zealand’s housing stock.

    KiwiSaver is unlikely to replace the traditional housing nest egg. New Zealanders have, on average, NZ$37,079 in their KiwiSaver accounts, with thousands of people reaching close to retirement age with less than $10,000 saved.

    Investing at the price peak

    The prospect of retirement looks bleakest for those currently aged between 35 and 49 years old. A recent report from credit agency Centrix found this group was struggling the most financially.

    A big part of the problem is that house prices skyrocketed just as they became first-time home buyers. The average asking price for residential property rose by 60.3% over the past decade, from $556,931 at the beginning of 2015 to $892,579 at the end of 2024.

    While incomes have also increased, they have not matched housing prices. In 2000, houses cost about five times the median household income. But by 2025, the median price had risen to 7.5 times the median household income.

    Those who bought their first home around the peak in 2021 are likely to be hit hardest by the forecast drop in house values. According to data insight firm Cotality (formerly Corelogic), nominal prices are expected to pass their 2021 peak by mid-2029. But when adjusted for inflation, prices in mid-2030 would be a fifth below the peak.

    Working into retirement

    Older New Zealanders are also facing significant housing pressures.

    According to a 2022 report from Treasury, over half of superannuitants still paying off mortgages spent more than 80% of their superannuation income on housing costs. Those who are mortgage-free are spending less than 20% of their super on housing.

    Between 2019 and 2024, the percentage of overdue mortgages for the 50+ age groups ranged between 2% and 2.5%, compared to a range of 1% to 1.5% for all mortgages.

    People between the age of 55 and 64 are likely to have purchased their homes in the late 1990s and early 2000s, so are less likely to be hurt by the 2021 peak and subsequent trough.

    Despite this apparent advantage, only 38% of people between 55 and 64 are mortgage free.

    KiwiSaver issues

    The possibility of using accumulated KiwiSaver funds to clear a mortgage is also diminishing. As a result of the 2025 Budget changes to KiwiSaver, employee and employer contributions will rise from April 2026 to 3.5% and from April 2028 to 4%, offsetting the reduced annual government contribution.

    The end of employer contributions matters particularly to the 24% of those aged over 65 years who are still in the workforce. A rule change in 2021 means employers are not required to make contributions or to deduct employee contributions, unless the employee continues to make KiwiSaver contributions.

    But current global crises are affecting KiwiSaver returns. Uncertain and volatile markets, especially for actively managed funds, mean fund managers reallocate money to try to minimise losses. Not all their bets pay off.

    By 2030, Stats NZ projects that approximately 265,000 people aged 65 and over will be in the workforce.

    The Office for Seniors notes that although older workers have challenges finding and staying in paid work, a third of the workforce is aged over 50 and 50% of people aged 60 to 69 are employed.

    Importantly, as the Retirement Commission research found, a third of people over 65 were not working by choice. An increasing number, who neither own their home nor have significant retirement savings, have to continue working past 65 because they need the money to eat and pay the bills.

    As New Zealand’s population ages, and more seniors have to work to pay for the essentials, it’s clear retirement is going to look different. Betting on the value of a house to fund life after 65 is less certain than it used to be. More than ever, New Zealanders need to consider how they will live well in their later years.

    Claire Dale 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. As house prices drop, will the retirement nest egg still be such a safe bet? – https://theconversation.com/as-house-prices-drop-will-the-retirement-nest-egg-still-be-such-a-safe-bet-259380

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: As house prices drop, will the retirement nest egg still be such a safe bet?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Claire Dale, Research Fellow, the Pensions and Intergenerational Equity (PIE) research hub, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

    MonthiraYodtiwong/Getty Images

    Changes to KiwiSaver, global economic uncertainty and predictions house prices could drop by as much as 20% by 2030 all mean retirement is looking very different to how it once did.

    A retirement strategy based on the equity held in a house is no longer as reliable as it has been in the past. Home ownership in Aotearoa New Zealand fell from 75% in 1991 to 60% in 2023 and is projected to fall to 48% in 2048.

    The average age of a first-home buyer has also risen to 36, meaning an increasing number of New Zealanders (13%) are paying off their mortgages after they reach retirement age.

    The number of retirees renting is also on the rise. By 2048, 40% of them will rent, placing pressure on New Zealand’s housing stock.

    KiwiSaver is unlikely to replace the traditional housing nest egg. New Zealanders have, on average, NZ$37,079 in their KiwiSaver accounts, with thousands of people reaching close to retirement age with less than $10,000 saved.

    Investing at the price peak

    The prospect of retirement looks bleakest for those currently aged between 35 and 49 years old. A recent report from credit agency Centrix found this group was struggling the most financially.

    A big part of the problem is that house prices skyrocketed just as they became first-time home buyers. The average asking price for residential property rose by 60.3% over the past decade, from $556,931 at the beginning of 2015 to $892,579 at the end of 2024.

    While incomes have also increased, they have not matched housing prices. In 2000, houses cost about five times the median household income. But by 2025, the median price had risen to 7.5 times the median household income.

    Those who bought their first home around the peak in 2021 are likely to be hit hardest by the forecast drop in house values. According to data insight firm Cotality (formerly Corelogic), nominal prices are expected to pass their 2021 peak by mid-2029. But when adjusted for inflation, prices in mid-2030 would be a fifth below the peak.

    Working into retirement

    Older New Zealanders are also facing significant housing pressures.

    According to a 2022 report from Treasury, over half of superannuitants still paying off mortgages spent more than 80% of their superannuation income on housing costs. Those who are mortgage-free are spending less than 20% of their super on housing.

    Between 2019 and 2024, the percentage of overdue mortgages for the 50+ age groups ranged between 2% and 2.5%, compared to a range of 1% to 1.5% for all mortgages.

    People between the age of 55 and 64 are likely to have purchased their homes in the late 1990s and early 2000s, so are less likely to be hurt by the 2021 peak and subsequent trough.

    Despite this apparent advantage, only 38% of people between 55 and 64 are mortgage free.

    KiwiSaver issues

    The possibility of using accumulated KiwiSaver funds to clear a mortgage is also diminishing. As a result of the 2025 Budget changes to KiwiSaver, employee and employer contributions will rise from April 2026 to 3.5% and from April 2028 to 4%, offsetting the reduced annual government contribution.

    The end of employer contributions matters particularly to the 24% of those aged over 65 years who are still in the workforce. A rule change in 2021 means employers are not required to make contributions or to deduct employee contributions, unless the employee continues to make KiwiSaver contributions.

    But current global crises are affecting KiwiSaver returns. Uncertain and volatile markets, especially for actively managed funds, mean fund managers reallocate money to try to minimise losses. Not all their bets pay off.

    By 2030, Stats NZ projects that approximately 265,000 people aged 65 and over will be in the workforce.

    The Office for Seniors notes that although older workers have challenges finding and staying in paid work, a third of the workforce is aged over 50 and 50% of people aged 60 to 69 are employed.

    Importantly, as the Retirement Commission research found, a third of people over 65 were not working by choice. An increasing number, who neither own their home nor have significant retirement savings, have to continue working past 65 because they need the money to eat and pay the bills.

    As New Zealand’s population ages, and more seniors have to work to pay for the essentials, it’s clear retirement is going to look different. Betting on the value of a house to fund life after 65 is less certain than it used to be. More than ever, New Zealanders need to consider how they will live well in their later years.

    Claire Dale 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. As house prices drop, will the retirement nest egg still be such a safe bet? – https://theconversation.com/as-house-prices-drop-will-the-retirement-nest-egg-still-be-such-a-safe-bet-259380

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: As house prices drop, will the retirement nest egg still be such a safe bet?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Claire Dale, Research Fellow, the Pensions and Intergenerational Equity (PIE) research hub, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

    MonthiraYodtiwong/Getty Images

    Changes to KiwiSaver, global economic uncertainty and predictions house prices could drop by as much as 20% by 2030 all mean retirement is looking very different to how it once did.

    A retirement strategy based on the equity held in a house is no longer as reliable as it has been in the past. Home ownership in Aotearoa New Zealand fell from 75% in 1991 to 60% in 2023 and is projected to fall to 48% in 2048.

    The average age of a first-home buyer has also risen to 36, meaning an increasing number of New Zealanders (13%) are paying off their mortgages after they reach retirement age.

    The number of retirees renting is also on the rise. By 2048, 40% of them will rent, placing pressure on New Zealand’s housing stock.

    KiwiSaver is unlikely to replace the traditional housing nest egg. New Zealanders have, on average, NZ$37,079 in their KiwiSaver accounts, with thousands of people reaching close to retirement age with less than $10,000 saved.

    Investing at the price peak

    The prospect of retirement looks bleakest for those currently aged between 35 and 49 years old. A recent report from credit agency Centrix found this group was struggling the most financially.

    A big part of the problem is that house prices skyrocketed just as they became first-time home buyers. The average asking price for residential property rose by 60.3% over the past decade, from $556,931 at the beginning of 2015 to $892,579 at the end of 2024.

    While incomes have also increased, they have not matched housing prices. In 2000, houses cost about five times the median household income. But by 2025, the median price had risen to 7.5 times the median household income.

    Those who bought their first home around the peak in 2021 are likely to be hit hardest by the forecast drop in house values. According to data insight firm Cotality (formerly Corelogic), nominal prices are expected to pass their 2021 peak by mid-2029. But when adjusted for inflation, prices in mid-2030 would be a fifth below the peak.

    Working into retirement

    Older New Zealanders are also facing significant housing pressures.

    According to a 2022 report from Treasury, over half of superannuitants still paying off mortgages spent more than 80% of their superannuation income on housing costs. Those who are mortgage-free are spending less than 20% of their super on housing.

    Between 2019 and 2024, the percentage of overdue mortgages for the 50+ age groups ranged between 2% and 2.5%, compared to a range of 1% to 1.5% for all mortgages.

    People between the age of 55 and 64 are likely to have purchased their homes in the late 1990s and early 2000s, so are less likely to be hurt by the 2021 peak and subsequent trough.

    Despite this apparent advantage, only 38% of people between 55 and 64 are mortgage free.

    KiwiSaver issues

    The possibility of using accumulated KiwiSaver funds to clear a mortgage is also diminishing. As a result of the 2025 Budget changes to KiwiSaver, employee and employer contributions will rise from April 2026 to 3.5% and from April 2028 to 4%, offsetting the reduced annual government contribution.

    The end of employer contributions matters particularly to the 24% of those aged over 65 years who are still in the workforce. A rule change in 2021 means employers are not required to make contributions or to deduct employee contributions, unless the employee continues to make KiwiSaver contributions.

    But current global crises are affecting KiwiSaver returns. Uncertain and volatile markets, especially for actively managed funds, mean fund managers reallocate money to try to minimise losses. Not all their bets pay off.

    By 2030, Stats NZ projects that approximately 265,000 people aged 65 and over will be in the workforce.

    The Office for Seniors notes that although older workers have challenges finding and staying in paid work, a third of the workforce is aged over 50 and 50% of people aged 60 to 69 are employed.

    Importantly, as the Retirement Commission research found, a third of people over 65 were not working by choice. An increasing number, who neither own their home nor have significant retirement savings, have to continue working past 65 because they need the money to eat and pay the bills.

    As New Zealand’s population ages, and more seniors have to work to pay for the essentials, it’s clear retirement is going to look different. Betting on the value of a house to fund life after 65 is less certain than it used to be. More than ever, New Zealanders need to consider how they will live well in their later years.

    Claire Dale 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. As house prices drop, will the retirement nest egg still be such a safe bet? – https://theconversation.com/as-house-prices-drop-will-the-retirement-nest-egg-still-be-such-a-safe-bet-259380

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: No more card surcharges: what the Reserve Bank’s proposed changes mean for your wallet

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Angel Zhong, Professor of Finance, RMIT University

    That extra 10c on your morning coffee. That $2 surcharge on your taxi ride. The sneaky 1.5% fee when you pay by card at your local restaurant. These could all soon be history.

    The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) has proposed a sweeping reform: abolishing card payment surcharges. The central bank says it’s in the public interest to scrap the system and estimates consumers could collectively save $1.2 billion annually.

    But like all major financial reforms, the devil is in the detail.

    The 20-year experiment is over

    Surcharging was introduced more than two decades ago to expose the true cost of different payment methods. In the early 2000s, card fees were high, cash was king, and surcharges helped nudge consumers toward lower-cost options.

    But fast-forward to 2025, and the payments ecosystem has changed dramatically. Cash now accounts for just 13% of in-person transactions, and the shift to contactless payments, accelerated by the pandemic, has made cards the default for most Australians.

    When there’s no real alternative, a surcharge becomes less a useful price signal and more a penalty for convenience.

    After an eight month review, the bank’s Payments System Board has concluded the surcharge model no longer works in a predominantly cashless economy. The proposal now on the table is to phase out surcharges and instead push for simplified, all-inclusive pricing.

    Who saves – and who pays?

    At first glance, removing surcharges looks like a win for consumers. Every household could save about $60 per year, based on the RBA’s estimates. But payment costs don’t vanish – they shift.

    This is where the Reserve Bank’s proposal is more sophisticated than it may appear. Alongside banning surcharges, it plans to lower interchange fees (the fees merchants pay to card networks like Visa and Mastercard) and introduce caps on international card transactions.

    These changes aim to reduce the burden on merchants, which in turn limits the pressure to raise prices.

    Could prices still rise?

    Some worry that without surcharges, businesses will simply embed the costs into product prices. That’s possible. However, the bank estimates this would result in only a 0.1 percentage point increase in consumer prices overall.

    There are three reasons for that:

    1. most merchants already don’t surcharge, especially small businesses. Of them, 90% may have included card costs in their pricing

    2. competition keeps pricing in check. Retailers in competitive markets can’t raise prices without risking customers

    3. transparency is coming. The reforms will require payment providers to disclose fees more clearly, allowing merchants to compare and switch – fostering more competition and lower costs.

    That said, the effects won’t be felt evenly. Merchants in sectors that do currently surcharge, like hospitality, transport, and tourism, will need to rethink their pricing strategies. Some may absorb costs; others may pass them on.

    The winners

    Consumers stand to benefit most. They’ll avoid surprise fees at checkout, won’t need to switch payment methods to dodge surcharges, and won’t have to report excessive fees to the Australian Consumer and Competition Commission. Combined with lower interchange fees, this means consumers should face less friction and more predictable pricing.

    About 90% of small businesses don’t currently surcharge and would gain around $185 million in net benefits. These businesses often pay higher interchange fees, so the reform will reduce their costs. New transparency requirements will also make it easier to find better deals from payment service providers (PSPs).

    Large businesses already receive lower domestic interchange rates, but they’ll benefit from new caps on foreign-issued card transactions, which is a win for those in e-commerce and tourism.

    The losers

    Banks that issue cards stand to lose about $900 million in interchange revenue under the preferred reform package. Some may respond by raising cardholder fees or cutting rewards, especially on premium credit cards. But they may also gain from increased credit card use as surcharges disappear.

    The 10% of small and 12% of large merchants who currently surcharge will have to adjust. They may face retraining costs and need to revise their pricing strategies.
    Most will be able to adapt, but the transition won’t be cost-free.

    Payment service providers will face about $25 million in compliance costs to remove surcharges and provide clearer fee breakdowns. For some, this may involve significant system changes, though one-off in nature.

    Will it work?

    The Reserve Bank’s proposal tackles real problems: an outdated surcharge model, opaque pricing by payment service providers, and bundling of unrelated services into payment fees. Its success depends on how well these reforms are implemented and whether they deliver real price transparency and lower costs.

    Removing visible price signals may create cross-subsidisation, where users of low-cost debit cards subsidise those who use high-cost rewards credit cards. Some economists argue this could reduce overall efficiency in the system.

    International experience offers mixed lessons. While the European Union and United Kingdom banned most surcharges years ago, outcomes have varied depending on market conditions. Efficiency gains haven’t always followed, and small business concerns persist.

    The road ahead

    The Reserve Bank is seeking feedback until August 26, with a final decision due by year-end. If adopted, the reform will be phased in, allowing time for businesses to adapt.

    For consumers, this may mark the end of hidden payment fees. But for the broader system, success will depend on more than just eliminating surcharges. It will require meaningful competition, transparency, and vigilance during the transition.

    While not a major omission, mobile wallets (such as Apple Pay) and Buy Now, Pay Later (BNPL) services represent a missing component in the broader payments ecosystem that the current reforms do not yet address.

    These platforms operate outside the traditional regulatory framework, often imposing higher merchant fees and lacking the transparency applied to card networks.

    Their growing popularity, especially among younger consumers, means they increasingly shape payment behaviour and merchant cost structures. To build a truly future-ready and equitable payments system, these emerging models may need to be brought into the regulatory fold.

    Angel Zhong 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. No more card surcharges: what the Reserve Bank’s proposed changes mean for your wallet – https://theconversation.com/no-more-card-surcharges-what-the-reserve-banks-proposed-changes-mean-for-your-wallet-261165

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Federal Court rules Australian government doesn’t have a duty of care to protect Torres Strait Islanders from climate change

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Liz Hicks, Lecturer in Law, The University of Melbourne

    Australian Climate Case

    The Federal Court has handed down its long-awaited judgement in a four-year climate case
    brought by Torres Strait Islanders.

    Elders Uncle Pabai Pabai and Uncle Paul Kabai took the Australian government to court on behalf of their community, arguing the government has a duty of care to protect them from climate change. They also asked the court to legally recognise the cultural loss and harm they are experiencing from sea-level rise and climate-induced flooding.

    But the court declined to recognise either duty or to legally recognise cultural harm.

    Many climate justice advocates hoped today’s decision would be the climate equivalent of the famous Mabo decision, which recognised native title. There are many parallels. At stake was the legal recognition of the harms and loss of connection to Country that Australia’s First Peoples are experiencing through government inaction on climate change.

    Vulnerability and leadership

    Torres Strait Islanders are well placed to bring this kind of legal claim.

    To sue a government for climate inaction, plaintiffs often have to show they are particularly impacted by climate harms over and above the rest of the population.

    Claims across the world have been brought by Indigenous peoples, farmers, young people who will experience catastrophic climate impacts in the future, and people with heat-sensitive illnesses.

    The islands on which Uncle Pabai and Uncle Paul live, Sabai and Boigu, are extremely low-lying. Climate-related flooding is already affecting whether people can live there.

    Importantly, small differences in future emissions scenarios will significantly impact their habitability. Every fraction of a degree of warming will matter.

    During the case, climate scientists gave evidence that on the current emissions scenario, the islands are highly likely to be uninhabitable less than 25 years from now.

    This will force Torres Strait Islanders to leave, severing them from thousands of years of tradition, fulfilment of their traditional practices (called Ailan Kastom), and connection to country and identity.

    The legal claim against the Commonwealth

    Uncle Pabai and Uncle Paul argued the Commonwealth government has a duty to protect Torres Strait Islanders from climate change when setting national emissions-reduction targets. They argued the government breached that duty by not setting targets in line with the best available science. This would involve calculating reduction targets by reference to Australia’s share to keep global warming to as close to 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels as possible.

    Second, they argued the government has a duty to protect property, the fulfilment of their traditional customs, and the health and life of Torres Strait Islanders from climate impacts. They argued the government breached that duty by failing to properly fund the construction of sea walls.

    What the Federal Court said

    Justice Wigney’s judgement emphasised the existential threat of climate change. It noted Torres Strait Islanders are particularly vulnerable to climate impacts and face a “bleak future” unless urgent action is taken.

    But it accepted the government’s argument that setting emissions reductions targets, and allocating funding for protective infrastructure, involves “policy” considerations a court can’t review.

    When do governments owe a duty of care to climate vulnerable groups?

    Plaintiffs elsewhere in the world have successfully argued that their government owed them a duty of care to protect them from climate harms by lowering emissions. But the argument has had mixed success in Australia.

    To establish a legal duty of care, plaintiffs need to show they have some kind of special relationship with the defendant. This relationship arises through factors such as the plaintiff’s vulnerability to a certain harm, and the defendant’s knowledge of, and control over, that harm.

    As First Peoples, Uncle Pabai and Uncle Paul argued they have this kind of relationship with the government. They pointed to a range of factors such as the particular vulnerability of the Torres Strait Islanders, and the government’s control over climate harms to them.

    Novel duties of care can be imposed on government and public authorities. But Australian courts have sometimes declined to do this where they would have to judge how governments have weighed different policy considerations.

    This is partly because it would be too difficult for the court to decide whether the government had met the legal standard of behaviour.

    Courts are more willing to find a government owes a duty of care where the government is merely applying a policy, or where it can measure the government’s behaviour against clear standards. But courts have also acknowledged that the distinction between making policy and applying policy is blurry.

    Uncle Pabai and Uncle Paul argued the Australian government has committed to the Paris Agreement, and this sets out a clear legal standard of the “best available science”.

    The Australian government argued its decisions about climate policy involve complex political priorities that a court shouldn’t review. It argued it shouldn’t be bound by the best available science as a legal standard.

    Paul Kabai and Pabai Pabai at Boigu Island, the most northerly inhabited island of Queensland. It is part of the top-western group of the Torres Strait Islands.
    Talei Elu

    The role of courts in protecting people from climate harm

    Today’s decision is a setback for both the climate and Indigenous justice movements. But the situation isn’t as bleak as it may seem.

    Across the world, plaintiffs in courts are gaining legal ground on climate accountability. It’s becoming easier to attribute harms to emitters, and to develop standards against which governments can be measured. And courts frequently reject government arguments that their contribution to climate change is minimal. They emphasise that each country must do its share for global collective action to work.

    It is a question of when, rather than if, law will adapt to deal with climate impacts. Much like a rising tide breaking against a seawall, the future impact of climate change on things that law already protects is too extreme for the law to resist.

    Liz Hicks has previously received a Commonwealth Research Training Program stipend and currently receives funding from the Manchester-Melbourne-Toronto Research Fund for a project on constitutional accountability and the environment. She is also a member of the Australian Greens Victoria.

    – ref. Federal Court rules Australian government doesn’t have a duty of care to protect Torres Strait Islanders from climate change – https://theconversation.com/federal-court-rules-australian-government-doesnt-have-a-duty-of-care-to-protect-torres-strait-islanders-from-climate-change-259999

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Federal Court rules Australian government doesn’t have a duty of care to protect Torres Strait Islanders from climate change

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Liz Hicks, Lecturer in Law, The University of Melbourne

    Australian Climate Case

    The Federal Court has handed down its long-awaited judgement in a four-year climate case
    brought by Torres Strait Islanders.

    Elders Uncle Pabai Pabai and Uncle Paul Kabai took the Australian government to court on behalf of their community, arguing the government has a duty of care to protect them from climate change. They also asked the court to legally recognise the cultural loss and harm they are experiencing from sea-level rise and climate-induced flooding.

    But the court declined to recognise either duty or to legally recognise cultural harm.

    Many climate justice advocates hoped today’s decision would be the climate equivalent of the famous Mabo decision, which recognised native title. There are many parallels. At stake was the legal recognition of the harms and loss of connection to Country that Australia’s First Peoples are experiencing through government inaction on climate change.

    Vulnerability and leadership

    Torres Strait Islanders are well placed to bring this kind of legal claim.

    To sue a government for climate inaction, plaintiffs often have to show they are particularly impacted by climate harms over and above the rest of the population.

    Claims across the world have been brought by Indigenous peoples, farmers, young people who will experience catastrophic climate impacts in the future, and people with heat-sensitive illnesses.

    The islands on which Uncle Pabai and Uncle Paul live, Sabai and Boigu, are extremely low-lying. Climate-related flooding is already affecting whether people can live there.

    Importantly, small differences in future emissions scenarios will significantly impact their habitability. Every fraction of a degree of warming will matter.

    During the case, climate scientists gave evidence that on the current emissions scenario, the islands are highly likely to be uninhabitable less than 25 years from now.

    This will force Torres Strait Islanders to leave, severing them from thousands of years of tradition, fulfilment of their traditional practices (called Ailan Kastom), and connection to country and identity.

    The legal claim against the Commonwealth

    Uncle Pabai and Uncle Paul argued the Commonwealth government has a duty to protect Torres Strait Islanders from climate change when setting national emissions-reduction targets. They argued the government breached that duty by not setting targets in line with the best available science. This would involve calculating reduction targets by reference to Australia’s share to keep global warming to as close to 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels as possible.

    Second, they argued the government has a duty to protect property, the fulfilment of their traditional customs, and the health and life of Torres Strait Islanders from climate impacts. They argued the government breached that duty by failing to properly fund the construction of sea walls.

    What the Federal Court said

    Justice Wigney’s judgement emphasised the existential threat of climate change. It noted Torres Strait Islanders are particularly vulnerable to climate impacts and face a “bleak future” unless urgent action is taken.

    But it accepted the government’s argument that setting emissions reductions targets, and allocating funding for protective infrastructure, involves “policy” considerations a court can’t review.

    When do governments owe a duty of care to climate vulnerable groups?

    Plaintiffs elsewhere in the world have successfully argued that their government owed them a duty of care to protect them from climate harms by lowering emissions. But the argument has had mixed success in Australia.

    To establish a legal duty of care, plaintiffs need to show they have some kind of special relationship with the defendant. This relationship arises through factors such as the plaintiff’s vulnerability to a certain harm, and the defendant’s knowledge of, and control over, that harm.

    As First Peoples, Uncle Pabai and Uncle Paul argued they have this kind of relationship with the government. They pointed to a range of factors such as the particular vulnerability of the Torres Strait Islanders, and the government’s control over climate harms to them.

    Novel duties of care can be imposed on government and public authorities. But Australian courts have sometimes declined to do this where they would have to judge how governments have weighed different policy considerations.

    This is partly because it would be too difficult for the court to decide whether the government had met the legal standard of behaviour.

    Courts are more willing to find a government owes a duty of care where the government is merely applying a policy, or where it can measure the government’s behaviour against clear standards. But courts have also acknowledged that the distinction between making policy and applying policy is blurry.

    Uncle Pabai and Uncle Paul argued the Australian government has committed to the Paris Agreement, and this sets out a clear legal standard of the “best available science”.

    The Australian government argued its decisions about climate policy involve complex political priorities that a court shouldn’t review. It argued it shouldn’t be bound by the best available science as a legal standard.

    Paul Kabai and Pabai Pabai at Boigu Island, the most northerly inhabited island of Queensland. It is part of the top-western group of the Torres Strait Islands.
    Talei Elu

    The role of courts in protecting people from climate harm

    Today’s decision is a setback for both the climate and Indigenous justice movements. But the situation isn’t as bleak as it may seem.

    Across the world, plaintiffs in courts are gaining legal ground on climate accountability. It’s becoming easier to attribute harms to emitters, and to develop standards against which governments can be measured. And courts frequently reject government arguments that their contribution to climate change is minimal. They emphasise that each country must do its share for global collective action to work.

    It is a question of when, rather than if, law will adapt to deal with climate impacts. Much like a rising tide breaking against a seawall, the future impact of climate change on things that law already protects is too extreme for the law to resist.

    Liz Hicks has previously received a Commonwealth Research Training Program stipend and currently receives funding from the Manchester-Melbourne-Toronto Research Fund for a project on constitutional accountability and the environment. She is also a member of the Australian Greens Victoria.

    – ref. Federal Court rules Australian government doesn’t have a duty of care to protect Torres Strait Islanders from climate change – https://theconversation.com/federal-court-rules-australian-government-doesnt-have-a-duty-of-care-to-protect-torres-strait-islanders-from-climate-change-259999

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: President Xi Jinping tells Albanese China ready to ‘push the bilateral relationship further’

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

    Chinese President Xi Jinping has told Anthony Albanese China stands ready to work with Australia “to push the bilateral relationship further”, in their meeting in Beijing on Tuesday.

    During the meeting, Albanese raised Australia’s concern about China’s lack of proper notice about its warships’ live fire exercise early this year.

    The prime minister later told journalists Xi had responded that “China engaged in exercises, just as Australia engages in exercises”.

    The government’s proposed sale of the lease of the Port of Darwin, now in the hands of a Chinese company, was not raised in the discussion.

    On Taiwan, Albanese said he had “reaffirmed […] the position of Australia in support for the status quo”.

    This was the fourth meeting between Xi and Albanese. The prime minister is on a six-day trip to China, accompanied by a business delegation. He is emphasising expanding trade opportunities with our biggest trading partner and attracting more Chinese tourists, whose numbers are not back to pre-pandemic levels.

    Albanese has come under some domestic criticism because this trip comes before he has been able to secure a meeting with United States President Donald Trump.

    In his opening remarks, while the media were present, Xi said the China-Australia relationship had risen “from the setback and turned around, bringing tangible benefits to the Chinese and Australian peoples”.

    “The most important thing we can learn from this is that a commitment to equal treatment, to seeking common ground while sharing differences, pursuing mutually beneficial cooperation, serves the fundamental interests of our two countries and two peoples.

    “No matter how the international landscape may evolve, we should uphold this overall direction unswervingly,” he said.

    “The Chinese side is ready to work with the Australian side to push the bilateral relationship further and make greater progress so as to bring better benefits to our two peoples.”

    Responding, Albanese noted Xi’s comments “about seeking common ground while sharing differences. That approach has indeed produced very positive benefits for both Australia and for China.

    “The Australian government welcomes progress on cooperation under the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement, which has its 10th anniversary year. As a direct result, trade is now flowing freely to the benefit of both countries and to people and businesses on both sides, and Australia will remain a strong supporter of free and fair trade.”

    Albanese told the media after the meeting his government’s approach to the relationship was “patient, calibrated and deliberate”.

    “Given that one out of four Australian jobs depends on trade and given that China is overwhelmingly by far the largest trading partner that Australia has, it is very much in the interest of Australian jobs, and the Australian economy, to have a positive and constructive relationship with China.

    “Dialogue is how we advance our interests, how we manage our differences, and we guard against misunderstanding.

    “President Xi Jinping and I agreed dialogue must be at the centre of our relationship. We also discussed our economic relationship, which is critical to Australia. We spoke about the potential for new engagement in areas such as decarbonisation”.

    Xi did not bring up China’s complaints about Australia’s foreign investment regime.

    Albanese said he raised the issue of Australian writer Yang Jun, who is incarcerated on allegations of espionage, which are denied.

    Premier Li Qiang was hosting a banquet for Albanese on Tuesday night.

    An editorial in the state-owned China Daily praised the Albanese visit, saying it showed “the Australian side has a clearer judgement and understanding of China than it had under previous Scott Morrison government”.

    “The current momentum in the development of bilateral relations between China and Australia shows that if differences are well managed, the steady development of ties can be guaranteed , even at a time when the political landscape of the world is becoming increasingly uncertain and volatile,” the editorial said.

    Australian journalists had a brush with Chinese security, when they were taking shots of local sights in Beijing. Security guards surrounded them and told them to hand over their footage. The incident was resolved by Australian officials.

    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. President Xi Jinping tells Albanese China ready to ‘push the bilateral relationship further’ – https://theconversation.com/president-xi-jinping-tells-albanese-china-ready-to-push-the-bilateral-relationship-further-261094

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Supermarket treatments for depression don’t require a prescription. But do they work?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jon Wardle, Professor of Public Health, Southern Cross University

    Australians have long been some of the highest users of herbal and nutritional supplements that claim to boost mood or ease depression. These include omega-3s (found in fish oil), St John’s wort, probiotics and vitamin D.

    In fact, among Australians with depression, these supplements are more popular than prescription medicines.

    But do they actually work? And how do they compare to other treatments? A new review has assessed the evidence from 209 studies – here’s what it found.

    Do these supplements work?

    The new study aimed to assess the international evidence available for common over-the-counter products for depression in adults aged 18–60.

    Despite their widespread popularity and availability, the study found there is surprisingly little research on these therapies, compared with psychological therapies and prescription antidepressants.

    Only a few products had a relatively large body of evidence suggesting they were effective at treating symptoms. These were omega-3 supplements, St John’s wort, saffron, probiotics and vitamin D.

    However, most products had only a single trial examining their use.

    The researchers noted there was promising evidence for some herbal and nutritional supplements, where multiple studies did exist. These included folic acid, zinc, Rhodiola, lavender and lemon balm. But there is not enough evidence yet to recommend them, so more studies would be needed.

    What does other research say?

    These findings appear to support previous research assessing supplements for depression.

    In 2024, the Australian government’s review of natural therapies also found moderate evidence that several herbal medicines can relieve symptoms in mild to moderate depression. These include curcumin (from turmeric), saffron and St John’s wort.

    It also found moderate evidence St John’s wort was as effective as conventional antidepressants.

    However, the major caveat is that much of the existing evidence relates to mild to moderate depression.

    Mild to moderate depression usually means few symptoms beyond the minimum required for diagnosis (such as loss of pleasure and depressed mood). Major depression involves five or more symptoms along with significant distress and impact on day-to-day function.

    While some products were found to have some effect in major depressive disorders – probiotics, for example – there is little evidence to suggest they’re effective where a large number of symptoms exist.

    Dose and quality varies

    The dose and quality of over-the-counter products can also vary significantly, which can make it difficult to identify appropriate products or assess which ones work.

    In the United Kingdom, official advice for health-care practitioners acknowledges there is evidence St John’s wort can help with less severe forms of depression. But it also advises caution in recommending it, given how much the dose, preparation and quality can vary between different herbal products.

    Man takes a vitamin
    St John’s wort dosage and quality varies between products.
    photoroyalty/Shutterstock

    In Australia, guidelines for psychiatrists treating mood disorders such as depression note that good evidence exists for using omega-3 fatty acids (fish oils). But they highlight that there only seems to be a benefit when the product has 60% or more eicosapentaenoic acid (one of the main types of omega-3).

    Whether folate supplements are effective for depression can depend on their form, which active ingredient is used, and how well the body can absorb it.

    There may be other nuances in other supplements that we need more research to understand.

    Are there any risks or downsides?

    The study also concluded these products present few safety issues, whether used alone or in combination with other treatments. This is the reason most remain available over the counter.

    However, herbal medicines and dietary supplements also contain chemicals that can work like drugs and interact with other medications.

    For example, the way St John’s wort works on neurotransmitters (the body’s chemical messengers) is similar to many prescription antidepressants.

    So taking it alongside antidepressants can lead to serotonin syndrome, a condition which can lead to fever and seizures in extreme instances. In rare cases, you may experience similar side effects to taking antidepressants.

    However, many of these treatments are not only safe but more effective when used together with conventional treatments for depression.

    For instance, some studies suggest omega-3 supplements used in addition to standard antidepressant therapy resulted in the best outcomes. But more research is needed to explore this link.

    How do they stack up against other therapies?

    Pharmaceutical medications, such as antidepressants, and talk therapies remain the gold standard in Australian guidelines for mood disorders. They are the most studied interventions for these disorders, which means we have the most evidence for how well they work.

    However, emerging evidence is developing for other therapies too.

    Lifestyle interventions to improve diet and exercise have been shown to be as effective in addressing symptoms of depression as receiving psychological treatment alone.

    Nutrients are the building blocks of many body processes, and some nutrient deficiencies themselves (such as iron and B12) can cause depressive symptoms. So their potential role of nutritional supplements is perhaps unsurprising.

    However, research – including our own – increasingly demonstrates eating nutrient-rich foods (rather than taking supplements) can be enough to improve symptoms in mood disorders such as depression.

    The Australian government’s review of natural therapies also found the evidence for non-pharmacological treatments, such as yoga, was more certain than for herbal medicines and nutritional supplements in treating depression.

    It’s also important to note that depressive symptoms rarely present alone. They can be secondary to other underlying health conditions (such as hypothyroidism) or present with other conditions.

    Investigating and addressing these potential root causes and improving general health is essential in managing symptoms.

    What are the key takeaways?

    Some herbal and nutritional supplements do appear to have a potentially beneficial effect for less severe forms of depression. But for many of these therapies there is still not enough evidence to offer definitive recommendations.

    While the Therapeutic Goods Administration regulates the safety and quality of supplements, there is still variation in product quality, dose and how well the body can absorb it.

    If you’re thinking of using herbal or nutritional supplements, it’s important to consult a health professional, such as a GP, naturopath or even a psychologist.

    If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14.

    The Conversation

    Jon Wardle is Foundation Director of the National Centre for Naturopathic Medicine and the Maurice Blackmore Chair of Naturopathic Medicine at Southern Cross University, which undertakes training and research in nutritional and herbal therapies. He has received funding from multiple foundations and agencies to conduct research on nutritional and herbal medicines, including the National Health and Medical Research Council and Medical Research Future Fund. He was part of the both the National Health and Medical Research Council Natural Therapies Working Committee and the Department of Health Natural Therapies Review Expert Advisory Panel which supported Professor Kidd in conducting the reviews mentioned in this article. However, this article represents his personal academic opinion and does not represent the opinions of either of these organisations.

    Carrie Thomson-Casey is affiliated with both major psychology professional associations the Australian Psychological Society (APS) and the Australian Association of Psychologists Inc (AAPi). Carrie is also the past convenor and now treasurer of an APS interest group Psychology and Integrative Mental Health.

    Carrie is an author of one of the papers Jon has cited.

    Jessica Bayes has received funding from several organisations to conduct research exploring diet and mental wellbeing, in addition to research investigating nutritional supplements. Jessica has also authored some of the articles referenced here.

    – ref. Supermarket treatments for depression don’t require a prescription. But do they work? – https://theconversation.com/supermarket-treatments-for-depression-dont-require-a-prescription-but-do-they-work-261010

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: A person in the US has died from pneumonic plague. It’s not just a disease of history

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Thomas Jeffries, Senior Lecturer in Microbiology, Western Sydney University

    Corona Borealis Studio/Shutterstock

    A person in Arizona has died from the plague, local health officials reported on Friday.

    This marks the first such death in this region in 18 years. But it’s a stark reminder that this historic disease, though rare nowadays, is not just a disease of the past.

    So what actually is “plague”? And is it any cause for concern in Australia?

    There are 3 types of ‘plague’

    The word “plague” is often used to refer to any major disease epidemic or pandemic, or even to other undesirable events, such as a mouse plague. Naturally, the word can evoke fear.

    But scientifically speaking, plague is a disease caused by the bacterium Yersinia pestis.

    Plague has three main forms: bubonic, septicemic and pneumonic.

    Bubonic is the most common and is named after “buboes”, which are the painful, swollen lymph nodes the infection causes. Other symptoms include fever, headache, chills and weakness.

    Bubonic plague is typically spread by fleas living on animals such as rats, prairie dogs and marmots. If an infected flea moves from their animal host to bite a human, this can cause an infection.

    People can also become infected through handling an animal infected with the disease.

    Septicemic plague occurs if bubonic plague is left untreated, or it can occur directly if the disease enters the bloodstream. Septicemic plague causes bleeding into the organs. The name comes from septicemia, which refers to a serious blood infection.

    The recent death in the United States was due to a case of pneumonic plague, which is the most severe form. Bubonic plague can in some cases spread to the lungs, where it becomes pneumonic plague. However, pneumonic plague can also spread from person to person via tiny respiratory droplets, in a similar way to COVID. Symptoms are similar to the other forms but also include severe pneumonia.

    Some 30–60% of people who contract bubonic plague will die, while the fatality rate can be up to 100% for pneumonic plague if left untreated.

    Animals such as rats can carry the bacterium that causes plague.
    marcus_photo_uk/Shutterstock

    Plague: a potted history

    This disease is one of the most important in history. The Plague of Justinian (541–750CE) killed tens of millions of people in the western Mediterranean, heavily impacting the expansion of the Byzantine Empire.

    The medieval Black Death (1346–53) was also seismic, killing tens of millions of people and up to half of Europe’s population.

    Spread by the growing trade networks of the British empire, the third and most recent plague pandemic spanned the years 1855 until roughly 1960, peaking in the early 1900s. It was responsible for 12 million deaths, primarily in India, and even reached Australia.

    It’s believed the bubonic plague was largely behind these pandemics.

    Plague in the modern day

    First introduced into the US during the third pandemic, plague infects an average of seven people a year in the west of the country, due to being endemic in groundhog and prairie dog populations there. The last major outbreak was 100 years ago.

    Deaths are very rare, with 14 deaths in the past 25 years in the US.

    Globally, there have been a few thousand cases of plague over the past decade.

    The countries with the most cases currently include the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Madagascar and Peru, with cases also occurring in India, central Asia and the US. Cases usually occur in rural and agricultural areas.

    Plague can be treated

    Plague can easily be treated with common antibiotics, typically a course of 10–14 days, which can include both oral and intravenous antibiotics. But it must be treated quickly.

    The recent death is concerning, as it involves the airborne pneumonic form of the disease, the only form that spreads easily from person to person. But there’s no evidence of further spread of the disease within the US at this stage.

    As Y. pestis is not found in Australian animals, there is little risk here. Plague has not been reported in Australia in more than a century.

    But plague, like many diseases, is influenced by environmental conditions. The risk of climate change causing an expansion in the habitat of animal hosts means public health experts around the world should continue to monitor it closely.

    The plague, though often perceived as a disease of history, is still with us and can pose a major health threat if not treated early.

    Thomas Jeffries 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. A person in the US has died from pneumonic plague. It’s not just a disease of history – https://theconversation.com/a-person-in-the-us-has-died-from-pneumonic-plague-its-not-just-a-disease-of-history-261088

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Tyranny is an ever-present threat to civilisations. Here’s how Classical Greece and China dealt with it

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Shannon Brincat, Senior Lecturer in Politics and International Relations, University of the Sunshine Coast

    We’re just a few months into US president Donald Trump’s second term but his rule has already been repeatedly compared to tyranny.

    This may all feel very new to Americans, and to the rest of us watching on from around the world. But the threat of tyranny is an ancient one.

    We can learn much from how people in ancient Greece and China dealt with this issue.

    Where does tyranny come from?

    The peoples of classical Greece were separated into city-states known as the polis.

    A few of these, such as Athens and Argos, were democratic.

    Others, such as Rhodes or Chios, had had democratic features such as civic participation in public life.

    These city-states routinely faced external enemies but also the threat of tyrannical take-over from within.

    Things came to a head in 510 BCE under the rule of an oppressive tyrant known as Hippias. He was ultimately expelled, leading eventually to the establishment of democracy through reforms made under an Athenian statesmen called Cleisthenes.

    According to Plato, tyranny is the most degenerate political regime and emerges out of democracy’s excesses.

    He argued that as democratic citizens become accustomed to living by pleasure rather than reason or duty to the public good, society becomes fragmented.

    Demagogues – populist leaders who gain power by appealing to base desires and prejudices of the masses – promise the people more liberties. They turn citizens away from virtue and toward tyranny.

    Aristotle, who was Plato’s student, defines tyranny as the corrupted form of monarchy. The tyrant perverts the constitutional order to bring about self-serving rulership – the rule of one. Tyranny, he argued, destroys law and justice, eroding all public trust.

    The approach of Plato and Aristotle to combating tyranny was closely tied to their conception of the polis and the importance of citizenship.

    For the classical Greeks, citizenship was a binding relationship of reciprocal duties and obligations owed to all other citizens. The law, they believed, was king.

    It was these conventions that constrained political power, especially the arbitrary rule of one.

    Civic education by participation in daily democratic life promoted virtue, they believed. All citizens and the ruler were subservient to the law – a bond that tyranny destroyed.

    Aristotle said a strong middle class that could best prevent tyranny because they indicated a less unequal, and therefore more stable, society.

    Plato’s view was more inward looking. He saw tyranny as a political manifestation of a disordered “enslaved soul” governed by appetites rather than reason. For him, philosophical guidance back to harmony was required for the tyrant and for the people.

    Only through wisdom, he argued, could the people recognise and reject demagogues and populists.

    Protecting democracy from tyranny

    Some city-states learned from their institutional failings when tyranny had taken them over.

    For example, after a coup of aristocrats overtook Athenian democracy in 411 BCE, Athenians began to swear the Oath of Demophantos. This was among the first attempts at a constitutional safeguard of democracy against tyranny.

    It legally and morally obliged citizens to resist any attempt to overthrow democracy by force. The undertaking was a reciprocal duty; as other scholars have argued, each citizen could count on the support of all others to protect the democracy when a tyrant tried again.

    This made it far more likely for people to take action against a would-be-tyrant; they knew every other citizen had sworn an oath to have their back.

    The Greek historians of the time support these views. For example, Herodotus in the 5th century documented the rise of several tyrants across Asia Minor (modern-day Turkey). He blamed the political vacuum created by the decline of aristocratic rule. Here, the personal ambition and luxury of elites laid the path to tyrannical behaviour.

    Another famous historian named Thucydides, writing at the same time, analysed the power and political corruption behind tyranny. He observed how times of crisis exposed vulnerabilities within Athens, leading to factionalism, instability, and the erosion of democracy.

    Tyranny in classical China

    In classical China we see a complementary, yet unique view of tyranny.

    During the Warring States period (475–221 BCE), when the Zhou Dynasty was divided amongst several competing states, preventing tyranny was a central concern.

    These states were mostly hereditary monarchies rather than democracies but they still emphasised accountability to the people.

    Mencius was a Chinese philosopher and disciple of Confucius.
    Mencius was a Chinese philosopher and disciple of Confucius.
    Pictures from History/Getty Images

    Mencius, a 4th-century BCE Chinese philosopher and Confucian scholar, argued the people’s welfare was the foundation of legitimate rule.

    There is, he argued, a responsibility to all under the Mandate of Heaven (天命, tiānmìng). This ancient Chinese doctrine asserted that heaven grants legitimacy to just rulers. If a ruler became despotic or failed to uphold harmony and virtue, the mandate can be withdrawn, justifying rebellion and dynastic change.

    Mencius famously said a ruler who oppresses the people is not a ruler but a “mere man” who could be violently overthrown.

    Xunzi, another Confucian philosopher writing in the late 4th to 3rd Centuries BCE, believed humans were inherently selfish and chaotic.

    To fend off tyranny he emphasised ritual, education, and rule of law. He believed in formal ceremonies and structured practices such as court etiquette, family rites, and daily ethical conduct. These, he believed, helped cultivate virtue, regulate behaviour, and maintain social harmony.

    Mozi, writing mostly in the 5th to early 4th centuries BCE, was a Chinese philosopher who opposed Confucianism and founded Mohism, offered a different view.

    Opposing all hierarchies, he emphasised jiān ài(兼爱) – universal obligation or care to all others – as a core ethical and political principle.

    According to Mozi, tyranny arises when rulers act selfishly – favoring their own families, states, or interests over the common good. He advocated for strong moral conduct and competence of leaders, rather than their lineage, wealth or status.

    Tyranny today

    Viewed together, these traditions suggest preventing tyranny requires more than just moral leadership.

    Rather, it requires a notion of reciprocity – of shared obligations between citizens – and systemic safeguards against the personal ambitions of rulers.

    Ethical governance, civic education, legal frameworks, and shared responsibilities are essential.

    The Conversation

    Shannon Brincat 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. Tyranny is an ever-present threat to civilisations. Here’s how Classical Greece and China dealt with it – https://theconversation.com/tyranny-is-an-ever-present-threat-to-civilisations-heres-how-classical-greece-and-china-dealt-with-it-259680

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Tyranny is an ever-present threat to civilisations. Here’s how Ancient Greece and China dealt with it

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Shannon Brincat, Senior Lecturer in Politics and International Relations, University of the Sunshine Coast

    Panasevich/Getty Images

    We’re just a few months into US president Donald Trump’s second term but his rule has already been repeatedly compared to tyranny.

    This may all feel very new to Americans, and to the rest of us watching on from around the world. But the threat of tyranny is an ancient one.

    We can learn much from how people in ancient Greece and China dealt with this issue.

    Where does tyranny come from?

    The peoples of classical Greece were separated into city-states known as the polis.

    A few of these, such as Athens and Argos, were democratic.

    Others, such as Rhodes or Chios, had had democratic features such as civic participation in public life.

    These city-states routinely faced external enemies but also the threat of tyrannical take-over from within.

    Things came to a head in 510 BCE under the rule of an oppressive tyrant known as Hippias. He was ultimately expelled, leading eventually to the establishment of democracy through reforms made under an Athenian statesmen called Cleisthenes.

    According to Plato, tyranny is the most degenerate political regime and emerges out of democracy’s excesses.

    He argued that as democratic citizens become accustomed to living by pleasure rather than reason or duty to the public good, society becomes fragmented.

    Demagogues – populist leaders who gain power by appealing to base desires and prejudices of the masses – promise the people more liberties. They turn citizens away from virtue and toward tyranny.

    Aristotle, who was Plato’s student, defines tyranny as the corrupted form of monarchy. The tyrant perverts the constitutional order to bring about self-serving rulership – the rule of one. Tyranny, he argued, destroys law and justice, eroding all public trust.

    The approach of Plato and Aristotle to combating tyranny was closely tied to their conception of the polis and the importance of citizenship.

    For the classical Greeks, citizenship was a binding relationship of reciprocal duties and obligations owed to all other citizens. The law, they believed, was king.

    It was these conventions that constrained political power, especially the arbitrary rule of one.

    Civic education by participation in daily democratic life promoted virtue, they believed. All citizens and the ruler were subservient to the law – a bond that tyranny destroyed.

    Aristotle said a strong middle class that could best prevent tyranny because they indicated a less unequal, and therefore more stable, society.

    Plato’s view was more inward looking. He saw tyranny as a political manifestation of a disordered “enslaved soul” governed by appetites rather than reason. For him, philosophical guidance back to harmony was required for the tyrant and for the people.

    Only through wisdom, he argued, could the people recognise and reject demagogues and populists.

    Protecting democracy from tyranny

    Some city-states learned from their institutional failings when tyranny had taken them over.

    For example, after a coup of aristocrats overtook Athenian democracy in 411 BCE, Athenians began to swear the Oath of Demophantos. This was among the first attempts at a constitutional safeguard of democracy against tyranny.

    It legally and morally obliged citizens to resist any attempt to overthrow democracy by force. The undertaking was a reciprocal duty; as other scholars have argued, each citizen could count on the support of all others to protect the democracy when a tyrant tried again.

    This made it far more likely for people to take action against a would-be-tyrant; they knew every other citizen had sworn an oath to have their back.

    The Greek historians of the time support these views. For example, Herodotus in the 5th century documented the rise of several tyrants across Asia Minor (modern-day Turkey). He blamed the political vacuum created by the decline of aristocratic rule. Here, the personal ambition and luxury of elites laid the path to tyrannical behaviour.

    Another famous historian named Thucydides, writing at the same time, analysed the power and political corruption behind tyranny. He observed how times of crisis exposed vulnerabilities within Athens, leading to factionalism, instability, and the erosion of democracy.

    Tyranny in classical China

    In classical China we see a complementary, yet unique view of tyranny.

    During the Warring States period (475–221 BCE), when the Zhou Dynasty was divided amongst several competing states, preventing tyranny was a central concern.

    These states were mostly hereditary monarchies rather than democracies but they still emphasised accountability to the people.

    Mencius was a Chinese philosopher and disciple of Confucius.
    Pictures from History/Getty Images

    Mencius, a 4th-century BCE Chinese philosopher and Confucian scholar, argued the people’s welfare was the foundation of legitimate rule.

    There is, he argued, a responsibility to all under the Mandate of Heaven (天命, tiānmìng). This ancient Chinese doctrine asserted that heaven grants legitimacy to just rulers. If a ruler became despotic or failed to uphold harmony and virtue, the mandate can be withdrawn, justifying rebellion and dynastic change.

    Mencius famously said a ruler who oppresses the people is not a ruler but a “mere man” who could be violently overthrown.

    Xunzi, another Confucian philosopher writing in the late 4th to 3rd Centuries BCE, believed humans were inherently selfish and chaotic.

    To fend off tyranny he emphasised ritual, education, and rule of law. He believed in formal ceremonies and structured practices such as court etiquette, family rites, and daily ethical conduct. These, he believed, helped cultivate virtue, regulate behaviour, and maintain social harmony.

    Mozi, writing mostly in the 5th to early 4th centuries BCE, was a Chinese philosopher who opposed Confucianism and founded Mohism, offered a different view.

    Opposing all hierarchies, he emphasised jiān ài(兼爱) – universal obligation or care to all others – as a core ethical and political principle.

    According to Mozi, tyranny arises when rulers act selfishly – favoring their own families, states, or interests over the common good. He advocated for strong moral conduct and competence of leaders, rather than their lineage, wealth or status.

    Tyranny today

    Viewed together, these traditions suggest preventing tyranny requires more than just moral leadership.

    Rather, it requires a notion of reciprocity – of shared obligations between citizens – and systemic safeguards against the personal ambitions of rulers.

    Ethical governance, civic education, legal frameworks, and shared responsibilities are essential.

    Shannon Brincat 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. Tyranny is an ever-present threat to civilisations. Here’s how Ancient Greece and China dealt with it – https://theconversation.com/tyranny-is-an-ever-present-threat-to-civilisations-heres-how-ancient-greece-and-china-dealt-with-it-259680

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Tyranny is an ever-present threat to civilisations. Here’s how Ancient Greece and China dealt with it

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Shannon Brincat, Senior Lecturer in Politics and International Relations, University of the Sunshine Coast

    Panasevich/Getty Images

    We’re just a few months into US president Donald Trump’s second term but his rule has already been repeatedly compared to tyranny.

    This may all feel very new to Americans, and to the rest of us watching on from around the world. But the threat of tyranny is an ancient one.

    We can learn much from how people in ancient Greece and China dealt with this issue.

    Where does tyranny come from?

    The peoples of classical Greece were separated into city-states known as the polis.

    A few of these, such as Athens and Argos, were democratic.

    Others, such as Rhodes or Chios, had had democratic features such as civic participation in public life.

    These city-states routinely faced external enemies but also the threat of tyrannical take-over from within.

    Things came to a head in 510 BCE under the rule of an oppressive tyrant known as Hippias. He was ultimately expelled, leading eventually to the establishment of democracy through reforms made under an Athenian statesmen called Cleisthenes.

    According to Plato, tyranny is the most degenerate political regime and emerges out of democracy’s excesses.

    He argued that as democratic citizens become accustomed to living by pleasure rather than reason or duty to the public good, society becomes fragmented.

    Demagogues – populist leaders who gain power by appealing to base desires and prejudices of the masses – promise the people more liberties. They turn citizens away from virtue and toward tyranny.

    Aristotle, who was Plato’s student, defines tyranny as the corrupted form of monarchy. The tyrant perverts the constitutional order to bring about self-serving rulership – the rule of one. Tyranny, he argued, destroys law and justice, eroding all public trust.

    The approach of Plato and Aristotle to combating tyranny was closely tied to their conception of the polis and the importance of citizenship.

    For the classical Greeks, citizenship was a binding relationship of reciprocal duties and obligations owed to all other citizens. The law, they believed, was king.

    It was these conventions that constrained political power, especially the arbitrary rule of one.

    Civic education by participation in daily democratic life promoted virtue, they believed. All citizens and the ruler were subservient to the law – a bond that tyranny destroyed.

    Aristotle said a strong middle class that could best prevent tyranny because they indicated a less unequal, and therefore more stable, society.

    Plato’s view was more inward looking. He saw tyranny as a political manifestation of a disordered “enslaved soul” governed by appetites rather than reason. For him, philosophical guidance back to harmony was required for the tyrant and for the people.

    Only through wisdom, he argued, could the people recognise and reject demagogues and populists.

    Protecting democracy from tyranny

    Some city-states learned from their institutional failings when tyranny had taken them over.

    For example, after a coup of aristocrats overtook Athenian democracy in 411 BCE, Athenians began to swear the Oath of Demophantos. This was among the first attempts at a constitutional safeguard of democracy against tyranny.

    It legally and morally obliged citizens to resist any attempt to overthrow democracy by force. The undertaking was a reciprocal duty; as other scholars have argued, each citizen could count on the support of all others to protect the democracy when a tyrant tried again.

    This made it far more likely for people to take action against a would-be-tyrant; they knew every other citizen had sworn an oath to have their back.

    The Greek historians of the time support these views. For example, Herodotus in the 5th century documented the rise of several tyrants across Asia Minor (modern-day Turkey). He blamed the political vacuum created by the decline of aristocratic rule. Here, the personal ambition and luxury of elites laid the path to tyrannical behaviour.

    Another famous historian named Thucydides, writing at the same time, analysed the power and political corruption behind tyranny. He observed how times of crisis exposed vulnerabilities within Athens, leading to factionalism, instability, and the erosion of democracy.

    Tyranny in classical China

    In classical China we see a complementary, yet unique view of tyranny.

    During the Warring States period (475–221 BCE), when the Zhou Dynasty was divided amongst several competing states, preventing tyranny was a central concern.

    These states were mostly hereditary monarchies rather than democracies but they still emphasised accountability to the people.

    Mencius was a Chinese philosopher and disciple of Confucius.
    Pictures from History/Getty Images

    Mencius, a 4th-century BCE Chinese philosopher and Confucian scholar, argued the people’s welfare was the foundation of legitimate rule.

    There is, he argued, a responsibility to all under the Mandate of Heaven (天命, tiānmìng). This ancient Chinese doctrine asserted that heaven grants legitimacy to just rulers. If a ruler became despotic or failed to uphold harmony and virtue, the mandate can be withdrawn, justifying rebellion and dynastic change.

    Mencius famously said a ruler who oppresses the people is not a ruler but a “mere man” who could be violently overthrown.

    Xunzi, another Confucian philosopher writing in the late 4th to 3rd Centuries BCE, believed humans were inherently selfish and chaotic.

    To fend off tyranny he emphasised ritual, education, and rule of law. He believed in formal ceremonies and structured practices such as court etiquette, family rites, and daily ethical conduct. These, he believed, helped cultivate virtue, regulate behaviour, and maintain social harmony.

    Mozi, writing mostly in the 5th to early 4th centuries BCE, was a Chinese philosopher who opposed Confucianism and founded Mohism, offered a different view.

    Opposing all hierarchies, he emphasised jiān ài(兼爱) – universal obligation or care to all others – as a core ethical and political principle.

    According to Mozi, tyranny arises when rulers act selfishly – favoring their own families, states, or interests over the common good. He advocated for strong moral conduct and competence of leaders, rather than their lineage, wealth or status.

    Tyranny today

    Viewed together, these traditions suggest preventing tyranny requires more than just moral leadership.

    Rather, it requires a notion of reciprocity – of shared obligations between citizens – and systemic safeguards against the personal ambitions of rulers.

    Ethical governance, civic education, legal frameworks, and shared responsibilities are essential.

    Shannon Brincat 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. Tyranny is an ever-present threat to civilisations. Here’s how Ancient Greece and China dealt with it – https://theconversation.com/tyranny-is-an-ever-present-threat-to-civilisations-heres-how-ancient-greece-and-china-dealt-with-it-259680

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Tyranny is an ever-present threat to civilisations. Here’s how Ancient Greece and China dealt with it

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Shannon Brincat, Senior Lecturer in Politics and International Relations, University of the Sunshine Coast

    Panasevich/Getty Images

    We’re just a few months into US president Donald Trump’s second term but his rule has already been repeatedly compared to tyranny.

    This may all feel very new to Americans, and to the rest of us watching on from around the world. But the threat of tyranny is an ancient one.

    We can learn much from how people in ancient Greece and China dealt with this issue.

    Where does tyranny come from?

    The peoples of classical Greece were separated into city-states known as the polis.

    A few of these, such as Athens and Argos, were democratic.

    Others, such as Rhodes or Chios, had had democratic features such as civic participation in public life.

    These city-states routinely faced external enemies but also the threat of tyrannical take-over from within.

    Things came to a head in 510 BCE under the rule of an oppressive tyrant known as Hippias. He was ultimately expelled, leading eventually to the establishment of democracy through reforms made under an Athenian statesmen called Cleisthenes.

    According to Plato, tyranny is the most degenerate political regime and emerges out of democracy’s excesses.

    He argued that as democratic citizens become accustomed to living by pleasure rather than reason or duty to the public good, society becomes fragmented.

    Demagogues – populist leaders who gain power by appealing to base desires and prejudices of the masses – promise the people more liberties. They turn citizens away from virtue and toward tyranny.

    Aristotle, who was Plato’s student, defines tyranny as the corrupted form of monarchy. The tyrant perverts the constitutional order to bring about self-serving rulership – the rule of one. Tyranny, he argued, destroys law and justice, eroding all public trust.

    The approach of Plato and Aristotle to combating tyranny was closely tied to their conception of the polis and the importance of citizenship.

    For the classical Greeks, citizenship was a binding relationship of reciprocal duties and obligations owed to all other citizens. The law, they believed, was king.

    It was these conventions that constrained political power, especially the arbitrary rule of one.

    Civic education by participation in daily democratic life promoted virtue, they believed. All citizens and the ruler were subservient to the law – a bond that tyranny destroyed.

    Aristotle said a strong middle class that could best prevent tyranny because they indicated a less unequal, and therefore more stable, society.

    Plato’s view was more inward looking. He saw tyranny as a political manifestation of a disordered “enslaved soul” governed by appetites rather than reason. For him, philosophical guidance back to harmony was required for the tyrant and for the people.

    Only through wisdom, he argued, could the people recognise and reject demagogues and populists.

    Protecting democracy from tyranny

    Some city-states learned from their institutional failings when tyranny had taken them over.

    For example, after a coup of aristocrats overtook Athenian democracy in 411 BCE, Athenians began to swear the Oath of Demophantos. This was among the first attempts at a constitutional safeguard of democracy against tyranny.

    It legally and morally obliged citizens to resist any attempt to overthrow democracy by force. The undertaking was a reciprocal duty; as other scholars have argued, each citizen could count on the support of all others to protect the democracy when a tyrant tried again.

    This made it far more likely for people to take action against a would-be-tyrant; they knew every other citizen had sworn an oath to have their back.

    The Greek historians of the time support these views. For example, Herodotus in the 5th century documented the rise of several tyrants across Asia Minor (modern-day Turkey). He blamed the political vacuum created by the decline of aristocratic rule. Here, the personal ambition and luxury of elites laid the path to tyrannical behaviour.

    Another famous historian named Thucydides, writing at the same time, analysed the power and political corruption behind tyranny. He observed how times of crisis exposed vulnerabilities within Athens, leading to factionalism, instability, and the erosion of democracy.

    Tyranny in classical China

    In classical China we see a complementary, yet unique view of tyranny.

    During the Warring States period (475–221 BCE), when the Zhou Dynasty was divided amongst several competing states, preventing tyranny was a central concern.

    These states were mostly hereditary monarchies rather than democracies but they still emphasised accountability to the people.

    Mencius was a Chinese philosopher and disciple of Confucius.
    Pictures from History/Getty Images

    Mencius, a 4th-century BCE Chinese philosopher and Confucian scholar, argued the people’s welfare was the foundation of legitimate rule.

    There is, he argued, a responsibility to all under the Mandate of Heaven (天命, tiānmìng). This ancient Chinese doctrine asserted that heaven grants legitimacy to just rulers. If a ruler became despotic or failed to uphold harmony and virtue, the mandate can be withdrawn, justifying rebellion and dynastic change.

    Mencius famously said a ruler who oppresses the people is not a ruler but a “mere man” who could be violently overthrown.

    Xunzi, another Confucian philosopher writing in the late 4th to 3rd Centuries BCE, believed humans were inherently selfish and chaotic.

    To fend off tyranny he emphasised ritual, education, and rule of law. He believed in formal ceremonies and structured practices such as court etiquette, family rites, and daily ethical conduct. These, he believed, helped cultivate virtue, regulate behaviour, and maintain social harmony.

    Mozi, writing mostly in the 5th to early 4th centuries BCE, was a Chinese philosopher who opposed Confucianism and founded Mohism, offered a different view.

    Opposing all hierarchies, he emphasised jiān ài(兼爱) – universal obligation or care to all others – as a core ethical and political principle.

    According to Mozi, tyranny arises when rulers act selfishly – favoring their own families, states, or interests over the common good. He advocated for strong moral conduct and competence of leaders, rather than their lineage, wealth or status.

    Tyranny today

    Viewed together, these traditions suggest preventing tyranny requires more than just moral leadership.

    Rather, it requires a notion of reciprocity – of shared obligations between citizens – and systemic safeguards against the personal ambitions of rulers.

    Ethical governance, civic education, legal frameworks, and shared responsibilities are essential.

    Shannon Brincat 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. Tyranny is an ever-present threat to civilisations. Here’s how Ancient Greece and China dealt with it – https://theconversation.com/tyranny-is-an-ever-present-threat-to-civilisations-heres-how-ancient-greece-and-china-dealt-with-it-259680

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Tyranny is an ever-present threat to civilisations. Here’s how Ancient Greece and China dealt with it

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Shannon Brincat, Senior Lecturer in Politics and International Relations, University of the Sunshine Coast

    Panasevich/Getty Images

    We’re just a few months into US president Donald Trump’s second term but his rule has already been repeatedly compared to tyranny.

    This may all feel very new to Americans, and to the rest of us watching on from around the world. But the threat of tyranny is an ancient one.

    We can learn much from how people in ancient Greece and China dealt with this issue.

    Where does tyranny come from?

    The peoples of classical Greece were separated into city-states known as the polis.

    A few of these, such as Athens and Argos, were democratic.

    Others, such as Rhodes or Chios, had had democratic features such as civic participation in public life.

    These city-states routinely faced external enemies but also the threat of tyrannical take-over from within.

    Things came to a head in 510 BCE under the rule of an oppressive tyrant known as Hippias. He was ultimately expelled, leading eventually to the establishment of democracy through reforms made under an Athenian statesmen called Cleisthenes.

    According to Plato, tyranny is the most degenerate political regime and emerges out of democracy’s excesses.

    He argued that as democratic citizens become accustomed to living by pleasure rather than reason or duty to the public good, society becomes fragmented.

    Demagogues – populist leaders who gain power by appealing to base desires and prejudices of the masses – promise the people more liberties. They turn citizens away from virtue and toward tyranny.

    Aristotle, who was Plato’s student, defines tyranny as the corrupted form of monarchy. The tyrant perverts the constitutional order to bring about self-serving rulership – the rule of one. Tyranny, he argued, destroys law and justice, eroding all public trust.

    The approach of Plato and Aristotle to combating tyranny was closely tied to their conception of the polis and the importance of citizenship.

    For the classical Greeks, citizenship was a binding relationship of reciprocal duties and obligations owed to all other citizens. The law, they believed, was king.

    It was these conventions that constrained political power, especially the arbitrary rule of one.

    Civic education by participation in daily democratic life promoted virtue, they believed. All citizens and the ruler were subservient to the law – a bond that tyranny destroyed.

    Aristotle said a strong middle class that could best prevent tyranny because they indicated a less unequal, and therefore more stable, society.

    Plato’s view was more inward looking. He saw tyranny as a political manifestation of a disordered “enslaved soul” governed by appetites rather than reason. For him, philosophical guidance back to harmony was required for the tyrant and for the people.

    Only through wisdom, he argued, could the people recognise and reject demagogues and populists.

    Protecting democracy from tyranny

    Some city-states learned from their institutional failings when tyranny had taken them over.

    For example, after a coup of aristocrats overtook Athenian democracy in 411 BCE, Athenians began to swear the Oath of Demophantos. This was among the first attempts at a constitutional safeguard of democracy against tyranny.

    It legally and morally obliged citizens to resist any attempt to overthrow democracy by force. The undertaking was a reciprocal duty; as other scholars have argued, each citizen could count on the support of all others to protect the democracy when a tyrant tried again.

    This made it far more likely for people to take action against a would-be-tyrant; they knew every other citizen had sworn an oath to have their back.

    The Greek historians of the time support these views. For example, Herodotus in the 5th century documented the rise of several tyrants across Asia Minor (modern-day Turkey). He blamed the political vacuum created by the decline of aristocratic rule. Here, the personal ambition and luxury of elites laid the path to tyrannical behaviour.

    Another famous historian named Thucydides, writing at the same time, analysed the power and political corruption behind tyranny. He observed how times of crisis exposed vulnerabilities within Athens, leading to factionalism, instability, and the erosion of democracy.

    Tyranny in classical China

    In classical China we see a complementary, yet unique view of tyranny.

    During the Warring States period (475–221 BCE), when the Zhou Dynasty was divided amongst several competing states, preventing tyranny was a central concern.

    These states were mostly hereditary monarchies rather than democracies but they still emphasised accountability to the people.

    Mencius was a Chinese philosopher and disciple of Confucius.
    Pictures from History/Getty Images

    Mencius, a 4th-century BCE Chinese philosopher and Confucian scholar, argued the people’s welfare was the foundation of legitimate rule.

    There is, he argued, a responsibility to all under the Mandate of Heaven (天命, tiānmìng). This ancient Chinese doctrine asserted that heaven grants legitimacy to just rulers. If a ruler became despotic or failed to uphold harmony and virtue, the mandate can be withdrawn, justifying rebellion and dynastic change.

    Mencius famously said a ruler who oppresses the people is not a ruler but a “mere man” who could be violently overthrown.

    Xunzi, another Confucian philosopher writing in the late 4th to 3rd Centuries BCE, believed humans were inherently selfish and chaotic.

    To fend off tyranny he emphasised ritual, education, and rule of law. He believed in formal ceremonies and structured practices such as court etiquette, family rites, and daily ethical conduct. These, he believed, helped cultivate virtue, regulate behaviour, and maintain social harmony.

    Mozi, writing mostly in the 5th to early 4th centuries BCE, was a Chinese philosopher who opposed Confucianism and founded Mohism, offered a different view.

    Opposing all hierarchies, he emphasised jiān ài(兼爱) – universal obligation or care to all others – as a core ethical and political principle.

    According to Mozi, tyranny arises when rulers act selfishly – favoring their own families, states, or interests over the common good. He advocated for strong moral conduct and competence of leaders, rather than their lineage, wealth or status.

    Tyranny today

    Viewed together, these traditions suggest preventing tyranny requires more than just moral leadership.

    Rather, it requires a notion of reciprocity – of shared obligations between citizens – and systemic safeguards against the personal ambitions of rulers.

    Ethical governance, civic education, legal frameworks, and shared responsibilities are essential.

    Shannon Brincat 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. Tyranny is an ever-present threat to civilisations. Here’s how Ancient Greece and China dealt with it – https://theconversation.com/tyranny-is-an-ever-present-threat-to-civilisations-heres-how-ancient-greece-and-china-dealt-with-it-259680

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Tyranny is an ever-present threat to civilisations. Here’s how Ancient Greece and China dealt with it

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Shannon Brincat, Senior Lecturer in Politics and International Relations, University of the Sunshine Coast

    Panasevich/Getty Images

    We’re just a few months into US president Donald Trump’s second term but his rule has already been repeatedly compared to tyranny.

    This may all feel very new to Americans, and to the rest of us watching on from around the world. But the threat of tyranny is an ancient one.

    We can learn much from how people in ancient Greece and China dealt with this issue.

    Where does tyranny come from?

    The peoples of classical Greece were separated into city-states known as the polis.

    A few of these, such as Athens and Argos, were democratic.

    Others, such as Rhodes or Chios, had had democratic features such as civic participation in public life.

    These city-states routinely faced external enemies but also the threat of tyrannical take-over from within.

    Things came to a head in 510 BCE under the rule of an oppressive tyrant known as Hippias. He was ultimately expelled, leading eventually to the establishment of democracy through reforms made under an Athenian statesmen called Cleisthenes.

    According to Plato, tyranny is the most degenerate political regime and emerges out of democracy’s excesses.

    He argued that as democratic citizens become accustomed to living by pleasure rather than reason or duty to the public good, society becomes fragmented.

    Demagogues – populist leaders who gain power by appealing to base desires and prejudices of the masses – promise the people more liberties. They turn citizens away from virtue and toward tyranny.

    Aristotle, who was Plato’s student, defines tyranny as the corrupted form of monarchy. The tyrant perverts the constitutional order to bring about self-serving rulership – the rule of one. Tyranny, he argued, destroys law and justice, eroding all public trust.

    The approach of Plato and Aristotle to combating tyranny was closely tied to their conception of the polis and the importance of citizenship.

    For the classical Greeks, citizenship was a binding relationship of reciprocal duties and obligations owed to all other citizens. The law, they believed, was king.

    It was these conventions that constrained political power, especially the arbitrary rule of one.

    Civic education by participation in daily democratic life promoted virtue, they believed. All citizens and the ruler were subservient to the law – a bond that tyranny destroyed.

    Aristotle said a strong middle class that could best prevent tyranny because they indicated a less unequal, and therefore more stable, society.

    Plato’s view was more inward looking. He saw tyranny as a political manifestation of a disordered “enslaved soul” governed by appetites rather than reason. For him, philosophical guidance back to harmony was required for the tyrant and for the people.

    Only through wisdom, he argued, could the people recognise and reject demagogues and populists.

    Protecting democracy from tyranny

    Some city-states learned from their institutional failings when tyranny had taken them over.

    For example, after a coup of aristocrats overtook Athenian democracy in 411 BCE, Athenians began to swear the Oath of Demophantos. This was among the first attempts at a constitutional safeguard of democracy against tyranny.

    It legally and morally obliged citizens to resist any attempt to overthrow democracy by force. The undertaking was a reciprocal duty; as other scholars have argued, each citizen could count on the support of all others to protect the democracy when a tyrant tried again.

    This made it far more likely for people to take action against a would-be-tyrant; they knew every other citizen had sworn an oath to have their back.

    The Greek historians of the time support these views. For example, Herodotus in the 5th century documented the rise of several tyrants across Asia Minor (modern-day Turkey). He blamed the political vacuum created by the decline of aristocratic rule. Here, the personal ambition and luxury of elites laid the path to tyrannical behaviour.

    Another famous historian named Thucydides, writing at the same time, analysed the power and political corruption behind tyranny. He observed how times of crisis exposed vulnerabilities within Athens, leading to factionalism, instability, and the erosion of democracy.

    Tyranny in classical China

    In classical China we see a complementary, yet unique view of tyranny.

    During the Warring States period (475–221 BCE), when the Zhou Dynasty was divided amongst several competing states, preventing tyranny was a central concern.

    These states were mostly hereditary monarchies rather than democracies but they still emphasised accountability to the people.

    Mencius was a Chinese philosopher and disciple of Confucius.
    Pictures from History/Getty Images

    Mencius, a 4th-century BCE Chinese philosopher and Confucian scholar, argued the people’s welfare was the foundation of legitimate rule.

    There is, he argued, a responsibility to all under the Mandate of Heaven (天命, tiānmìng). This ancient Chinese doctrine asserted that heaven grants legitimacy to just rulers. If a ruler became despotic or failed to uphold harmony and virtue, the mandate can be withdrawn, justifying rebellion and dynastic change.

    Mencius famously said a ruler who oppresses the people is not a ruler but a “mere man” who could be violently overthrown.

    Xunzi, another Confucian philosopher writing in the late 4th to 3rd Centuries BCE, believed humans were inherently selfish and chaotic.

    To fend off tyranny he emphasised ritual, education, and rule of law. He believed in formal ceremonies and structured practices such as court etiquette, family rites, and daily ethical conduct. These, he believed, helped cultivate virtue, regulate behaviour, and maintain social harmony.

    Mozi, writing mostly in the 5th to early 4th centuries BCE, was a Chinese philosopher who opposed Confucianism and founded Mohism, offered a different view.

    Opposing all hierarchies, he emphasised jiān ài(兼爱) – universal obligation or care to all others – as a core ethical and political principle.

    According to Mozi, tyranny arises when rulers act selfishly – favoring their own families, states, or interests over the common good. He advocated for strong moral conduct and competence of leaders, rather than their lineage, wealth or status.

    Tyranny today

    Viewed together, these traditions suggest preventing tyranny requires more than just moral leadership.

    Rather, it requires a notion of reciprocity – of shared obligations between citizens – and systemic safeguards against the personal ambitions of rulers.

    Ethical governance, civic education, legal frameworks, and shared responsibilities are essential.

    Shannon Brincat 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. Tyranny is an ever-present threat to civilisations. Here’s how Ancient Greece and China dealt with it – https://theconversation.com/tyranny-is-an-ever-present-threat-to-civilisations-heres-how-ancient-greece-and-china-dealt-with-it-259680

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: After a hopeful start, Labor’s affordable housing fund is proving problematic

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katrina Raynor, Director of the Centre for Equitable Housing, Per Capita and Research Associate, The University of Melbourne

    When the Albanese government announced the A$10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund in 2023, the news reverberated through the housing sector.

    A new funding facility to help build 30,000 social and affordable rental homes in five years. Given we only increased Australia’s social housing stock by 24,000 dwellings in the decade to 2024, this represents a significant uptick.

    The future fund is part of the National Housing Accord’s overall commitment to build 1.2 million new homes by the end of the decade. This target is now in serious doubt following advice from Treasury.

    Nonetheless, people were genuinely excited and hopeful about the focus on meeting the housing needs of lower income people.

    But stakeholders were also sceptical – and they had every right to be.

    How it works

    The future fund is a dedicated investment vehicle which helps finance new housing builds using the returns on the original $10 billion endowment.

    It does this by distributing loans and grants via competitive funding rounds open to not-for-profits, the private sector and other levels of government.

    When announcing the scheme, then Housing Minister Julie Collins said it would help address acute housing needs for people who are especially vulnerable:

    […] this will provide housing support to remote Indigenous communities, women and children experiencing domestic and family violence, older women at risk of homelessness, and veterans experiencing or at risk of homelessness.

    Two funding rounds have so far been announced – 9,284 social dwellings and 9,366 affordable homes.

    State and territory governments are involved in the process by providing access to land, expediting planning approvals and sometimes acting as developers.

    Reasons for hope

    The future fund is what the housing sector has been begging for for decades. It is a consistent, somewhat protected, pot of funding with a mandate to build social and affordable housing at scale.

    It is one of several hopeful changes underway in the housing space. The housing portfolio is now ensconced in cabinet after being elevated in the first Albanese ministry.

    Summerhill Village is a social housing project in Melbourne designed for older women to live independently.
    Author supplied, CC BY

    The relocation of housing and homelessness into Treasury is another positive development. Previously, policy areas were fragmented across a variety of departments.

    This is particularly welcome given we are yet to see the promised National Housing and Homeless Plan despite consultations beginning in 2023.

    Room for improvement

    While the future fund is a welcome infusion of money, my discussions with stakeholders have provided mixed feedback.

    As with any new program, there have been teething issues. Red tape has slowed contracts, while the May election paused all negotiations.

    Housing funding in Australia remains lumpy – characterised by sudden changes in the scale and priorities of funding – and policy is highly politicised.

    Survival of the cheapest

    Loans and grants are distributed through competitive, oversubscribed funding rounds.

    Coupled with a need for quick political wins, bigger players with lower cost projects are far more likely to receive funding to guarantee a larger quantum of housing.

    While this may appear to reflect greater value for money, it means the scheme is incentivised to fund affordable housing aimed at moderate income households rather than social housing aimed at more vulnerable people. New homes are not targeted where need is greatest.

    Given affordable housing will be delivered at 75% of market rent, there are many people who will still not be able to afford it. While we undoubtedly need both, the need is far greater for social housing.

    As the chart above shows, almost all funding in round one went to Tier One Community Housing Providers, who are the biggest developers with the most in-house capacity.

    While privileging larger organisations is not necessarily a bad thing, it does mean smaller players with more location or cohort-specific strengths are continuing to miss out.

    For example, only one Aboriginal Community Housing Provider was successful in the first round, sparking calls for an Aboriginal-specific funding round.

    Program inefficency

    Submitting bids is time consuming and uncertain, especially for funding rounds designed to stimulate new partnerships between stakeholders who haven’t worked together before.

    Further, establishing partnerships and contracts with government is labour intensive and complex.

    One industry insider recently joked the main things being funded by the scheme are new backyard pools for Sydney-based lawyers.

    Beyond this, the future fund provides availability payments – which recur quarterly during the operating phase of projects – rather than upfront capital grants.

    According to research, this is one of the most inefficient ways to fund social housing. Capital grants paid at the start to support construction are far more cost effective.

    Lack of operational funds

    Another key barrier is the focus on “bricks and mortar” to the exclusion of ongoing service costs.

    Funding to cover tenancy support, building maintenance and operations, and other wrap-around services is essential, especially for social housing aimed at individuals with higher needs.

    This is not covered by the fund and is yet to be substantively picked up by state governments either.

    Clearly, there are aspects of the housing future fund that need improvement. But this is not a call to abolish the scheme.

    The last thing the sector needs is another policy pivot or funding cut. In fact, doubling the fund to $20 billion would be warranted.

    The 30,000 new homes fall well short of the estimated 640,000 Australian households whose housing needs are currently unmet.

    The Housing Australia Future Fund is just one element – but an important one – in the suite of measures we should be using to address acute housing needs.

    Katrina Raynor is the Director of Per Capita’s Centre for Equitable Housing. Per Capita is an independent think tank that receives funding from a range of sources including philanthropy, unions, individuals and government.

    – ref. After a hopeful start, Labor’s affordable housing fund is proving problematic – https://theconversation.com/after-a-hopeful-start-labors-affordable-housing-fund-is-proving-problematic-260085

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: After a hopeful start, Labor’s affordable housing fund is proving problematic

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katrina Raynor, Director of the Centre for Equitable Housing, Per Capita and Research Associate, The University of Melbourne

    When the Albanese government announced the A$10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund in 2023, the news reverberated through the housing sector.

    A new funding facility to help build 30,000 social and affordable rental homes in five years. Given we only increased Australia’s social housing stock by 24,000 dwellings in the decade to 2024, this represents a significant uptick.

    The future fund is part of the National Housing Accord’s overall commitment to build 1.2 million new homes by the end of the decade. This target is now in serious doubt following advice from Treasury.

    Nonetheless, people were genuinely excited and hopeful about the focus on meeting the housing needs of lower income people.

    But stakeholders were also sceptical – and they had every right to be.

    How it works

    The future fund is a dedicated investment vehicle which helps finance new housing builds using the returns on the original $10 billion endowment.

    It does this by distributing loans and grants via competitive funding rounds open to not-for-profits, the private sector and other levels of government.

    When announcing the scheme, then Housing Minister Julie Collins said it would help address acute housing needs for people who are especially vulnerable:

    […] this will provide housing support to remote Indigenous communities, women and children experiencing domestic and family violence, older women at risk of homelessness, and veterans experiencing or at risk of homelessness.

    Two funding rounds have so far been announced – 9,284 social dwellings and 9,366 affordable homes.

    State and territory governments are involved in the process by providing access to land, expediting planning approvals and sometimes acting as developers.

    Reasons for hope

    The future fund is what the housing sector has been begging for for decades. It is a consistent, somewhat protected, pot of funding with a mandate to build social and affordable housing at scale.

    It is one of several hopeful changes underway in the housing space. The housing portfolio is now ensconced in cabinet after being elevated in the first Albanese ministry.

    Summerhill Village is a social housing project in Melbourne designed for older women to live independently.
    Author supplied, CC BY

    The relocation of housing and homelessness into Treasury is another positive development. Previously, policy areas were fragmented across a variety of departments.

    This is particularly welcome given we are yet to see the promised National Housing and Homeless Plan despite consultations beginning in 2023.

    Room for improvement

    While the future fund is a welcome infusion of money, my discussions with stakeholders have provided mixed feedback.

    As with any new program, there have been teething issues. Red tape has slowed contracts, while the May election paused all negotiations.

    Housing funding in Australia remains lumpy – characterised by sudden changes in the scale and priorities of funding – and policy is highly politicised.

    Survival of the cheapest

    Loans and grants are distributed through competitive, oversubscribed funding rounds.

    Coupled with a need for quick political wins, bigger players with lower cost projects are far more likely to receive funding to guarantee a larger quantum of housing.

    While this may appear to reflect greater value for money, it means the scheme is incentivised to fund affordable housing aimed at moderate income households rather than social housing aimed at more vulnerable people. New homes are not targeted where need is greatest.

    Given affordable housing will be delivered at 75% of market rent, there are many people who will still not be able to afford it. While we undoubtedly need both, the need is far greater for social housing.

    As the chart above shows, almost all funding in round one went to Tier One Community Housing Providers, who are the biggest developers with the most in-house capacity.

    While privileging larger organisations is not necessarily a bad thing, it does mean smaller players with more location or cohort-specific strengths are continuing to miss out.

    For example, only one Aboriginal Community Housing Provider was successful in the first round, sparking calls for an Aboriginal-specific funding round.

    Program inefficency

    Submitting bids is time consuming and uncertain, especially for funding rounds designed to stimulate new partnerships between stakeholders who haven’t worked together before.

    Further, establishing partnerships and contracts with government is labour intensive and complex.

    One industry insider recently joked the main things being funded by the scheme are new backyard pools for Sydney-based lawyers.

    Beyond this, the future fund provides availability payments – which recur quarterly during the operating phase of projects – rather than upfront capital grants.

    According to research, this is one of the most inefficient ways to fund social housing. Capital grants paid at the start to support construction are far more cost effective.

    Lack of operational funds

    Another key barrier is the focus on “bricks and mortar” to the exclusion of ongoing service costs.

    Funding to cover tenancy support, building maintenance and operations, and other wrap-around services is essential, especially for social housing aimed at individuals with higher needs.

    This is not covered by the fund and is yet to be substantively picked up by state governments either.

    Clearly, there are aspects of the housing future fund that need improvement. But this is not a call to abolish the scheme.

    The last thing the sector needs is another policy pivot or funding cut. In fact, doubling the fund to $20 billion would be warranted.

    The 30,000 new homes fall well short of the estimated 640,000 Australian households whose housing needs are currently unmet.

    The Housing Australia Future Fund is just one element – but an important one – in the suite of measures we should be using to address acute housing needs.

    Katrina Raynor is the Director of Per Capita’s Centre for Equitable Housing. Per Capita is an independent think tank that receives funding from a range of sources including philanthropy, unions, individuals and government.

    – ref. After a hopeful start, Labor’s affordable housing fund is proving problematic – https://theconversation.com/after-a-hopeful-start-labors-affordable-housing-fund-is-proving-problematic-260085

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: The southern hemisphere is full of birds found nowhere else on Earth. Their importance has been overlooked

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Matthias Dehling, Researcher, School of Biological Sciences, Monash University

    Matthias Dehling

    The snow petrel, a strikingly white bird with black eyes and a black bill, is one of only three bird species ever observed at the South Pole. In fact, the Antarctic is the only place on Earth where this bird lives.

    It isn’t alone in this. Antarctica and the sub-Antarctic harbour a large number of endemic species, which means these species are only found in one or a few locations in the world.

    In other words, these regions have a high degree of “endemism” – an important metric that tells us where to focus species conservation efforts.

    But our new study shows that the degree of endemism in Antarctica and the sub-Antarctic – and in the southern hemisphere more generally – has been underestimated.

    This is important because areas with a high degree of endemism harbour species with restricted ranges, unique evolutionary history or unique ecological functions. This makes them potentially more vulnerable to disturbances such as climate change, fundamental changes in habitat, or invasive introduced species.

    If the degree of endemism is underestimated, conservation efforts may overlook the sites that are home to irreplaceable birds.

    Biased measurements

    There are two reasons why global patterns of species endemism aren’t well defined. First, the most common method used to calculate endemism tends to give higher values to places with more species overall – this is known as species richness.

    In addition, global studies of diversity often exclude areas that are comparatively species-poor. These areas are mainly in the southern hemisphere – most notably the Antarctic region. When sites that only contain a few species are left out, this influences the estimates of endemism for all other sites.

    An alternative way to calculate endemism takes into account a site’s “complementarity”. This metric considers whether species found at a site are also found elsewhere. With this method, we can find sites that have the highest percentage of species with a restricted range.

    At such highly endemic sites, the local ecosystem relies heavily on species with restricted ranges to function, which makes them all the more irreplaceable.

    The superb lyrebird, known for its skillful vocal imitations, is endemic to southeast Australia.
    Matthias Dehling

    Global hotspots for endemic species

    This is the approach we used in our new study to reassess the endemism of birds worldwide. In our study, we also considered other aspects of bird diversity. We measured endemism with regard to whether sites hold irreplaceable evolutionary history and ecological functions of birds.

    We found that southern-hemisphere communities showed higher rates of local endemism than northern-hemisphere communities across all aspects of diversity. The sub-Antarctic islands and the High Andes, as well as several regions in Australia, Aotearoa New Zealand and southern Africa, stand out as global hotspots of endemism.

    These regions hold many charismatic birds with unique evolutionary histories or unique ecological functions, and these birds are largely restricted to the southern hemisphere.

    Among these are the palaeognaths – the bird lineage that includes kiwis, emus, cassowaries and ostriches. They also include the lyrebirds and the New Zealand wrens, as well as iconic Antarctic species such as penguins and albatrosses.

    Tawaki or Fiordland crested penguin is only found in Aotearoa New Zealand.
    Matthias Dehling

    Not much land, a lot of ocean

    The higher rates of endemism in the southern hemisphere are likely related to the uneven global distribution of landmass. Put simply, there is much more available landmass in the northern hemisphere. As you go further south, landmasses become increasingly separated by vast expanses of ocean.

    Because of the smaller and separated landmasses, species in the southern hemisphere have much smaller ranges than species in the northern hemisphere. Consequently, local species communities share fewer species with each other. This leads to the higher observed endemism in the southern hemisphere.

    The black-breasted buttonquail is a secretive rainforest bird whose range is restricted to a tiny area in south-east Queensland, Australia.
    Matthias Dehling

    A heightened vulnerability

    Our findings suggest that birds in the northern and southern hemisphere might react differently to environmental pressures. Unfortunately, most studies on the impact of climate change to date are from the northern hemisphere.

    In response to climate change in particular, species are expected to shift their ranges towards cooler climates. While northern-hemisphere birds are likely free to shift their ranges across large stretches of uninterrupted landmass, birds in the southern hemisphere are hindered by vast expanses of ocean that separate the different landmasses on which they live.

    For species at the southern tips of South America, Africa or Australia, the nearest major landmass towards the south is Antarctica. But it is unsuitable for most bird species.

    The potentially heightened vulnerability of southern-hemisphere birds suggests they deserve more protection. In addition to known species diversity hotspots that hold large numbers of species, conservation efforts should consider areas that might hold only a small number of species, but irreplaceable ones that aren’t found anywhere else.

    Matthias Dehling receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

    – ref. The southern hemisphere is full of birds found nowhere else on Earth. Their importance has been overlooked – https://theconversation.com/the-southern-hemisphere-is-full-of-birds-found-nowhere-else-on-earth-their-importance-has-been-overlooked-260828

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: The southern hemisphere is full of birds found nowhere else on Earth. Their importance has been overlooked

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Matthias Dehling, Researcher, School of Biological Sciences, Monash University

    Matthias Dehling

    The snow petrel, a strikingly white bird with black eyes and a black bill, is one of only three bird species ever observed at the South Pole. In fact, the Antarctic is the only place on Earth where this bird lives.

    It isn’t alone in this. Antarctica and the sub-Antarctic harbour a large number of endemic species, which means these species are only found in one or a few locations in the world.

    In other words, these regions have a high degree of “endemism” – an important metric that tells us where to focus species conservation efforts.

    But our new study shows that the degree of endemism in Antarctica and the sub-Antarctic – and in the southern hemisphere more generally – has been underestimated.

    This is important because areas with a high degree of endemism harbour species with restricted ranges, unique evolutionary history or unique ecological functions. This makes them potentially more vulnerable to disturbances such as climate change, fundamental changes in habitat, or invasive introduced species.

    If the degree of endemism is underestimated, conservation efforts may overlook the sites that are home to irreplaceable birds.

    Biased measurements

    There are two reasons why global patterns of species endemism aren’t well defined. First, the most common method used to calculate endemism tends to give higher values to places with more species overall – this is known as species richness.

    In addition, global studies of diversity often exclude areas that are comparatively species-poor. These areas are mainly in the southern hemisphere – most notably the Antarctic region. When sites that only contain a few species are left out, this influences the estimates of endemism for all other sites.

    An alternative way to calculate endemism takes into account a site’s “complementarity”. This metric considers whether species found at a site are also found elsewhere. With this method, we can find sites that have the highest percentage of species with a restricted range.

    At such highly endemic sites, the local ecosystem relies heavily on species with restricted ranges to function, which makes them all the more irreplaceable.

    The superb lyrebird, known for its skillful vocal imitations, is endemic to southeast Australia.
    Matthias Dehling

    Global hotspots for endemic species

    This is the approach we used in our new study to reassess the endemism of birds worldwide. In our study, we also considered other aspects of bird diversity. We measured endemism with regard to whether sites hold irreplaceable evolutionary history and ecological functions of birds.

    We found that southern-hemisphere communities showed higher rates of local endemism than northern-hemisphere communities across all aspects of diversity. The sub-Antarctic islands and the High Andes, as well as several regions in Australia, Aotearoa New Zealand and southern Africa, stand out as global hotspots of endemism.

    These regions hold many charismatic birds with unique evolutionary histories or unique ecological functions, and these birds are largely restricted to the southern hemisphere.

    Among these are the palaeognaths – the bird lineage that includes kiwis, emus, cassowaries and ostriches. They also include the lyrebirds and the New Zealand wrens, as well as iconic Antarctic species such as penguins and albatrosses.

    Tawaki or Fiordland crested penguin is only found in Aotearoa New Zealand.
    Matthias Dehling

    Not much land, a lot of ocean

    The higher rates of endemism in the southern hemisphere are likely related to the uneven global distribution of landmass. Put simply, there is much more available landmass in the northern hemisphere. As you go further south, landmasses become increasingly separated by vast expanses of ocean.

    Because of the smaller and separated landmasses, species in the southern hemisphere have much smaller ranges than species in the northern hemisphere. Consequently, local species communities share fewer species with each other. This leads to the higher observed endemism in the southern hemisphere.

    The black-breasted buttonquail is a secretive rainforest bird whose range is restricted to a tiny area in south-east Queensland, Australia.
    Matthias Dehling

    A heightened vulnerability

    Our findings suggest that birds in the northern and southern hemisphere might react differently to environmental pressures. Unfortunately, most studies on the impact of climate change to date are from the northern hemisphere.

    In response to climate change in particular, species are expected to shift their ranges towards cooler climates. While northern-hemisphere birds are likely free to shift their ranges across large stretches of uninterrupted landmass, birds in the southern hemisphere are hindered by vast expanses of ocean that separate the different landmasses on which they live.

    For species at the southern tips of South America, Africa or Australia, the nearest major landmass towards the south is Antarctica. But it is unsuitable for most bird species.

    The potentially heightened vulnerability of southern-hemisphere birds suggests they deserve more protection. In addition to known species diversity hotspots that hold large numbers of species, conservation efforts should consider areas that might hold only a small number of species, but irreplaceable ones that aren’t found anywhere else.

    Matthias Dehling receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

    – ref. The southern hemisphere is full of birds found nowhere else on Earth. Their importance has been overlooked – https://theconversation.com/the-southern-hemisphere-is-full-of-birds-found-nowhere-else-on-earth-their-importance-has-been-overlooked-260828

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Is there any hope for the internet?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Aarushi Bhandari, Assistant Professor of Sociology, Davidson College

    Hate and mental illness fester online because love and healing seem to be incompatible with profits. Ihor Lukianenko/iStock via Getty Images

    In 2001, social theorist bell hooks warned about the dangers of a loveless zeitgeist. In “All About Love: New Visions,” she lamented “the lack of an ongoing public discussion … about the practice of love in our culture and in our lives.”

    Back then, the internet was at a crossroads. The dot-com crash had bankrupted many early internet companies, and people wondered if the technology was long for this world.

    The doubts were unfounded. In only a few decades, the internet has merged with our bodies as smartphones and mined our personalities via algorithms that know us more intimately than some of our closest friends. It has even constructed a secondary social world.

    Yet as the internet has become more integrated in our daily lives, few would describe it as a place of love, compassion and cooperation. Study after study describe how social media platforms promote alienation and disconnection – in part because many algorithms reward behaviors like trolling, cyberbullying and outrage.

    Is the internet’s place in human history cemented as a harbinger of despair? Or is there still hope for an internet that supports collective flourishing?

    Algorithms and alienation

    I explore these questions in my new book, “Attention and Alienation.”

    In it, I explain how social media companies’ profits depend on users investing their time, creativity and emotions. Whether it’s spending hours filming content for TikTok or a few minutes crafting a thoughtful Reddit comment, participating on these platforms takes work. And it can be exhausting.

    Even passive engagement – like scrolling through feeds and “lurking” in forums – consumes time. It might feel like free entertainment – until people recognize they are the product, with their data being harvested and their emotions being manipulated.

    Blogger, journalist and science fiction writer Cory Doctorow coined the term “enshittification” to describe how experiences on online platforms gradually deteriorate as companies increasingly exploit users’ data and tweak their algorithms to maximize profits.

    For these reasons, much of people’s time spent online involves dealing with toxic interactions or mindlessly doomscrolling, immersed in dopamine-driven feedback loops.

    This cycle is neither an accident nor a novel insight. Hate and mental illness fester in this culture because love and healing seem to be incompatible with profits.

    Care hiding in plain sight

    In his 2009 book “Envisioning Real Utopias,” the late sociologist Erik Olin Wright discusses places in the world that prioritize cooperation, care and egalitarianism.

    Wright mainly focused on offline systems like worker-owned cooperatives. But one of his examples lived on the internet: Wikipedia. He argued that Wikipedia demonstrates the ethos “from each according to ability, to each according to need” – a utopian ideal popularized by Karl Marx.

    Wikipedia still thrives as a nonprofit, volunteer-ran bureaucracy. The website is a form of media that is deeply social, in the literal sense: People voluntarily curate and share knowledge, collectively and democratically, for free. Unlike social media, the rewards are only collective.

    There are no visible likes, comments or rage emojis for participants to hoard and chase. Nobody loses and everyone wins, including the vast majority of people who use Wikipedia without contributing work or money to keep it operational.

    Building a new digital world

    Wikipedia is evidence of care, cooperation and love hiding in plain sight.

    In recent years, there have been more efforts to create nonprofit apps and websites that are committed to protecting user data. Popular examples include Signal, a free and open source instant messaging service, and Proton Mail, an encrypted email service.

    These are all laudable developments. But how can the internet actively promote collective flourishing?

    What if Wikipedia were less the exception, and more the norm?
    Andriy Onufriyenko/Moment via Getty Images

    In “Viral Justice: How We Grow the World We Want,” sociologist Ruha Benjamin points to a way forward. She tells the story of Black TikTok creators who led a successful cultural labor strike in 2021. Many viral TikTok dances had originally been created by Black artists, whose accounts, they claimed, were suppressed by a biased algorithm that favored white influencers.

    TikTok responded to the viral #BlackTikTokStrike movement by formally apologizing and making commitments to better represent and compensate the work of Black creators. These creators demonstrated how social media engagement is work – and that workers have the power to demand equitable conditions and fair pay.

    This landmark strike showed how anyone who uses social media companies that profit off the work, emotions and personal data of their users – whether it’s TikTok, X, Facebook, Instagram or Reddit – can become organized.

    Meanwhile, there are organizations devoted to designing an internet that promotes collective flourishing. Sociologist Firuzeh Shokooh Valle provides examples of worker-owned technology cooperatives in her 2023 book, “In Defense of Solidarity and Pleasure: Feminist Technopolitics in the Global South.” She highlights the Sulá Batsú co-op in Costa Rica, which promotes policies that seek to break the stranglehold that negativity and exploitation have over internet culture.

    “Digital spaces are increasingly powered by hate and discrimination,” the group writes, adding that it hopes to create an online world where “women and people of diverse sexualities and genders are able to access and enjoy a free and open internet to exercise agency and autonomy, build collective power, strengthen movements, and transform power relations.”

    In Los Angeles, there’s Chani, Inc., a technology company that describes itself as “proudly” not funded by venture capitalists. The Chani app blends mindfulness practices and astrology with the goal of simply helping people. The app is not designed for compulsive user engagement, the company never sells user data, and there are no comments sections.

    No comments

    What would social media look like if Wikipedia were the norm instead of an exception?

    To me, a big problem in internet culture is the way people’s humanity is obscured. People are free to speak their minds in text-based public discussion forums, but the words aren’t always attached to someone’s identity. Real people hide behind the anonymity of user names. It isn’t true human interaction.

    In “Attention and Alienation,” I argue that the ability to meet and interact with others online as fully realized, three-dimensional human beings would go a long way toward creating a more empathetic, cooperative internet.

    When I was 8 years old, my parents lived abroad for work. Sometimes we talked on the phone. Often I would cry late into the night, praying for the ability to “see them through the phone.” It felt like a miraculous possibility – like magic.

    I told this story to my students in a moment of shared vulnerability. This was in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic, so the class was taking place over videoconferencing. In these online classes, one person talked at a time. Others listened.

    It wasn’t perfect, but I think a better internet would promote this form of discussion – people getting together from across the world to share the fullness of their humanity.

    Efforts like Clubhouse have tapped into this vision by creating voice-based discussion forums. The company, however, has been criticized for predatory data privacy policies.

    What if the next iteration of public social media platforms could build on Clubhouse? What if they brought people together and showcased not just their voices, but also live video feeds of their faces without harvesting their data or promoting conflict and outrage?

    Raised eyebrows. Grins. Frowns. They’re what make humans distinct from increasingly sophisticated large language models and artificial intelligence chatbots like ChatGPT.

    After all, is anything you can’t say while looking at another human being in the eye worth saying in the first place?

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

    – ref. Is there any hope for the internet? – https://theconversation.com/is-there-any-hope-for-the-internet-259251

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: ABC’s and CBS’s settlements with Trump are a dangerous step toward the commander in chief becoming the editor-in-chief

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michael J. Socolow, Professor of Communication and Journalism, University of Maine

    Will settlements by news companies with President Donald Trump turn journalists into puppets? MARHARYTA MARKO/iStock Getty Images Plus

    It was a surrender widely foreseen. For months, rumors abounded that Paramount would eventually settle the seemingly frivolous lawsuit brought by President Donald Trump concerning editorial decisions in the production of a CBS interview with Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris in 2024.

    On July 2, 2025, those rumors proved true: The settlement between Paramount and Trump’s legal team resulted in CBS’s parent company agreeing to pay $16 million to the future Donald Trump Library – the $16 million included Trump’s legal fees – in exchange for ending the lawsuit. Despite the opinion of many media law scholars and practicing attorneys who considered the lawsuit meritless, Shari Redstone, the largest shareholder of Paramount, yielded to Trump.

    Redstone had been trying to sell Paramount to Skydance Media since July 2024, but the transaction was delayed by issues involving government approval.

    Specifically, when the Trump administration assumed power in January 2025, the new Federal Communications Commission had no legal obligation to facilitate, without scrutiny, the transfer of the CBS network’s broadcast licenses for its owned-and-operated TV stations to new ownership.

    The FCC, under newly installed Republican Chairman Brendan Carr, was fully aware of the issues in the legal conflict between Trump and CBS at the time Paramount needed FCC approval for the license transfers. Without a settlement, the Paramount-Skydance deal remained in jeopardy.

    Until it wasn’t.

    At that point, Paramount joined Disney in implicitly apologizing for journalism produced by their TV news divisions.

    Earlier in 2025, Disney had settled a different Trump lawsuit with ABC News in exchange for a $15 million donation to the future Trump Library. That lawsuit involved a dispute over the wording of the actions for which Trump was found liable in a civil lawsuit brought by E. Jean Carroll.

    GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump said the CBS interview with Democratic nominee Kamala Harris was ‘fraudulent interference with an election.’

    It’s not certain what the ABC and CBS settlements portend, but many are predicting they will produce a “chilling effect” within the network news divisions. Such an outcome would arise from fear of new litigation, and it would install a form of internal self-censorship that would influence network journalists when deciding whether the pursuit of investigative stories involving the Trump administration would be worth the risk.

    Trump has apparently succeeded where earlier presidents failed.

    Presidential pressure

    From Jimmy Carter trying to get CBS anchor Walter Cronkite to stop ending his evening newscasts with the number of days American hostages were being held in Iran to Richard Nixon’s administration threatening the broadcast licenses of The Washington Post’s TV stations to weaken Watergate reporting, previous presidents sought to apply editorial pressure on broadcast journalists.

    But in the cases of Carter and Nixon, it didn’t work. The broadcast networks’ focus on both Watergate and the Iran hostage crisis remained unrelenting.

    Nor were Nixon and Carter the first presidents seeking to influence, and possibly control, network news.

    President Lyndon Johnson, who owned local TV and radio stations in Austin, Texas, regularly complained to his old friend, CBS President Frank Stanton, about what he perceived as biased TV coverage. Johnson was so furious with the CBS and NBC reporting from Vietnam, he once argued that their newscasts seemed “controlled by the Vietcong.”

    Yet none of these earlier presidents won millions from the corporations that aired ethical news reporting in the public interest.

    Before Trump, these conflicts mostly occurred backstage and informally, allowing the broadcasters to sidestep the damage to their credibility should any surrender to White House administrations be made public. In a “Reporter’s Notebook” on the CBS Evening News the night of the Trump settlement, anchor John Dickerson summarized the new dilemma succinctly: “Can you hold power to account when you’ve paid it millions? Can an audience trust you when it thinks you’ve traded away that trust?”

    “The audience will decide that,” Dickerson continued, concluding: “Our job is to show up to honor what we witness on behalf of the people we witness it for.”

    During the Iran hostage crisis, CBS News anchor Walter Cronkite ended every broadcast with the number of days the hostages had been held captive.

    Holding power to account

    There’s an adage in TV news: “You’re only as good as your last show.”

    Soon, Skydance Media will assume control over the Paramount properties, and the new CBS will be on the airwaves.

    When the licenses for KCBS in Los Angeles, WCBS in New York and the other CBS-owned-and-operated stations are transferred, we’ll learn the long-term legacy of corporate capitulation. But for now, it remains too early to judge tomorrow’s newscasts.

    As a scholar of broadcast journalism and a former broadcast journalist, I recommend evaluating programs like “60 Minutes” and the “CBS Evening News” on the record they will compile over the next three years – and the record they compiled over the past 50. The same goes for “ABC World News Tonight” and other ABC News programs.

    A major complicating factor for the Paramount-Skydance deal was the fact that “60 Minutes” has, over the past six months, broken major scoops embarrassing to the Trump administration, which led to additional scrutiny by its corporate ownership. Judged by its reporting in the first half of 2025, “60 Minutes” has upheld its record of critical and independent reporting in the public interest.

    If audience members want to see ethical, independent and professional broadcast journalism that holds power to account, then it’s the audience’s responsibility to tune it in. The only way to learn the consequences of these settlements is by watching future programming rather than dismissing it beforehand.

    The journalists working at ABC News and CBS News understand the legacy of their organizations, and they are also aware of how their owners have cast suspicion on the news divisions’ professionalism and credibility. As Dickerson asserted, they plan to “show up” regardless of the stain, and I’d bet they’re more motivated to redeem their reputations than we expect.

    I don’t think reporters, editors and producers plan to let Donald Trump become their editor-in-chief over the next three years. But we’ll only know by watching.

    Michael Socolow’s father, Sanford Socolow, worked for CBS News from 1956 to 1988.

    – ref. ABC’s and CBS’s settlements with Trump are a dangerous step toward the commander in chief becoming the editor-in-chief – https://theconversation.com/abcs-and-cbss-settlements-with-trump-are-a-dangerous-step-toward-the-commander-in-chief-becoming-the-editor-in-chief-261006

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: A warning from the future: the risk if NZ gets climate adaptation policy wrong today

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tom Logan, Senior Lecturer Above the Bar, Civil and Natural Resources Engineering, University of Canterbury

    Getty Images

    New Zealand 2050: On the morning of February 27, the sea surged through the dunes south of the small town of Te Taone, riding on the back of Cyclone Harita’s swollen rivers and 200mm of overnight rainfall.

    By mid-morning, floodwaters had engulfed entire streets. Power was out. Roads were underwater. Emergency services responded swiftly, coordinating evacuations and establishing shelters.

    But for many residents, the realisation came days later: the help they expected after the water receded – support to rebuild, relocate or recover – wasn’t coming.

    “We lost everything,” says Mere Rākete, a solo mother of three, standing outside her home, now uninhabitable. “I rang the council, the government helpline, even the insurance company. They all said I’m not covered.”

    Mere lives in a suburb long identified as “high risk” under national climate risk maps. She didn’t stay there because she ignored the risk. She stayed because she had no viable alternative.

    “They say we had a choice. But when houses here were $400,000 and anything safer was $700,000, what choice is that?”

    No more buyouts

    Although this story is fictitious, it describes a plausible future based on how New Zealand’s draft climate adaptation framework could play out. It reflects the likely consequences of policy decisions that focus narrowly on financial exposure.

    Last week’s recommendations from the Ministry for the Environment’s Independent Reference Group rightly called for urgent and improved risk information. But they focused narrowly on direct risk to property and infrastructure.

    In particular, the group proposed that beyond 2045 the government should not buy out property owners after climate-related disasters (or those at high risk of future events).

    Responding to the recommendations last week, climate policy analyst Jonathan Boston wrote that ruling out property buyouts “is philosophically misguided, morally questionable, administratively inept, and politically naïve”.

    But it appears the government shares the reference group’s view. Addressing the current flooding disaster in the Tasman district, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said, “In principle, the government won’t be able to keep bailing out people in this way.”

    Beyond the specifics of financial compensation, however, lie the cascading and systemic risks that follow a major weather event. In reality, the impacts do not stop at the property boundary.

    When a family is displaced, or even fears displacement, the consequences ripple outward: schooling is disrupted, jobs are lost, mental health declines, community networks fragment and local economies suffer.

    Research shows how the after-effects of a disaster domino through interconnected systems, affecting health, housing, labour markets and social cohesion.

    A policy decades in the making

    Back to the future: our fictional town of Te Taone sits in a floodplain identified decades ago. By the 2040s, insurance had become unaffordable. New development slowed but many families, especially those on lower incomes, remained, with few relocation options.

    The adaptation framework proposed in 2025, based on a “beneficiary pays” model, created a 20-year transition period that ended in 2045. After that, residents in high-risk areas became ineligible for buyouts or standard recovery funding.

    Future government investment was limited to Crown-owned assets or projects with “national benefit”. Restoration of local infrastructure such as roads and power lines would depend on whether councils or ratepayers could pay.

    Today, parts of Te Taone remain cut off. Power is still out in some areas. The school has relocated inland. Local shops have closed. Many homes are damaged, waterlogged, or destroyed, and some families are now living in tents.

    “It’s not that we weren’t warned,” says a local community worker. “It’s just that we couldn’t afford to do anything but live with the risk and hope for the best.”

    Te Taone’s experience is now raising deeper concerns that Aotearoa New Zealand’s climate adaptation framework may be entrenching a form of “climate redlining”. Those with the means can move to escape risk, while others are left behind to bear it.

    Adaptation or abandonment?

    Māori communities are especially affected. Parts of the floodplain include ancestral land, some communally owned, some leased by whānau who cannot easily relocate. In many cases, this land was only recently returned from the Crown, after years of land court proceedings or Treaty settlements.

    The prospect of abandoning it again, without coordinated support, echoes earlier waves of institutional neglect. Mere Rākete is now considering joining a class action, one of several reportedly forming across the country.

    Residents are challenging the government or local councils over a failure in their duty of care by allowing homes to be built, sold or inhabited in known risk zones without clear and enforceable warnings or adequate alternatives.

    Meanwhile, adaptation experts are calling for a reset: a national compensation framework with clear eligibility rules, long-term investment in affordable housing beyond hazard-prone areas.

    Above all, they argue, government policy based on a climate adaptation framework developed 25 years ago has not reduced exposure to risk. Instead, it has redistributed it from those who could leave to those who couldn’t.

    In the meantime, the remaining residents of Te Taone wait for the next cyclone and wonder whether, next time, anyone will help.

    Planning with people in mind

    Our imagined future scenario can be avoided if governments take a broader view of adaptation. Treating climate risk as an individual responsibility may reduce short-term government liability. But it will not reduce long-term social and fiscal liability.

    The risk of failing to act systemically is that the country pays in other ways – in fractured communities, rising inequity and preventable harm.

    Adaptation to climate change has to be about more than limiting the upfront costs of buyouts or infrastructure repairs. Ignoring the wider impacts will only shift the burden and increase it over time.

    Real economic and community resilience means planning with people in mind, investing early and making sure no one is left behind. That work must begin now.

    Tom Logan owns shares in Urban Intelligence. He receives funding from the Ministry for Business, Innovation and Employment and the Royal Society of NZ.

    Paula Blackett works part time for Urban Intelligence. She receives research funding from the Ministry for Business, Innovation and Employment and undertakes consulting work regarding climate risk and adaptation.

    – ref. A warning from the future: the risk if NZ gets climate adaptation policy wrong today – https://theconversation.com/a-warning-from-the-future-the-risk-if-nz-gets-climate-adaptation-policy-wrong-today-260912

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Hung parliament still likely outcome of Tasmanian election, with Liberals well ahead of Labor in new poll

    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 new Tasmanian DemosAU poll gives the Liberals a 34.9–24.7 statewide vote lead over Labor, implying the Liberals will win the most seats but be short of a majority at this Saturday’s election. I also cover the Coalition’s vote was inefficiently distributed at the federal election, as well as US and UK politics.

    The Tasmanian state election will be held this Saturday. Tasmania uses the proportional Hare-Clark system for its lower house elections. The five Tasmanian seats used at federal elections each have seven members, for a total of 35 MPs. A quota for election is one-eighth of the vote, or 12.5%.

    A DemosAU poll for Pulse Tasmania, conducted July 6–10 from a sample of 3,421, gave the Liberals 34.9% of the vote (up 0.9 since the June 19–26 DemosAU poll), Labor 24.7% (down 2.6), the Greens 15.6% (up 0.5), the Nationals 2.7%, the Shooters 1.8% and independents 20.3% (up 1.0).

    The Nationals are only contesting Bass, Braddon and Lyons, and the poll would not have included them in the other two electorates of Clark and Franklin, so the Nationals’ vote in the electorates they are contesting would be higher than their statewide vote.

    With a total sample of over 3,400, the sample size per electorate would be over 680. Using the results in individual electorates, this poll has the Liberals on a total of 13–14 seats out of 35, Labor on 9–10, the Greens on 6–7, independents on 4–6 and both the Nationals and Shooters either winning zero or one seat.

    If the election results reflect this poll, the Liberals would easily be the largest party, but they would not win the 18 seats needed for a majority. There would probably be a majority for Labor, the Greens and left-wing independents, but Labor did not attempt to form government in a similar situation after the March 2024 election.

    It’s been 11 years since Labor last held government in Tasmania, with the Labor/Greens government at that time widely blamed for Labor’s heavy defeat in the March 2014 election. But with the continuing decline of the major parties, Labor may have to reach an agreement with the Greens if they want to form government again in Tasmania.

    Labor and the Liberals have both supported construction of a new AFL stadium. I believe this partly explains the drop in Labor’s vote, as many on the left would oppose this stadium. Labor’s refusal to attempt to form government after the March 2024 election probably also contributed to its low vote.

    Voters may also be blaming Labor for this early election, just 16 months after the previous Tasmanian election. This election is just over two months after the federal election.

    Federal election: Coalition’s vote inefficiently distributed

    Analyst Kevin Bonham has a pendulum of House of Representatives seats after the results of the May 3 federal election. There are likely to be federal redistributions from July 2026 in some states, so this won’t be the pendulum used at the next federal election.

    Labor won 94 of the 150 seats, the Coalition 43 and all Others 13, from a two-party vote of 55.2–44.8 to Labor. Assuming the Others are unchanged, Labor would need to lose 19 seats to drop below the 76 needed for a majority. On the pendulum, this occurs when the seat of Whitlam falls, but Labor won Whitlam by 56.3–43.7, more than 1% higher than their national vote.

    This means that, using a uniform swing on the actual results, Labor would have won a majority even if they had lost the national two-party vote by 51.0–49.0, despite 13 Other seats.

    Despite the electoral hammering, the Coalition retained many regional seats by large margins. This contributed to an inefficiently distributed vote. With voters in the cities making up a majority of all Australian voters, the Coalition can’t win by appealing just to voters in the regions.

    The Coalition would be the largest party if they won 26 seats from Labor. This happens when the Coalition gains Braddon, which Labor won by 57.2–42.8, so the Coalition would need a 51.9–48.1 national two-party margin. For a Coalition majority, they would need 33 gains, and need a 53.7–46.3 national two-party win.

    US and UK politics

    I wrote for The Poll Bludger on Saturday that United States President Donald Trump’s net approval was nearly unchanged at -6.7 after the passage of the “big beautiful bill” through Congress. I also covered Elon Musk’s new party and New York City mayoral general election polls.

    In the United Kingdom, a Labour MP has defected to a potential Jeremy Corbyn-led party. The far-right Reform has led Labour in UK national polls since the early May local elections. In a House of Commons vote on a welfare reform bill, 49 Labour MPs rebelled.

    Two Queensland poll give LNP big leads

    A Queensland state DemosAU poll, conducted July 4–9 from a sample of 1,027, gave the Liberal National Party a 55–45 lead (53.8–46.2 to the LNP at the October 2024 election). The Poll Bludger said this was a one-point gain for the LNP since a February DemosAU poll.

    Primary votes were 40% LNP (steady), 28% Labor (down two), 13% Greens (up one), 12% One Nation (up two) and 7% for all Others (down one). On the recent Queensland state budget, 24% thought it would be good for the Queensland economy, 19% bad and 57% were unsure. By 43–26, respondents thought Labor would not have delivered a better budget.

    A Queensland state Redbridge poll gave the LNP a 56–44 lead. Primary votes were 43% LNP, 29% Labor, 11% Greens and 17% for all Others (there was no One Nation breakdown).

    Queensland was the only state the Coalition won at the federal election, though only by 50.6–49.4. The state LNP is still benefiting from a honeymoon after ousting Labor at last year’s election.

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

    – ref. Hung parliament still likely outcome of Tasmanian election, with Liberals well ahead of Labor in new poll – https://theconversation.com/hung-parliament-still-likely-outcome-of-tasmanian-election-with-liberals-well-ahead-of-labor-in-new-poll-261073

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Hung parliament still likely outcome of Tasmanian election, with Liberals well ahead of Labor in new poll

    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 new Tasmanian DemosAU poll gives the Liberals a 34.9–24.7 statewide vote lead over Labor, implying the Liberals will win the most seats but be short of a majority at this Saturday’s election. I also cover the Coalition’s vote was inefficiently distributed at the federal election, as well as US and UK politics.

    The Tasmanian state election will be held this Saturday. Tasmania uses the proportional Hare-Clark system for its lower house elections. The five Tasmanian seats used at federal elections each have seven members, for a total of 35 MPs. A quota for election is one-eighth of the vote, or 12.5%.

    A DemosAU poll for Pulse Tasmania, conducted July 6–10 from a sample of 3,421, gave the Liberals 34.9% of the vote (up 0.9 since the June 19–26 DemosAU poll), Labor 24.7% (down 2.6), the Greens 15.6% (up 0.5), the Nationals 2.7%, the Shooters 1.8% and independents 20.3% (up 1.0).

    The Nationals are only contesting Bass, Braddon and Lyons, and the poll would not have included them in the other two electorates of Clark and Franklin, so the Nationals’ vote in the electorates they are contesting would be higher than their statewide vote.

    With a total sample of over 3,400, the sample size per electorate would be over 680. Using the results in individual electorates, this poll has the Liberals on a total of 13–14 seats out of 35, Labor on 9–10, the Greens on 6–7, independents on 4–6 and both the Nationals and Shooters either winning zero or one seat.

    If the election results reflect this poll, the Liberals would easily be the largest party, but they would not win the 18 seats needed for a majority. There would probably be a majority for Labor, the Greens and left-wing independents, but Labor did not attempt to form government in a similar situation after the March 2024 election.

    It’s been 11 years since Labor last held government in Tasmania, with the Labor/Greens government at that time widely blamed for Labor’s heavy defeat in the March 2014 election. But with the continuing decline of the major parties, Labor may have to reach an agreement with the Greens if they want to form government again in Tasmania.

    Labor and the Liberals have both supported construction of a new AFL stadium. I believe this partly explains the drop in Labor’s vote, as many on the left would oppose this stadium. Labor’s refusal to attempt to form government after the March 2024 election probably also contributed to its low vote.

    Voters may also be blaming Labor for this early election, just 16 months after the previous Tasmanian election. This election is just over two months after the federal election.

    Federal election: Coalition’s vote inefficiently distributed

    Analyst Kevin Bonham has a pendulum of House of Representatives seats after the results of the May 3 federal election. There are likely to be federal redistributions from July 2026 in some states, so this won’t be the pendulum used at the next federal election.

    Labor won 94 of the 150 seats, the Coalition 43 and all Others 13, from a two-party vote of 55.2–44.8 to Labor. Assuming the Others are unchanged, Labor would need to lose 19 seats to drop below the 76 needed for a majority. On the pendulum, this occurs when the seat of Whitlam falls, but Labor won Whitlam by 56.3–43.7, more than 1% higher than their national vote.

    This means that, using a uniform swing on the actual results, Labor would have won a majority even if they had lost the national two-party vote by 51.0–49.0, despite 13 Other seats.

    Despite the electoral hammering, the Coalition retained many regional seats by large margins. This contributed to an inefficiently distributed vote. With voters in the cities making up a majority of all Australian voters, the Coalition can’t win by appealing just to voters in the regions.

    The Coalition would be the largest party if they won 26 seats from Labor. This happens when the Coalition gains Braddon, which Labor won by 57.2–42.8, so the Coalition would need a 51.9–48.1 national two-party margin. For a Coalition majority, they would need 33 gains, and need a 53.7–46.3 national two-party win.

    US and UK politics

    I wrote for The Poll Bludger on Saturday that United States President Donald Trump’s net approval was nearly unchanged at -6.7 after the passage of the “big beautiful bill” through Congress. I also covered Elon Musk’s new party and New York City mayoral general election polls.

    In the United Kingdom, a Labour MP has defected to a potential Jeremy Corbyn-led party. The far-right Reform has led Labour in UK national polls since the early May local elections. In a House of Commons vote on a welfare reform bill, 49 Labour MPs rebelled.

    Two Queensland poll give LNP big leads

    A Queensland state DemosAU poll, conducted July 4–9 from a sample of 1,027, gave the Liberal National Party a 55–45 lead (53.8–46.2 to the LNP at the October 2024 election). The Poll Bludger said this was a one-point gain for the LNP since a February DemosAU poll.

    Primary votes were 40% LNP (steady), 28% Labor (down two), 13% Greens (up one), 12% One Nation (up two) and 7% for all Others (down one). On the recent Queensland state budget, 24% thought it would be good for the Queensland economy, 19% bad and 57% were unsure. By 43–26, respondents thought Labor would not have delivered a better budget.

    A Queensland state Redbridge poll gave the LNP a 56–44 lead. Primary votes were 43% LNP, 29% Labor, 11% Greens and 17% for all Others (there was no One Nation breakdown).

    Queensland was the only state the Coalition won at the federal election, though only by 50.6–49.4. The state LNP is still benefiting from a honeymoon after ousting Labor at last year’s election.

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

    – ref. Hung parliament still likely outcome of Tasmanian election, with Liberals well ahead of Labor in new poll – https://theconversation.com/hung-parliament-still-likely-outcome-of-tasmanian-election-with-liberals-well-ahead-of-labor-in-new-poll-261073

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Many fish are social, but pesticides are pushing them apart

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kyle Morrison, PhD Candidate in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, UNSW Sydney

    Kazakov Maksim, Shutterstock

    Scientists have detected pesticides in rivers, lakes and oceans worldwide. So what are these pesticides doing to the fish?

    Long before pesticides reach lethal doses, they can disrupt hormones, impair brain function and change fish behaviour. Many of these behaviours are essential for healthy ecosystems.

    In a new study, my colleagues and I found that pesticides affect many different behaviours in fish. Overall, the chemical pesticides make fish less sociable and interactive. They spend less time gathering in groups, become less protective of their territory, and make fewer attempts to mate.

    Imagine the ocean without the vibrant schools of fish we’ve come to love – only isolated swimmers drifting about. Quietly, ecosystems begin to unravel, long before mass die-offs hit the news.

    Healthy reef ecosystems feature fish swimming together and socialising.
    Mike Workman, Shutterstock

    Fish are living and dying in polluted water

    Australia is a major producer and user of pesticides, with more than 11,000 approved chemical products routinely used in agricultural and domestic settings. Remarkably, some of these chemicals remain approved in Australia despite being banned in other regions such as the European Union due to safety concerns.

    When a tractor or plane sprays pesticides onto crops, it creates a mist of chemicals in the air to kill crop pests. After heavy rain, these chemicals can flow into roadside drains, filter through soil, and slowly move into rivers, lakes and oceans.

    Fish swim in this diluted chemical mixture. They can absorb pesticides through their gills or eat contaminated prey.

    At high concentrations, mass fish deaths can result, such as those repeatedly observed in the Menindee Lakes. However, doses in the wild often aren’t lethal and more subtle effects can occur. Scientists call these “sub-lethal” effects.

    One commonly investigated sub-lethal effect is a change in behaviour – in other words, a change in the way a fish interacts with its surrounding environment.

    Our previous research has found most experiments have looked at the impacts on fish in isolation, measuring things such as how far or how fast they swim when pesticides are present.

    But fish aren’t solitary — they form groups, defend territory and find mates. These behaviours keep aquatic ecosystems stable. So this time we studied how pesticides affect these crucial social behaviours.

    Pesticide exposure makes fish less social

    Our study extracted and analysed data from 37 experiments conducted around the world. Together, these tested the impacts of 31 different pesticides on the social behaviour of 11 different fish species.

    The evidence suggests pesticides make fish less social, and this finding is consistent across species. Courtship was the most severely impacted behaviour – the process fish use to find and attract mates. This is particularly alarming because successful courtship is essential for healthy fish populations and ecosystem stability.

    Next, we found pesticides such as the herbicide glyphosate, which can disrupt brain function and hormone levels had the strongest impacts on fish social behaviours. This raises important questions about how brain function and hormones drive fish social behaviour, which could be tested by scientists in the future.

    For example, scientists could test how much a change in testosterone relates to a change in territory defence. Looking at these relationships between what’s going on inside the body mechanisms and outward behaviour will help us better understand the complex impacts of pesticides.

    We also identified gaps in the current studies. Most existing studies focus on a limited number of easy-to-study “model species” such as zebrafish, medaka and guppies. They also often use pesticide dosages and durations that may not reflect real-world realities.

    Addressing these gaps by including a range of species and environmentally relevant dosages is crucial to understanding how pesticides affect fish in the wild.

    One of the experiments in our study involved convict surgeonfish, which gather in large groups or ‘shoals’.
    Damsea, Shutterstock

    Behaviour is a blind spot in regulation

    Regulatory authorities should begin to recognise behaviour as a reliable and important indicator of pesticide safety. This can help them catch pesticide pollution early, before mass deaths occur.

    Scientists play a crucial role too. By following the same methods, scientists can produce comparable results. A standardised method then provides regulators the evidence needed to confidently assess pesticide risks.

    Together, regulatory authorities and scientists can find a way to use behavioural studies to help inform policy decisions. This will help to prevent mass deaths and catch pesticide impacts early on.

    Leave no stone unturned in restoring our waters

    Rivers, lakes, oceans and reefs are bearing the brunt of an ever-growing human footprint.

    So far, much of the spotlight has focused on reducing carbon emissions and managing overfishing — and rightly so. But there’s another, quieter threat drifting beneath the surface: the chemicals we use.

    Pesticides used on farms and in gardens are being detected everywhere, even iconic ecosystems such as the Great Barrier Reef. As we have shown, these pesticides can have disturbing effects even at low concentrations.

    Now is the time to cut pesticide use and reduce runoff. Through switching to less toxic chemicals and introducing better regulations, we can reduce the damage. If we act with urgency, we can limit the impacts pesticides have on our planet.

    Kyle Morrison 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. Many fish are social, but pesticides are pushing them apart – https://theconversation.com/many-fish-are-social-but-pesticides-are-pushing-them-apart-256230

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Do I have prostate cancer? Why a simple PSA blood test alone won’t give you the answer

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kevin M. Koo, NHMRC Emerging Leadership Fellow, The University of Queensland

    Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in Australia, with about 26,000 men diagnosed per year. The majority (more than 85%) are aged over 60.

    Prostate cancer kills around 3,900 Australians a year. Yet most prostate cancers progress very slowly and many men die “with” and not “from” prostate cancer.

    Prostate cancer is currently detected with a blood test. This measures the amounts of prostate specific antigen (PSA) in the blood, a protein produced by the prostate gland.

    But while an elevated PSA can indicate prostate cancer, other non-cancerous conditions, such as prostate enlargement or inflammation, can also increase PSA levels.

    New draft guidelines aim to provide clearer recommendations about the role PSA tests should play in detecting prostate cancer.

    Life-saving treatment vs harmful overdiagnosis

    Early detection of prostate cancer by PSA testing is important. It allows for timely treatments such as prostate removal surgery, radiation or hormonal therapy.

    But despite their effectiveness, these treatments can cause problems such as erectile dysfunction. Urinary incontinence issues occur in up to 14% of patients.

    Therefore, if the prostate cancer is considered low-risk and has not spread outside the prostate, the clinician may recommend “active surveillance” to closely monitor the cancer for signs of progression.

    If the low-risk prostate cancer doesn’t progress, treatment and its associated side effects can be delayed or avoided.



    Read more:
    Treatment can do more harm than good for prostate cancer − why active surveillance may be a better option for some

    The controversy around PSA testing is it can over-diagnose low-risk prostate cancers that would never become life-threatening.

    PSA tests may also give false positive results when someone doesn’t have cancer.

    Such scenarios cause harm to men who are over-treated for prostate cancer solely based on elevated PSA levels.

    In a decades-long clinical study involving 182,000 men, PSA testing reduced prostate cancer deaths by 20% compared to men who didn’t undergo testing.

    But a trade-off was having to over-treat around 48 men to prevent one prostate cancer death.

    We need to find the balance between enabling early life-saving detection and preventing harmful over-treatment of men with low-risk prostate cancer.

    Prostate cancer surgery can leave some men with urinary incontinence.
    Jota Buyinch Photo/Shutterstock

    What do the draft guidelines say?

    The Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia has released new draft clinical guidelines for the early detection of prostate cancer for public consultation.

    The following recommended changes aim to reduce over-treatment and minimise harm.

    1. Offer all men a ‘baseline’ PSA test at 40

    All men would be offered an initial PSA test at age 40 to provide a baseline PSA measurement to compare against follow-up tests.

    A baseline PSA measurement would enable the calculation of PSA doubling time: the number of months taken for PSA level to double from baseline.

    Aggressive fast-growing tumors tend to have shorter PSA doubling times, so this would enable early detection of high-risk prostate cancer for prompt treatment.

    Such a change could improve prostate cancer risk classification and spare more men from unnecessary harmful treatment side effects.

    2. GPs offer men aged 50–69 PSA tests every two years

    The draft guidelines recommend GPs offer PSA testing every two years for all men aged 50–69.

    For men over 70, PSA testing would be recommended based on clinical assessment by GPs.

    Men are more likely to be diagnosed with prostate cancer at an advanced age. So as they get older and have a shorter life expectancy, the harms of treatment are more likely to outweigh the benefits of early detection.

    This recommendation could reduce over-diagnosis by considering individual life expectancy, overall health and potential treatment harms.

    3. Target populations at greater risk

    As with other cancer types, prostate cancer is a disease caused by gene malfunctioning leading to tumour growth. Men with a family history of prostate cancer are around three times more likely to develop and die from prostate cancer due to their genetic susceptibility.

    Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander men have a higher risk of dying from prostate cancer compared to non-Indigenous men. This may be due to delayed diagnoses and limited access to prostate cancer treatment options in remote areas.

    For these men with higher prostate cancer risk, the draft guidelines recommend earlier and more frequent PSA testing, starting at age 40.

    This change could prioritise and serve targeted, high-risk populations of men who would benefit most from more regular PSA testing.

    Men with a family history of prostate cancer are more likely to develop the disease.
    Shakirov Albert/Shutterstock

    No more ‘finger up the bum’

    Previously, men with high PSA levels were referred for needle prostate biopsies which involve invasive insertion of needles into different areas of the prostate to remove tissue samples for lab analyses.

    Needle biopsies are painful and come with risks of bleeding or infection. So, it’s helpful to use additional prostate cancer testing approaches to guide who is referred for a biopsy.

    The new draft guidelines no longer recommend the use of digital rectal examination, the dreaded “finger up the bum”, to screen for signs of prostate cancer together with PSA testing. Men find this unpleasant and embarrassing.

    Instead, clinicians can turn to advanced imaging. Medicare rebates have been available for magnetic resonance imaging to diagnose prostate cancer since 2018.

    Medical specialists often order a multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) following elevated PSA levels to determine if biopsies are required. This is a specialised MRI that uses strong magnets and radio waves to construct a detailed three-dimensional image of the prostate from different angles and identify suspicious-looking areas.

    The draft guidelines recommend mpMRI to supplement PSA testing to better determine if a biopsy is needed. This saves men from unnecessary invasive procedures and reduces health-system costs.

    The information gathered from the public consultations will inform the final draft prostate cancer early detection guidelines. The final recommendations will then be sent to the National Health and Medical Research Council for approval, before becoming clinical practice.

    Kevin M. Koo receives funding from the Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia.

    – ref. Do I have prostate cancer? Why a simple PSA blood test alone won’t give you the answer – https://theconversation.com/do-i-have-prostate-cancer-why-a-simple-psa-blood-test-alone-wont-give-you-the-answer-257240

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –