Category: Universities

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Second Reading Speech – Universities Accord (cutting student debt by 20%) Bill 2025

    Source: Murray Darling Basin Authority

    It is a privilege to introduce the Universities Accord (Cutting Student Debt by 20%) Bill.

    As promised, this is the very first bill to be introduced to the Parliament after the election. 

    And as promised, it cuts the student debt of three million Australians by 20 percent. 

    Mr Speaker, on the 3rd of May Australians made their voices heard. 

    They voted for the tax cuts we are delivering.

    They voted for free TAFE that we are making permanent.

    They voted for us to build more homes.

    They voted for us to roll out more Medicare Urgent Care Clinics.

    They voted for cheaper medicine. 

    They voted for the biggest investment in Medicare ever, to make it easier to see a doctor for free than ever before. 

    And they voted for this. 

    Cutting the student debt of three million Australians by 20 percent. 

    Most of those are young Australians. 

    Just out of uni. Just out of TAFE. 

    Just out of home. Just getting started. 

    Trying to save to buy a home. 

    Thinking about starting a family. 

    Nurses. Teachers. Tradies. 

    Doctors and Paramedics.

    Engineers. Architects.

    IT workers. AI Experts.

    These are the Australians who will build Australia’s future. 

    Who are already building it. 

    And this will take a weight off their back. 

    The average HELP debt today is about $27,600.

    When this legislation passes it will cut that debt by about $5,520.

    If you have got a debt of $50,000 it will cut it by $10,000. 

    All up it will cut student debt by over $16 billion.

    When this legislation passes your debt will be cut by 20 per cent, based on what it was on 1 June this year, before this year’s indexation occurred.

    That will make sure you get the maximum benefit possible and that we honour our promise in full.

    And it will all happen automatically.

    The Australian Tax Office will process changes at their end. 

    You won’t have to do a thing.

    It will take a bit of time for the Tax Office to do this work. 

    But once this Bill is passed the cut is guaranteed. 

    Mr Speaker, this is a big deal for everyone with a student debt today.

    Three million Australians.

    But it’s not the only thing this Bill does.

    It also makes important structural changes to the way the repayment system works.

    To make it fairer.

    And to help with the cost of living.

    This Bill raises the minimum amount you have to earn before you have to start making repayments – from $54,435 in 2024-25 to $67,000 in 2025-26.

    And it reduces the minimum repayments you have to make.

    For someone earning $70,000 it will reduce the minimum repayments they have to make by $1,300 a year.

    That’s real cost of living help.

    More money in your pocket – not the government’s.

    When you really need it.

    This is an important structural reform.

    We are replacing the current repayment system with a new marginal repayment system.

    At the moment the amount that you pay off every year is based on your entire wage.

    That means once you earn above the current minimum repayment threshold of $54,435, you pay a percentage of your entire wage as a repayment.

    Under the changes in this Bill, you will only pay a percentage of your wage above the minimum repayment threshold.

    So, for example, if you earn $70,000 at the moment you currently have to repay $1,750 each year.

    Under these changes you will only have to repay about $450.

    In other words, if you earn $70,000 a year, you will have to repay $1,300 less a year than you currently have to.

    If you earn $80,000 a year, you will have to repay $850 less a year than you currently have to.

    And if you earn $110,000 a year, you will have to repay $700 less a year than you currently have to.

    You can still pay off more if you want to.

    But what this does is make the system fairer.

    It means you start paying off your uni degree when university starts to pay off for you.

    It’s a recommendation of the Universities Accord.

    And it’s a recommendation of the architect of HECS, Professor Bruce Chapman.

    When we announced this reform to create a marginal repayment system, Professor Chapman said this is:

    “…the most important thing that’s happened to the system in 35 years. It’s a marginal collection, it’s much gentler and much fairer than previously — we should have done it years ago.”

    Mr Speaker, these are important reforms, that will help millions of Australians, now and into the future. 

    It’s why it is the first Bill that we have introduced to this new Parliament.

    As the Prime Minister said when he announced in November last year that we would cut student debt by 20 per cent and make these structural changes:

    “It helps everyone repaying a student debt right now – and it delivers a better deal for every student in the years ahead.

    Permanent, structural reform to boost take home pay for young Australians.

    This is about putting money back into your pocket – and putting intergenerational equity back into the system.

    Good for cost of living.

    Good for this generation – and for generations to come.

    Good for building Australia’s future.”

    Mr Speaker, not surprisingly, the Coalition immediately said that they would oppose this Bill. 

    Like everything else, their immediate reaction was to attack this.

    I suspect they now rue that decision.

    They called it “terrible”. They called it “unfair”.

    In the electorates they represented, people saw something different.

    In electorates right across the country, where 1 in 4 voters have a student debt, they saw an opportunity to get a load off their back.

    To make their life a little bit easier.

    And they voted for it.

    As one anonymous National Party MP told the Daily Telegraph after the election:

    “My kids are paying off a university debt and I reckon they voted for Labor”.

    Mr Speaker, when even your own family won’t vote for you, you know you’ve got it wrong.

    Now the Opposition have a chance to get this right.

    Not just by voting for it.

    But by actually speaking in support of it.

    This is a chance for the opposition to admit they got it wrong.

    And that the Australian people got it right.

    Education is the most powerful cause for good.

    A good education changes lives.

    A good education system changes countries.

    It’s changed ours.

    We have got a good education system in Australia today.

    But the truth is it can be better and fairer.

    This Bill is part of that.

    So is Paid Prac that started this month for teaching and nursing students.

    For midwifery students and social work students.

    So are the University Study Hubs that will open up in our outer suburbs and regions over the next few months.

    And so is the new Needs-based Funding system for our universities that starts next year.

    It is also what the agreements we have signed with every State and Territory to fix the funding of our public schools are all about.

    And tying that funding to real reform to help kids who start behind or fall behind to catch up and keep up, and help more kids finish school and then go on to TAFE or University.

    It also means making our child care centres safer.

    And I will introduce legislation to help do that in a few moments time.

    Mr Speaker, once again, it’s my privilege to make good on a promise we made last year and that we repeated every single day of the election campaign. 

    In every seat across the country.

    To cut student debt by 20 per cent.

    To cut the debt of 3 million Australians.

    To take a weight off their back.

    To help with the cost of living.

    And to help build Australia’s future.

    I commend this Bill to the House.

    MIL OSI News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Become an Ambassador of VDNKh: The country’s main exhibition invites volunteers

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: Moscow Government – Government of Moscow –

    An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

    The country’s main exhibition is meeting everyone who is full of energy and desire to develop. Anyone can join the volunteer corps “VDNKh Ambassadors”. This is a team of like-minded people who help ensure an interesting and comfortable stay for visitors on the exhibition grounds and beyond.

    Currently, there are about 500 people involved in the VDNKh volunteer corps. Of these, 315 are young people. The team is looking for open, sociable and active people aged 16 and over. To join, you must fill out questionnaire on the website. The answer will come within a week.

    Volunteers work in the hospitality, cultural and event areas. They gain exciting and useful experience in organizing large-scale city, all-Russian and international festivals or individual events, take care of unique objects of historical and cultural value. Their daily chores include coordinating visitors on the territory, helping to find the necessary information, creating a friendly atmosphere, informing guests about events and activities. Volunteers also help in the work of VDNKh museums, participate in replenishing funds, preserving and popularizing the cultural heritage of the exhibition. Students of architectural and art educational institutions get a chance to enrich their knowledge and acquire professional skills. They regularly meet with architects and restorers, get acquainted with historical pavilions, learn about the work carried out at the exhibition as part of the restoration and reconstruction of various objects, and about the technologies used.

    It is worth noting that VDNKh cooperates with the Mytishchi branch of the Moscow State Technical University named after N.E. Bauman. For students of the university studying in the field of “Landscape Architecture”, off-site classes are organized, where children study types of woody and herbaceous plants, types of flower arrangement, architectural styles, small architectural forms and much more.

    Volunteers of the VDNKh Ambassadors Corps not only have the opportunity to take part in large-scale events in the city and the country, but can also visit museums, exhibitions and the VDNKh skating rink, master classes, trainings and excursions for free, and receive discounts from exhibition partners. Ambassadors are provided with branded equipment and are treated to free lunches on the days of work on the exhibition grounds. Volunteer activity is officially recorded on the dobro.ru portal, entries are made in a personal book, and participants are thanked.

    Get the latest news quicklyofficial telegram channel city of Moscow.

    Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    .

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI USA: July 22nd, 2025 Heinrich Announces Committee Passage of $6.5 Million to Combat Crime, Save Lives, & Keep New Mexicans Safe

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for New Mexico Martin Heinrich

    WASHINGTON — U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) announced the bipartisan Senate Appropriations Committee passage of the Fiscal Year 2026 (FY26) Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill. With Committee approval of this bill, Heinrich secured support for over $6.5 million for nine local projects in New Mexico.

    “While this Appropriations bill isn’t perfect, it includes resources and investments I negotiated for New Mexico that will help our law enforcement officers solve and reduce violent crime, keep our communities safe, and save lives,” said Heinrich, a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee. “This legislation will allocate additional resources to investigate, respond to, and prevent crimes in Tribal communities, including funding to address the crisis of Missing and Murdered Indigenous Persons. Additionally, the bill creates a fentanyl tracking system, builds on my work to prevent firearm straw purchases and illegal gun trafficking, and makes opioid use disorder medications more accessible to New Mexicans. As a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, I will always fight for investments that put New Mexico communities first.”

    Next, the bill will be considered by the full United States Senate.

    Congressionally Directed Spending

    Heinrich successfully included $6,521,000 in investments for the following 9 local projects in the bill:

    • $1,668,000 for the New Mexico Statewide Sexual Assault Program to increase capacity at the Helpline and Work Force Trauma Institute.
    • $1,050,000 for the Bernalillo County Sheriff’s Office for forensic analysis and crime scene reconstruction equipment.
    • $1,000,000 for the Las Cruces Police Department to establish an Evidence Processing Lab for local law enforcement agencies.
    • $908,000 for the Albuquerque Police Department to purchase crime scene processing equipment at the Metropolitan Forensic Science Center.
    • $629,000 for the City of Farmington to acquire forensic DNA and narcotics identification equipment, training, and personnel.
    • $533,000 for Eastern New Mexico University Campus to enhance lighting and safety on campus.
    • $350,000 for New Mexicans to Prevent Gun Violence to expand its youth gun violence prevention programs.
    • $268,000 for the Doña Ana County Sheriff’s Office to purchase mobile security trailers.
    • $115,000 for Gallup Police Department to purchase crime scene reconstruction equipment.

    Additionally, Heinrich and U.S. Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) successfully included $1,000,000 for the New Mexico Medical Investigator to enhance the DNA Processing Laboratory.

    Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Key Points and Highlights

    Combatting Crimes on Tribal Lands: Heinrich successfully included language directing the Department of Justice (DOJ) to continue to allocate additional resources to address the crisis of Missing and Murdered Indigenous Persons, including providing sufficient funding to investigate, respond to, and prevent crimes in Tribal communities. Heinrich helped secure $95,000,000 within the Crime Victims Fund specifically for law enforcement efforts on Tribal lands and in order for federal, state, and tribal governments to coordinate on these critical public safety initiatives.

    Fentanyl Tracking System: Heinrich successfully included language directing the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to develop a comprehensive fentanyl tracking system. That tracking system would include documentation of seizure location, chemical composition, probable or known manufacturing location, and probable or known point of entry into the United States. Currently, fentanyl interdiction is compiled at land ports of entry by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), but the DEA does not have readily accessible tracking data on the movement of illicit drugs within the U.S. or their point of origin. Requiring the compilation and organization of that data will complement DHS’ work and improve our country’s work to effectively combat the fentanyl crisis.

    Firearm Straw Purchases Prevention: Heinrich successfully included language calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to continue its public awareness campaign to reduce firearm straw purchases at the retail level and to educate would-be straw purchasers of the penalties associated with knowingly participating in an illegal firearm purchase. This language builds on Heinrich’s work to negotiate and author the provision in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act that increased criminal penalties for straw purchases and made it illegal to traffic firearms out of the United States. To date, more than 1,000 defendants have been charged by the Department of Justice because of those provisions, removing hundreds of firearms from the streets.

    Removing Barriers to Lifesaving Medication: Heinrich successfully included language directing the DEA to take further action to remove barriers to access for opioid use disorder medications such as buprenorphine. The data clearly shows that prescriptions of medications for opioid use disorder significantly reduce the risk of overdose death, but despite their demonstrated effectiveness, approximately 87% of those suffering from opioid use disorder do not have a prescription for these lifesaving medications. The inclusion of this language will assist local medical and mental health providers and make medications, including buprenorphine, more accessible to New Mexicans.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: July 22nd, 2025 Heinrich Announces Committee Passage of $6.5 Million to Combat Crime, Save Lives, & Keep New Mexicans Safe

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for New Mexico Martin Heinrich

    WASHINGTON — U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) announced the bipartisan Senate Appropriations Committee passage of the Fiscal Year 2026 (FY26) Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill. With Committee approval of this bill, Heinrich secured support for over $6.5 million for nine local projects in New Mexico.

    “While this Appropriations bill isn’t perfect, it includes resources and investments I negotiated for New Mexico that will help our law enforcement officers solve and reduce violent crime, keep our communities safe, and save lives,” said Heinrich, a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee. “This legislation will allocate additional resources to investigate, respond to, and prevent crimes in Tribal communities, including funding to address the crisis of Missing and Murdered Indigenous Persons. Additionally, the bill creates a fentanyl tracking system, builds on my work to prevent firearm straw purchases and illegal gun trafficking, and makes opioid use disorder medications more accessible to New Mexicans. As a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, I will always fight for investments that put New Mexico communities first.”

    Next, the bill will be considered by the full United States Senate.

    Congressionally Directed Spending

    Heinrich successfully included $6,521,000 in investments for the following 9 local projects in the bill:

    • $1,668,000 for the New Mexico Statewide Sexual Assault Program to increase capacity at the Helpline and Work Force Trauma Institute.
    • $1,050,000 for the Bernalillo County Sheriff’s Office for forensic analysis and crime scene reconstruction equipment.
    • $1,000,000 for the Las Cruces Police Department to establish an Evidence Processing Lab for local law enforcement agencies.
    • $908,000 for the Albuquerque Police Department to purchase crime scene processing equipment at the Metropolitan Forensic Science Center.
    • $629,000 for the City of Farmington to acquire forensic DNA and narcotics identification equipment, training, and personnel.
    • $533,000 for Eastern New Mexico University Campus to enhance lighting and safety on campus.
    • $350,000 for New Mexicans to Prevent Gun Violence to expand its youth gun violence prevention programs.
    • $268,000 for the Doña Ana County Sheriff’s Office to purchase mobile security trailers.
    • $115,000 for Gallup Police Department to purchase crime scene reconstruction equipment.

    Additionally, Heinrich and U.S. Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) successfully included $1,000,000 for the New Mexico Medical Investigator to enhance the DNA Processing Laboratory.

    Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Key Points and Highlights

    Combatting Crimes on Tribal Lands: Heinrich successfully included language directing the Department of Justice (DOJ) to continue to allocate additional resources to address the crisis of Missing and Murdered Indigenous Persons, including providing sufficient funding to investigate, respond to, and prevent crimes in Tribal communities. Heinrich helped secure $95,000,000 within the Crime Victims Fund specifically for law enforcement efforts on Tribal lands and in order for federal, state, and tribal governments to coordinate on these critical public safety initiatives.

    Fentanyl Tracking System: Heinrich successfully included language directing the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to develop a comprehensive fentanyl tracking system. That tracking system would include documentation of seizure location, chemical composition, probable or known manufacturing location, and probable or known point of entry into the United States. Currently, fentanyl interdiction is compiled at land ports of entry by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), but the DEA does not have readily accessible tracking data on the movement of illicit drugs within the U.S. or their point of origin. Requiring the compilation and organization of that data will complement DHS’ work and improve our country’s work to effectively combat the fentanyl crisis.

    Firearm Straw Purchases Prevention: Heinrich successfully included language calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to continue its public awareness campaign to reduce firearm straw purchases at the retail level and to educate would-be straw purchasers of the penalties associated with knowingly participating in an illegal firearm purchase. This language builds on Heinrich’s work to negotiate and author the provision in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act that increased criminal penalties for straw purchases and made it illegal to traffic firearms out of the United States. To date, more than 1,000 defendants have been charged by the Department of Justice because of those provisions, removing hundreds of firearms from the streets.

    Removing Barriers to Lifesaving Medication: Heinrich successfully included language directing the DEA to take further action to remove barriers to access for opioid use disorder medications such as buprenorphine. The data clearly shows that prescriptions of medications for opioid use disorder significantly reduce the risk of overdose death, but despite their demonstrated effectiveness, approximately 87% of those suffering from opioid use disorder do not have a prescription for these lifesaving medications. The inclusion of this language will assist local medical and mental health providers and make medications, including buprenorphine, more accessible to New Mexicans.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Doorstop – Parliament House, Canberra

    Source: Murray Darling Basin Authority

    JASON CLARE, MINISTER FOR EDUCATION: Thanks very much for coming along. Today’s a big day. Today, I’ll introduce two pieces of legislation. The first, to cut student debt by 20 per cent; and the second, to cut funding to childcare centres that aren’t up to scratch, that aren’t meeting the sort of minimum standards that parents need and that our children deserve.

    The first piece of legislation to cut student debt by 20 per cent is something that we promised, I think, every day of the election campaign in every part of the country. It means cutting the debt of three million Australians. A lot of those are young Australians. Often young people don’t see themselves on the ballot paper when they go to vote, but a lot of young people did at this election, and they voted for it in their millions. The impact of this legislation is that for the average person with a student debt, they’ll see their debt cut by about $5,500. That’s a big deal. That’s a lot of weight off their back, and it will help a lot of young people that might be just out of uni, just out of home, just getting started.

    The second piece of legislation that I’ll introduce is about giving the Commonwealth the powers that we need to be able to cut access to the child care subsidy for centres that aren’t up to scratch. I think the whole country has been sickened and shocked by the revelations that have come out of Victoria in the last few weeks, and a lot of work is needed to rebuild trust in a system that parents rely upon every single day – more than a million parents across the country – and this legislation is part of that. The biggest weapon that the Commonwealth has to wield here is the funding that we provide that enables child care centres to operate. It’s something like $16 billion a year, and that covers about 70 per cent of the cost of running the average child care centre. Child care centres can’t operate without it, and I think it’s fair, I think most mums and dads will think it’s fair, that if centres are repeatedly not meeting the sort of standards that we set for them, that we should have the power to be able to cut that funding off. This is not about shutting centres down. It’s about lifting standards up and giving us the powers to make that happen.

    I might pass to Andrew to talk in a little bit of detail about the cut to student debt by 20 per cent, and then ask Jess to talk a little bit more about the legislation that we’ll introduce today to be able to cut funding to centres that aren’t up to scratch.

    ANDREW GILES, MINISTER FOR SKILLS AND TRAINING: Thanks very much, Jason. From our very first day in office, the Albanese Labor Government has been committed to breaking down all of those barriers that have held back too many Australians from accessing education and training. And today, we take another really big step forward in that regard. I’m going to talk really to make two points about this. The first one is to recognise the significance, as Jason just laid out, of this first piece of legislation – a piece of legislation that we talked about constantly through the campaign, and indeed since the commitment was made some months before that. A commitment that really resonated with so many Australians, three million of whom will benefit from this cut. Real cost of living relief. Money back in the pockets of Australians who can do with that help and that message of reassurance. I want to say this, though – not only have we been listening to students in Australia, we’ve been listening to all of the students in tertiary education and apprentices too, because this is not just relief from HECS debt. It’s relief that will also support nearly 300,000 students with various VET loans. They will also benefit.

    And that leads me to the second point I want to make here. There really is never a better time than now to think about pursuing a VET pathway. At the same time that we made this commitment that Jason will be introducing in the form of legislation today, we also made our commitment to make Free TAFE permanent. And that has been an extraordinary success in turning around the skills crisis and breaking down another barrier that’s held back too many Australians from accessing skills. As of today, more than 170,000 Free TAFE courses have been completed. More than 650,000 enrolments have taken place. This is making a huge difference alongside so many other incentives, like the one that’s just rolled out for 1 July encouraging more people to pick up the tools and become a housing tradie. There is more to be done of course, but all of these commitments demonstrate our determination to do everything possible to deliver cost of living relief today, and to create more pathways for more Australians to get the skills they want to do the jobs that we need. I’ll hand over Jess to talk about the second bill.

    JESS WALSH, MINISTER FOR EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION: Thanks very much, Andrew. Thanks very much, Jason. Well, every child deserves to be safe in early childhood education and care, and every parent deserves to know that their children are safe too. But it has been a really distressing time for children and their families as we see these revelations unfold in Victoria. It’s been distressing for parents. It’s been distressing for the vast majority of early childhood educators as well, who are just going into work every day to take the best care that they can of our nation’s children. We want to rebuild the confidence that our early learning centres are safe and that they do provide quality early education. And of course, the vast majority of our early learning services do that every single day. But there are some repeat offenders who continue to put profit ahead of child safety, and that’s what the legislation that we’re introducing today is targeted to deal with. We have a strong message for those providers who do put profit ahead of child safety, and that is that we want you to lift your game or to leave the sector.

    Our focus is going to be on helping those providers to lift their game, and this legislation will give us the tools to do that. It will allow us to withdraw Commonwealth Child Care Subsidy from those providers who persistently and consistently let families down. It gives us a strong stick that we’re willing to use to drive standards in early childhood education to deliver the quality and the safety that parents deserve.

    JOURNALIST: Minister Clare, the Minister has just spoken about this legislation being a stick to encourage providers to do the right thing. Are there any, what else is in this bill to actually help some of the providers to do more? I mean, some of the big providers have talked about needing more funds or assistance for training, for instance; for CCTV cameras and so forth. What else is in this bill beyond stick?

    CLARE: Well, this legislation is about giving the Commonwealth the power to cut off funding, cut off the childcare subsidy funding to centres that aren’t meeting that minimum standard, that are repeatedly not meeting that minimum standard. Now these centres know the standard they have to set, now they know what the consequences will be if they don’t meet it. The legislation also gives more power to the authorised officers in our department to be able to do spot checks of centres, particularly in the area of fraud. This is another area that is very serious that we’ve been working on, that I’ve been working on now for three years. The Government’s provided about an extra $220 million for fraud investigation of early education and care. It’s helped to claw back more than $300 million for the Australian taxpayer. This gives more power to our officers to be able to do spot checks without a warrant or without the AFP on board, but they will also be able to, if they spot safety concerns, pass that on to state regulators as well.

    Now, Josh, you make the point that this isn’t the only thing we need to do, and that is absolutely right. When education ministers meet next month, we’ll be talking about some of the things you just mentioned. A national educator register so that we can track workers from centre to centre and from state to state. I think the revelations in Victoria over the course of the last few weeks tell us exactly why this is so important. CCTV and the role that it can potentially play in deterring a bad person from doing heinous things and also helping police with their investigations, but also the sort of training, mandatory child safety training, that already exists in the courses but doesn’t exist in the classroom, doesn’t exist in centres, that can play a crucial role in helping to make sure that the 99.9 per cent of people who are good and honest and hardworking and care for and love our kids and educate our kids every day, the people who are aghast at what they’re reading in the newspapers and are angry that their profession is in the media for the wrong reasons, have the skills they need to spot a bad person before they act. To have the skills that they need to spot somebody who might be looking to do something terrible to children or to distract them from stepping in and stopping it from happening. So whether it’s the register, whether it’s training, or whether it’s CCTV or a bunch of other things that will come out, I’m sure of the rapid review in Victoria and the work that’s being done in New South Wales, all of that is on the table when education ministers meet next month.

    The other thing I should mention here for the sake of completeness is the Attorney-General will also meet with AGs across the country next month to look at the reforms that are needed that are long overdue to working with children checks.

    JOURNALIST: How many breaches of the minimum standards would take you to strip the childcare centre of its funding? What’s the threshold in the legislation?

    CLARE: State regulators can shut a centre down right now if they think there’s a real and imminent threat to childcare safety. So they can do that today. What this legislation gives us the power to do is to shut a centre down if we think they’re below the minimum standard and they’re not likely to get there or they’re not intending to get there. So we can issue a show cause notice and say you’ve got 28 days, give us a good explanation about why you’re not there or we will cut your funding. Alternatively, we might set some conditions on the centre and say you’ve got a period of time to reach that standard, to meet the requirements that the state regulator has told you to reach, potentially to employ a child safety expert in the centre to help you reach them. And as I said, I want centres to get to those standards. We don’t want to have to shut centres down. But also we want to make sure that parents know that if a centre has a show cause notice given to it, or it’s got conditions that are imposed upon it, that mums and dads at that centre deserve to know that we’ve done that and to be able to make a decision about where they want to send their kids.

    JOURNALIST: You just said that state and territory governments already have the power to shut down centres. What difference is this going to make now that the Commonwealth has that power as well?

    CLARE: Well, they have that power and they use it. This is an additional power to make sure that the centres, and there are a number of them that are not at that minimum standard, take the action that they need to take to lift their standards to the sort of standards that we set as a nation, that parents expect and that our children deserve.

    JOURNALIST: So do you think that state and territory governments haven’t been doing enough of that kind of putting that pressure and threatening to shut places down, or shutting places down, if you feel like the Commonwealth needs to step into this?

    CLARE: Well, states do that work now. They tell centres about the standards they expect them to meet, and sometimes centres don’t meet them, and the problem remains unfixed. This gives us the power to step in there where centres are just either deliberately or for whatever reason not meeting those sorts of standards. The bottom line, though, is we all need to do more here. States need to do more. The Commonwealth needs to do more. Centres need to do more as well.

    JOURNALIST: Minister, just on HECS, obviously this is a one-off cut, but what about future students? Is it not unfair to only have this one line in the sand and cut it by 20 per cent? What about the students of the future?

    CLARE: Look, I think there’s a lot of work to do to make our education system better and fairer. And there’s a lot of work to do to make our higher education system better and fairer. The fact is today about 50 per cent of young people have a uni degree, but not everywhere. Not where I grew up, not in the outer suburbs of our big cities, not in regional Australia, not amongst kids from poor and disadvantaged backgrounds. And I want to fix that. That’s what the Universities Accord is all about, and we’ve already taken steps to implement some of that report –

    JOURNALIST: Does that –

    CLARE: Hang on a second. Part of that’s Paid Prac that rolls out this month – financial support for the first time for teaching students and nursing students and midwifery and social work students while they do the practical part of their university degree. Part of it is also uncapping funding for the fee-free university bridging courses that help make sure that people that have finished high school, or maybe they haven’t finished high school and aren’t ready for a uni degree, are ready for it. Part of it is also changing the way that we fund universities. Over the course of the last 12 months or so, I’ve struck agreements with every state and territory to fix the funding of public schools, what David Gonski called for more than a decade ago. Now, what we’ll do next year is change the funding of universities, so it’s needs-based as well, and the funding follows the student. And so more funding flows to students from disadvantaged backgrounds and students from regional Australia, because we know that there is not just fewer young people from disadvantaged backgrounds starting a degree but fewer finishing a degree.

    It also means, and I’m sorry for the long answer, but this is a comprehensive piece of work, building and operating more university Hubs in our outer suburbs, in our regions. When I was a kid growing up, there were a lot of Macca’s logos and a lot of Westfield logos in Western Sydney, not a lot of uni logos. Uni felt like it was someplace else for somewhere else. And a lot of my mates just either dropped out of school or finished school, never thought of uni because they thought it wasn’t for them. I want to change that too. And that’s what those Hubs are about. But this Accord is big. It’s the work of multiple governments and multiple ministers. That’s why we’ve set up the Australian Tertiary Education Commission to act as a steward to drive long-term reform here. And there is more work to do. This is just the start.

    JOURNALIST: If I can just follow up on that. Does that mean some of those changes involve potentially cutting student fees into the future?

    CLARE: Well, the ATEC’s job is to look at all of that. Not just that, but all of that.

    JOURNALIST: Can I go back to child care? I’m obviously very mindful you’re introducing this legislation today and the national database, it does require sort of corralling the states and territories. It’s a tricky job. Can you wait for this much longer, for this meeting to happen in the middle of August or later in August for a three-year period? And then can I ask as well, what’s the timeline for fresh year is setting up the database? This would take some time, would it not?

    CLARE: Josh, the truth is this should have happened yesterday. And this can’t happen fast enough. And states are already taking steps to expand their existing teacher registers. Victoria is a good example of that, and they’ll have that stood up by the end of August. So where states do that, that’s good, but we need to join it up, because to make the system work the way it needs to work, we need to be able to track people not just from centre to centre, but from state to state. And if you want evidence of why that’s important, have a look at the Ashley Griffith case in Queensland from a couple of years ago.

    JOURNALIST: If I may, this is on another issue –

    CLARE: Yep, and then we’ll bounce back.

    JOURNALIST: When are we looking to see the Government’s 2035 emissions target, and can we expect a more ambitious target?

    CLARE: Oh, look, I’ll ask you to talk to Chris Bowen about that. I’m pretty busy today on some pretty important things.

    JOURNALIST: Just back on the future student stuff, the cost of an arts or humanities degree has almost doubled under the last government. Is that something you’re looking to change this term?

    CLARE: Really, it’s the same answer that I gave just a moment ago about the role of the ATEC.

    JOURNALIST: Could I just follow you up on one of the questions you asked a minute ago? What’s the timeline for setting up a register like this with the national database for the childcare workers? I mean, and I believe there was a Child Safety Authority report in 2013 that said investigations into –

    CLARE: 2023, I think, Josh?

    JOURNALIST: Maybe 2023. The problem is investigations into sexual assaults that were unsubstantiated, whether they would be included in a data set?

    CLARE: Two separate questions. We want to stand this up as quickly as possible, and I mentioned in my previous answer the work that states are doing, but ACECQA, the National Independent Authority, is doing that work about what the elements of the register need to involve, and that will be presented to ministers when we meet in August. On that second question, that’s something that attorneys will be looking at as part of the working with children checks.

    JOURNALIST: Is it time for a national watchdog in this space?

    CLARE: Well, one of the things that the Productivity Commission recommended when they provided us with a blueprint for reform of early education and care, and I touched on the Accord, which is the equivalent for higher education, is a national early education and care commission. And I’ve got an open mind about that. I’ve said that in the media last week. What that report said is we’ve got to do a number of things to build a better, a fairer and a safer early education and care system. One of those, the first of those, is to pay workers more. When you pay people more, more people want to and we’re seeing the evidence of that this year. That 15 per cent pay rise has meant that we’re now seeing more people come back to the sector and building a permanent workforce. Our kids will be safer if the workers are permanent, that they’re not moving in and out of centres all the time. So that pay rise is already reaping dividends for parents and for our children. It also recommended that we remove the activity test so kids from disadvantaged backgrounds don’t miss out on the value of early education and care. And it’s recommended a commission like this. In its report, it didn’t say that this would have a role in safety, but that doesn’t mean that it can’t. And this is something that we will look at in the future.

    JOURNALIST: It was already hard to get child care workers in Australia. I know that there’s been a pay rise since then. Are you concerned that people aren’t going to be choosing child care careers following the really heinous allegations that have come out?

    CLARE: I might ask Jess to comment on this as well because I know how dear this is to your heart. We want people to do this job. There aren’t many jobs in this country more important. They’re vested with the trust of our most precious things, our children. The little ones that walk through the door or are carried through the door of centres every single day. And that pay rise is doing what we really wanted it to do last year. We’re seeing the number of people applying to be an early education and care worker jump by, what is it, Jess, more than 20 per cent. The number of vacancies drop by about the same amount as well. That tells us if you pay people more, people want to do the job. And I do worry that these people who do this incredibly important job, one of them is my cousin, she’s worked in this sector for 35 years. I remember when my little guy first went into care, I said, ‘how do I pick a good centre?’ And she said, ‘go to the place where the people have been working there forever, where they don’t want to leave.’ That’s a great centre, but it’s also a safe centre. And if we want that to be everywhere, you’ve got to pay people better. A lot of people have been leaving to go and work at Bunnings and Woolies just because you could earn more. And so that’s why that pay rise is important and that’s why rebuilding trust and faith in in this service, in this system, is so important.

    WALSH: Thanks, Jason. Well, I think when Jason’s answered a question, there’s not much left to say. But I’ve been going out to early childhood education centres for the past few weeks and talking to educators as they grapple with this. And they are absolutely devastated and distressed by these allegations. But it’s not making them want to leave the sector. It’s making them determined to stay. These are the people who want to provide quality early childhood education. That is what they are there for. That is what they are going into work to do every single day. We do want to see more dedicated, committed early childhood educators in the sector. And that is exactly what is happening with the pay rise, a historic pay rise of 15 per cent that educators themselves advocated for years and years. The previous government didn’t take action on that front. It meant that early childhood educators were undervalued. It meant that in our first term of office the workforce was really in crisis. People were leaving the jobs that they love because they weren’t earning enough and love just doesn’t pay the bills. So what we’re seeing with this pay rise is people coming back to the sector. We’re seeing people stay in the sector and we’re seeing them able to provide that really high quality care that children deserve and that they want to provide. And again, that continuity in an early learning centre with educators is the absolute key to quality and safety. When educators know each other, when they know the children, when they know the families, that’s when we get quality, safe, early childhood education. This historic 15 per cent pay rise has been a game changer for that.

    CLARE: Thanks very much everybody.
     

    MIL OSI News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Case Opposes Public Lands And Natural Resources Funding Measure That Cripples Efforts To Combat Climate Change And Slashes Funds For National Parks

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Ed Case (Hawai‘i – District 1)

    (Washington, DC) – U.S. Congressman Ed Case (HI-01), a member of the House Appropriations Committee, voted in full Committee today against the proposed Fiscal Year (FY) 2026 Interior Appropriations bill that cut $2.9 billion from programs and agencies that support public lands and our nation’s natural resources.   

    The Interior, Environment and Related Appropriations bill funds the U.S. Department of the Interior, including the National Park Service (NPS), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Geological Survey, Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Forest Service and various independent agencies including the National Endowments on Arts and the Humanities. The bill’s FY 2026 discretionary funding level is $38 billion. This is a decrease of $2.9 billion from the FY 2025 enacted level.  

    “While these measures fund many critical Hawai‘i and priorities I requested, I regrettably had to vote against this version because it cripples efforts to deal with climate change by defunding all of the climate work by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,” said Case. 

    “It further decimates public lands by slashing funding for the National Park Service and gutting key conservation agencies that protect our parks, forests and wildlife. It also undermines museums and cultural institutions, cutting support for the Smithsonian and slashing the arts and humanities by $72 million each.”

    In full Committee debate on the measure, Case voiced his strong opposition to the bill’s proposed $1.7 billion in cuts to federal support for Drinking Water and Clean Water State Revolving Funds (see remarks here: https://youtu.be/0w197WN4wys).

    These vital programs offer low-cost financing to local communities for a broad spectrum of water quality infrastructure projects. They have played a critical role in efforts to remediate Red Hill, including supporting technical assistance for source water protection, and are critical to continued maintenance of Hawaii’s drinking water quality. 

    “Red Hill reinforced all over again that in an island community our water systems are fragile and priceless,” Case said.  

    “We need sustained investment not just to meet the urgent demands of remediation, but to ensure the long-term safety, resilience, and sustainability of our water infrastructure. We cannot cut back now on the very programs that have made that possible over the last half century,” Case said. 

    Continued support for the State Revolving Funds is also essential to Hawaii’s ability to confront emerging contaminants like PFAS, or “forever chemicals,” which pose serious risks to public health and the environment. Furthermore, these funds are critical for moving forward on 38 high-priority water infrastructure projects across the state. These projects strengthen drinking water safety, improve wastewater treatment, and build long-term resilience in Hawaii’s water systems. Without adequate federal investment, many of these initiatives risk delay or cancellation, leaving our communities vulnerable. 

    However, the measure added several of Case’s priority requests, including: 

    ·         $5 million for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s State of the Birds Activities to respond to the urgent needs of critically endangered birds that now face possible extinction. These funds will help save numerous endemic birds in Hawai‘i that have been devastated by climate change and avian malaria.  

    ·         $45 million for the U.S. Geological Survey Biological Threats and Invasive Species Research Program.  

    ·         $66 million for the U.S. Geological Survey’s Climate Adaptation Science Centers, which includes the Pacific Islands Climate Adaptation Science Center based out of the University of Hawai‘i-Mānoa. These centers provide regionally relevant scientific information, tools and techniques to resource managers and communities in Hawai‘i in response to our changing climate.  

    ·         $63 million for State Historic Preservation Offices, which will help preserve Hawaii’s treasured historic properties.

    ·         $80 million for State Fire Assistance, which provides financial and technical support directly to states to enhance firefighting capacity, support community-based hazard mitigation and expand outreach and education to homeowners and communities concerning fire prevention. 

    ·         $20 million for the Joint Fire Science Program, which supports a national collaboration of fire science exchanges providing science information to federal, state, local, tribal and private stakeholders.  

    ·         $5 million for Japanese Confinement Site Grants and funding for the Amache National Historic Site, which was one of ten incarceration sites established by the War Relocation Authority during World War II to detain Japanese Americans who were forcibly removed from their communities on the West Coast.  

    Through his assignment on the Committee, Case was also able to secure a Member-designated Community Project Funding (CPF) project of $1,092,000 for the Department of Hawaiian Homelands (DHHL) to upgrade the sewer infrastructure at Papakōlea.  

    “Papakōlea is the only Hawaiian Home Lands community located in central Honolulu with more than 300 homes and some 1,300 residents,” said Case. “As the infrastructure in Papakōlea ages, the sewer system has become susceptible to cracks, root intrusions and other defects that diminish the effectiveness of the service lines. My CPF will assist DHHL to work on a sewer line rehabilitation/replacement program for the community.” 

    The House’s CPF rules require that each project must have demonstrated community support, must be fully disclosed by the requesting Member and must be subject to audit by the independent Government Accountability Office. Case’s disclosures are here: https://case.house.gov/services/funding-disclosures.htm.  

    A summary of the bill is available here.  

    This is the eighth bill of twelve separate bills developed and approved by the Appropriations Committee that would fund the federal government at some $1.6 trillion for FY 2026 commencing October 1st of this year. The bill now moves on to the full House of Representatives for its consideration.

    ###

     

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-Evening Report: Young Japanese voters embrace right-wing populist parties, leaving the prime minister on the brink

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Craig Mark, Adjunct Lecturer, Faculty of Economics, Hosei University

    Japan’s ruling coalition suffered the widely expected loss of its majority in the July 20 election, as young voters shifted to the populist right. As a result, Shigeru Ishiba’s prime ministership now hangs in the balance.

    The election was for half of the 248 members of the House of Councillors, the upper house of the National Diet, Japan’s parliament. The Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) secured 39 seats, and its minor coalition partner, the Komeito Party, just eight. This left it three seats short of the 50 required to maintain its majority, as populist opposition parties made dramatic gains.

    The LDP is now confronted with minorities in both houses of the Diet for the first time in the party’s 70-year history. It is a huge decline from its postwar dominance of Japanese politics.

    In a press conference on Monday, Ishiba said he would not resign, as the LDP remained the largest party in the upper house. He also insisted he needed to stay in office to complete negotiations with the Trump administration, which had threatened to continue harsh trade tariffs after August 1.

    But Ishiba is facing calls from disgruntled LDP Diet members to step down. He had already led the LDP into minority government in last October’s election for the lower house of the Diet, the House of Representatives. He called the snap election in the wake of securing LDP leadership last September.




    Read more:
    Why did Japan’s new leader trigger snap elections only a week after taking office? And what happens next?


    However, the main opposition Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan (CDP) was not responsible for this latest defeat – it managed only to retain its 22 seats. Instead, the LDP and Komeito instead lost out to the two rising populist parties: the centre-right Democratic Party for the People (DPFP), which went from four to 17 seats, and the far-right Sanseito party, which made the most dramatic gains, from one to 14 seats.

    Main opposition leader Yoshihiko Noda now needs to again consider whether to bring on a motion of no confidence in the Ishiba cabinet in the lower house. Last month, he backed away from doing so. Such a motion would likely succeed with the support of the other opposition parties, and immediately trigger a snap lower house election. But it would also be highly risky, as it could allow the two right-wing parties to again overshadow the main opposition.

    The young shift to the right

    Exit polls showed younger people voted in greater numbers for the two right-wing parties. Their dissatisfaction erupted against the political status quo that has long favoured older generations. Older Japanese remain the main supporters for the two major parties, as well as the smaller Komeito and the declining Japanese Communist Party.

    Many voters were angry about declining wages, persistent inflation, and a growing tax burden to fund the straining pension and welfare system that disproportionately benefits the elderly.

    The leaders of the two right-wing parties, 56-year-old Yuichiro Tamaki and 47-year-old Sohei Kamiya, more effectively used social media to exploit this electoral discontent and push their populist messages.

    Sanseito emerged at the start of the COVID pandemic in March 2020. It promoted anti-vaccination conspiracy theories and xenophobia through its campaign slogan of “Japanese First”.

    As more people have expressed frustration with Japan’s record tourist numbers, Sanseito and the smaller far-right Conservative Party of Japan sought to scapegoat the relatively small foreign resident population of waging a “silent invasion”.

    This includes spreading false stories about them causing local crime waves, depressing wages, hiking real estate prices, and abusing welfare.

    The number of foreign-born residents, mostly from other Asian countries, has steadily risen to 3.8 million to meet the demands of the shrinking labour force. However, it still only comprises about 3% of Japan’s (ageing and shrinking) population.

    Despite running and electing a majority of female candidates, Sanseito has also attracted criticism for wanting to end gender equality so as to raise the birth rate. It also wants to remove democratic protections from the postwar constitution and return to an imperial form of government.

    The success of the two right-wing parties, along with the nationalist neoliberal Japan Innovation Party, threatens to transform Japanese politics.

    However, it remains to be seen whether they will be able to cooperate effectively in the Diet with other parties to enact their policy agenda. This includes cutting the consumption tax rate while boosting subsidies to support families and farmers, and restricting immigration.

    Uncertainty reigns

    The increased political uncertainty will raise concerns about Japan’s ability to continue its strategic reorientation. It has pledged to increase its defence spending to 2% of gross domestic product (GDP). It also wants to increase security cooperation with Europe, India and Australia.

    The LDP’s Diet members will hold a full party meeting on July 31 to assess the election. If a majority of LDP members across both houses and representatives of the party’s prefectural chapters petition for a leadership ballot, they could mount a spill against Ishiba.

    Ishiba now needs to continue to negotiate with opposition parties to pass legislation in both houses of the Diet. US President Donald Trump’s sudden announcement that a “massive” deal has been struck with Japan for a reciprocal tariff rate of 15% may yet give him a temporary political reprieve.

    But as his post-election approval rating hits a record low 23%, his ailing premiership looks even more vulnerable.

    Craig Mark 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. Young Japanese voters embrace right-wing populist parties, leaving the prime minister on the brink – https://theconversation.com/young-japanese-voters-embrace-right-wing-populist-parties-leaving-the-prime-minister-on-the-brink-261673

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian Federation Dmitry Grigorenko visited Novosibirsk State University

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: Novosibirsk State University –

    An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

    On Monday, July 21, Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian Federation – Chief of the Government Staff Dmitry Grigorenko visited the Novosibirsk Region on a working visit. One of the items on the agenda was a visit to Novosibirsk State University, where guests were presented with developments of the Center for Artificial Intelligence (CAI) and the Advanced Engineering School (AES) of NSU.

    During the meeting, the rector of NSU, academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences Mikhail Fedoruk, introduced the vice-premier to the history of the university, told him what is special about NSU, what it is now and what are the plans for the near future. He noted the special role of the university as a center of attraction for innovations and its contribution to the development of Akademgorodok, Novosibirsk and the country as a whole. Mikhail Fedoruk also emphasized that all the main strategic technological projects that the university is implementing within the framework of the Priority 2030 program are somehow related to new technologies and artificial intelligence.

    The AI Center employees, in turn, presented a number of projects that are at various stages of readiness. In partnership with Rostelecom, a whole line of video detectors is being developed that monitor various situations that require the intervention of emergency and city services.

    Currently, about two dozen such detectors have been created, some of which have already been installed for testing in real conditions at the university campus facilities. In the future, the developers want to move on to creating detectors capable of tracking several specified signs or threats at once in order to optimize the operation of video surveillance systems.

    A prototype of an autonomous intelligent assistant for visually impaired and blind patients was also presented, operating on the basis of using large language models and artificial intelligence technologies. This is a joint development with another industrial partner of the AI Center – the Novosibirsk branch of the Federal State Autonomous Institution “NMITs “MNTK “Microsurgery of the Eye” named after Academician S.N. Fedorov” of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation.

    — The principle of operation of this system is simple: a video camera will “see” instead of a person, the information from which will be sent to a portable computer, which will convert it into text. Then the text description is converted by a voice assistant and sent through headphones directly to the patient, — explained the head of the project at the NSU Center for Information Technologies Alexey Okunev.

    Another area of work is related to monitoring atmospheric and noise pollution in municipalities. Here, the partner of the NSU Center for Informatics and Information Technologies is the Novosibirsk company CityAir, which specializes in the production and maintenance of networks and services for monitoring the quality of atmospheric air. Together with the university, the company intends to more widely implement artificial intelligence technologies in its work, thereby increasing the capabilities of the supplied equipment.

    The NSU Advanced Engineering School has presented a “digital core” project for oil companies. NSU is the lead organization of a consortium that won a grant of 210 million rubles to develop digital core methods, an innovative tool that will help the Russian oil industry improve the efficiency of extracting hard-to-recover oil and gas reserves. The research will be conducted using the latest synchrotron, the Siberian Ring Photon Source (SKIF), located in the science city of Koltsovo.

    — The subject of digital core combines the most advanced methods of mathematical modeling, experimental research techniques and data processing. The unique capabilities of synchrotron radiation will allow us to close these areas, making it possible to instrumentally track the impact of various methods of increasing oil recovery on rock and choose the most optimal scenarios for developing hard-to-recover oil and gas reserves, — commented Sergey Golovin, Director of the Advanced Engineering School of NSU, Professor of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

    Dmitry Grigorenko highly praised the developments presented to him, while emphasizing that any remarkable results should not remain “a thing in itself,” and it is necessary to move on to their implementation in the real sector of the country’s economy as quickly as possible.

    — Such visits by representatives of the country’s leadership are very important for us. We get the opportunity to tell the top officials of the state about the results of our work, to understand from their reaction how relevant our developments are and, in case of a positive assessment, to receive support in implementation, which today is one of the most difficult barriers for most developers, — commented on the results of the visit the director of the NSU Center for Information Technologies Alexander Lyulko.

    Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    .

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-Evening Report: ER Report: A Roundup of Significant Articles on EveningReport.nz for July 23, 2025

    ER Report: Here is a summary of significant articles published on EveningReport.nz on July 23, 2025.

    Hard labour conditions of online moderators directly affect how well the internet is policed – new study
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tania Chatterjee, Joint PhD Candidate at Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, The University of Queensland Getty Images/GCShutter Big tech platforms often present content moderation as a seamless, tech‑driven system. But human labour, often outsourced to countries such as India and the Philippines, plays a pivotal role in

    Ghosted by a friend? 4 expert tips on how to handle the hurt
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Megan Willis, Associate Professor, School of Behavioural and Health Sciences, Australian Catholic University martin-dm/Getty When we talk about “ghosting”, we usually think it relates to dating. But what happens when you’ve been ghosted by someone you’ve known for years – your childhood best friend, a parent, a

    Labor’s new bill would cut HELP loans by 20%. But it also risks locking some graduates into a ‘debt treadmill’
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrew Norton, Professor of Higher Education Policy, Monash University The Albanese government’s 20% cut to student debt is the first bill introduced to the new federal parliament. It is clever politics. In the government’s first term, the 3 million Australians with a student debt turned high indexation

    ICJ climate crisis ruling: Will world’s top court back Pacific-led call to hold governments accountable?
    By Jamie Tahana in The Hague for RNZ Pacific In 2019, a group of law students at the University of the South Pacific, frustrated at the slow pace with which the world’s governments were moving to address the climate crisis, had an idea — they would take the world’s governments to court. They arranged a

    ‘Maybe this is the last minutes you are living’: how the war is impacting young Ukrainians
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ashley Humphrey, Lecturer in Social Sciences, Monash University Now into its fourth year, the war that followed Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has taken a devastating toll. An estimated 60,000 to 100,0000 Ukrainian lives have been lost and more than 10 million citizens displaced, and entire cities have

    Auckland is NZ’s ‘primate city’ but its potential remains caged in by poor planning and vision
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Timothy Welch, Senior Lecturer in Urban Planning, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau Getty Images The recent report comparing Auckland to nine international peer cities delivered an uncomfortable truth: our largest city is falling behind, hampered by car dependency, low-density housing and “weak economic performance”. The Deloitte

    Climate disasters are pushing people into homelessness – but there’s a lot we can do about it
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Timothy Heffernan, Lecturer in Anthropology, Australian National University Almost half of all Australian properties are at risk of bushfire, while 17,500 face risk of coastal erosion. By 2030, more than 3 million will face riverine flood risk. Meanwhile, housing demand continues to outpace supply. With climate-related disasters

    UK bans Gaza protest group – could the same thing happen in Australia?
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Shannon Bosch, Associate Professor (Law), Edith Cowan University More than 100 people were arrested in the United Kingdom on the weekend for supporting Palestine Action, a protest group that opposes Britain’s support of Israel. Palestine Action was recently proscribed as a terrorist organisation, placing it in the

    The incredible impact of Ozzy Osbourne, from Black Sabbath to Ozzfest to 30 years of retirement tours
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lachlan Goold, Senior Lecturer in Contemporary Music, University of the Sunshine Coast Ozzy Osbourne photographed in London in 1991. Martyn Goodacre/Getty Images Ozzy Osbourne, the “prince of darkness” and godfather of heavy metal, has died aged 76, just weeks after he reunited with Black Sabbath bandmates for

    Could the latest ‘interstellar comet’ be an alien probe? Why spotting cosmic visitors is harder than you think
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sara Webb, Lecturer, Centre for Astrophysics and Supercomputing, Swinburne University of Technology Comet 3I/ATLAS International Gemini Observatory/NOIRLab/NSF/AURA/K. Meech/Jen Miller/Mahdi Zamani, CC BY On July 1, astronomers spotted an unusual high-speed object zooming towards the Sun. Dubbed 3I/ATLAS, the surprising space traveller had one very special quality: its

    Should Australia lower the voting age to 16 like the UK? We asked 5 experts
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Pandanus Petter, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, School of Politics and International Relations, Australian National University The government in the UK is introducing legislation into parliament to lower the voting age to 16. If passed, the new age rules will be in place for the next general election, expected

    Doctors shouldn’t be allowed to object to medical care if it harms their patients
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Julian Savulescu, Visiting Professor in Biomedical Ethics, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute; Distinguished Visiting Professor in Law, University of Melbourne; Uehiro Chair in Practical Ethics, The University of Melbourne HRAUN/Getty A young woman needs an abortion and the reasons, while urgent, are not medical. A United States Navy

    Ultra fast fashion could be taxed to oblivion in France. Could Australia follow suit?
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rowena Maguire, Professor of Law and Director of the Centre of Justice, Queensland University of Technology Ryan McVay/Getty For centuries, clothes were hard to produce and expensive. People wore them as long as possible. But manufacturing advances have steadily driven down the cost of production. These days,

    Central bank independence and credibility matters. Here’s why
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Simon, Adjunct Fellow in Economics, Macquarie University Olga Kashubin/Shutterstock In the United States, President Donald Trump has been pressuring the chairman of the US Federal Reserve, Jerome Powell, to slash interest rates. This is partly to ease the interest payments on the ballooning US government debt.

    Kneecap’s stance on Gaza extends a long history of the Irish supporting other oppressed peoples
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ciara Smart, PhD Graduand in Australasian Irish History, University of Tasmania Love them or hate them, there’s no doubt Irish hip-hop trio Kneecap are having a moment. Their music – delivered in a powerful fusion of English and Irish – is known for its gritty lyrics about

    Do countries have a duty to prevent climate harm? The world’s highest court is about to answer this crucial question
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nathan Cooper, Associate Professor of Law, University of Waikato Getty Images The International Court of Justice (ICJ) will issue a highly anticipated advisory opinion overnight to clarify state obligations related to climate change. It will answer two urgent questions: what are the obligations of states under international

    Gaza not a religious issue – it’s a massive violation of international law, say accord critics
    Asia Pacific Report Groups that have declined to join the government-sponsored “harmony accord” signed yesterday by some Muslim and Jewish groups, say that the proposed new council is “misaligned” with its aims. The signed accord was presented at Government House in Auckland. About 70 people attended, including representatives of the New Zealand Jewish Council, His

    Flying the flags for Palestine – NZ protesters take message to Devonport
    The Devonport Flagstaff About 200 people marched in Devonport last Saturday in support of Palestine. Pro-Palestine flags and placards were draped on the band rotunda at Windsor Reserve as speakers, including Green Party co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick and the people power manager of Amnesty International Aotearoa New Zealand Margaret Taylor, a Devonport local, encouraged the crowd

    View from The Hill: How much can Jim Chalmers get out of the economic reform roundtable?
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra We’re now less than a month away from the start of the Albanese government’s “economic reform” (aka “productivity”) roundtable, but it has become quite hard to get a fix on exactly what this gathering will amount to. The guest list

    Israeli settlers beat to death 2 Palestinians in latest lynchings
    BEARING WITNESS: By Cole Martin in occupied West Bank Two young Palestinians were beaten to death on their land by Israeli settlers in the occupied West Bank on Friday. A funeral was held on Sunday for Sayfollah “Saif” Mussalet, 20, and Muhammad Shalabi, 23, who were brutally killed by a large group of settlers in

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-Evening Report: Labor’s new bill would cut HELP loans by 20%. But it also risks locking some graduates into a ‘debt treadmill’

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrew Norton, Professor of Higher Education Policy, Monash University

    The Albanese government’s 20% cut to student debt is the first bill introduced to the new federal parliament. It is clever politics.

    In the government’s first term, the 3 million Australians with a student debt turned high indexation of their loan balances into a major issue. The proposed 20% cut flipped a political negative into a positive ahead of the May 2025 federal election.

    The 20% cut legislation, introduced on Wednesday, will also change how student debt is repaid. All the 1.2 million people currently repaying student loans will pay less per year as a result.

    How does the cut work, and what does it mean in practice for current students and people with student debt?

    Beware the fine print

    These changes come with disadvantages. The 20% cut is not well targeted. It will deliver major benefits to recent graduates, but much less to current students or earlier graduates, and nothing to future students.

    While repaying less HELP debt per year sounds good, more graduates will be caught on a debt treadmill, repaying less than the annual indexation on their HELP balance. Both HELP changes will also be costly for government.

    Meanwhile, the government has not changed the cost of degrees. Arts, law and business students continue to accrue debts of about $17,000 per year of study.

    How does the cut work?

    The 20% cut applies to all student loan schemes, including the five HELPs now operating in higher education – HECS-HELP, FEE-HELP, OS-HELP, SA-HELP and START-UP HELP. These cover student fees as well as other programs to assist with overseas study or amenities fees.

    The loans to be cut by 20% will be based on amounts owed as at June 1 2025. As a guide to the amounts of money involved, the table below shows balances as at June 30 2024.

    Why the cut is not fair

    The benefits of the 20% cut will be distributed in a random and inequitable way, as a recent analysis from economic think tank the e61 Institute shows.

    The biggest beneficiaries will be people who recently completed their degrees: their borrowing has peaked but they have not made any significant repayments. Graduates who are partway through clearing their debt, and current students, will receive some benefit. People who recently completed their repayments, and future students, will receive no benefit at all.

    Other winners from the 20% cut will be current and former students of private higher education institutions, as they pay relatively high fees via the FEE-HELP scheme. So too do people who have borrowed to finance postgraduate degrees. Although most student debtors are women, men on average have higher debts, so they will benefit more from the 20% cut.

    A new repayment scheme

    The government is also changing how student debt is repaid.

    The income threshold at which repayments start will increase from A$56,156 to $67,000 a year for 2025–26. People with incomes between these levels who currently repay via employer salary deductions can stop after the legislation comes into force. Any unnecessary repayments will be refunded when 2025–26 tax returns are processed.

    Once the first income threshold is passed, the way repayments are calculated will also change. Under the current system, the repayment is a percentage of the person’s total income. At the $56,156 threshold the repayment rate is 1%, leading to a repayment of $561.56. These percentages increase incrementally up to 10% on incomes of $164,712 or more. The jagged repayment amounts in the chart below are the percentage of income rates changing 18 times on their way to 10%.

    The current repayment system was criticised as “unfair” by the Universities Accord final report in 2024, as an increase in income can result in lower take-home pay.

    Under the proposed system nobody will take home less money after a pay rise. Repayment will be based only on marginal income – the amount above the threshold. People with student debt will pay 15 cents in the dollar for all they earn between $67,000 and $124,999. From $125,000 the rate lifts to 17 cents in the dollar.

    The government has capped annual repayments at no more than 10% of the person’s total income. This ensures nobody pays more under the new repayment system.

    Slower repayments mean more debt in the end

    But there’s a catch.

    A Parliamentary Budget Office costing released in April 2025 estimates the effects of the new system on HELP repayment times. Obviously, if people repay less each year it will take them longer to clear their debt.

    For a HELP debtor consistently earning an average graduate income, the budget office estimates full repayment would take one more year, to 11 years in total. But for people starting their careers on lower incomes, below the $67,000 first threshold, repayment times could increase by much more, dragging out full repayment time from 32 to 40 years.

    What happens early in graduate careers is a major concern with the new system.

    Consider an arts graduate who finishes their degree with a HELP debt of $50,000. Indexation at the current inflation rate of 2.4% would be $1,200. Under the current repayment system, an arts graduate earning $65,000 would cover their indexation and reduce their debt by $100. Under the proposed system, arts graduates will see their debt increase through indexation unless they earn at least $75,000. For context, the median full-time salary for an arts graduate in 2023 was $69,400.

    The worry is many people will get stuck on a HELP debt treadmill, seeing their debt increase each year as they repay nothing or less than the indexation amount.

    The cost of these reforms

    In another report, the Parliamentary Budget Office estimated the initial debt waiver will cost $9 billion, plus the loss of future indexation.

    But quantifying the total cost of these changes is not straightforward, as it involves estimating the future income and consequent HELP repayments of 3 million people.

    As most HELP debtors will repay less each year under the new system, for the government it means delayed repayments and higher bad debt. The budget office thinks in 2025–26, repayments of loan principal will decline by $820 million compared to the current system.

    What about the Job-ready Graduates scheme?

    This highlights the need for a more coherent funding approach, which integrates debts and repayments in ways that are fair to students while moderating the cost to government.

    The Universities Accord final report recommended student contributions should be realigned with graduate earnings.

    Ideally, graduates working full-time should complete repayments within similar ranges of years, regardless of which course they took. That is far from what happens under the current system – known as the Job-ready Graduates scheme – set up under the Morrison government. With the annual humanities student contribution for 2026 set at $17,399, many arts graduates will struggle to ever get their debt under control.

    The government has promised but postponed changes to student contribution levels. The new Australian Tertiary Education Commission will advise the government on this matter.

    But student contributions alone cannot fix the problem. The repayment system must also be realistic about what different types of debtors earn. Especially with student loans now also serving vocational education, the $67,000 first threshold risks creating a larger group of people with permanent student debt.

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

    ref. Labor’s new bill would cut HELP loans by 20%. But it also risks locking some graduates into a ‘debt treadmill’ – https://theconversation.com/labors-new-bill-would-cut-help-loans-by-20-but-it-also-risks-locking-some-graduates-into-a-debt-treadmill-261472

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-Evening Report: Ghosted by a friend? 4 expert tips on how to handle the hurt

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Megan Willis, Associate Professor, School of Behavioural and Health Sciences, Australian Catholic University

    martin-dm/Getty

    When we talk about “ghosting”, we usually think it relates to dating. But what happens when you’ve been ghosted by someone you’ve known for years – your childhood best friend, a parent, a child?

    These disappearances can be harder to explain, and even harder to heal from.

    It’s also surprisingly common. For instance, one study showed 38.6% of people have been ghosted by a friend.

    So why do people ghost those closest to them? What impact does it have on those left behind? How do you begin to move on?

    What is ghosting?

    Ghosting is when someone abruptly, or gradually, cuts off all communication without explanation. Whether it’s a friend, family member or love interest, the signs are much the same – messages left on read or calls ignored. Sometimes you’re blocked.

    Ghosting doesn’t just happen online. It can also play out in person, when someone deliberately ignores you – avoiding eye contact, refusing attempts to engage in conversation, pretending you’re not there.

    Unlike relationships that gradually wither over time, or end abruptly after an argument, ghosting is a one-sided withdrawal from a relationship that happens without closure.

    For the person left behind, it can feel like grief.

    Why do people ghost family and friends?

    People often ghost friends for the same reasons they ghost romantic partners.

    Ghosting is more common – and considered more acceptable – in brief or casual romantic relationships or friendships. That’s when people may ghost because they lose interest, wish to avoid confrontation, or find it easier than facing the discomfort of ending things directly.

    In longer-term relationships, ghosting may stem from incompatibility, be prompted by different priorities, physical distance, or growing apart over time.

    Major life transitions – such as becoming a parent, entering the workforce, moving, or going through a divorce – can often provide the catalyst for someone to shrink their social network.

    In some cases, ghosting is driven by self-preservation or concerns for personal safety, particularly when ghosting involves family members.

    People report ghosting in response to toxic, emotionally draining, or abusive relationships, often when previous attempts to resolve issues were met with abuse or aggression. In such instances, ghosting isn’t so much an avoidance strategy, but a last resort to preserve someone’s safety and psychological wellbeing.

    Ghosting has also been linked to certain personality traits. One study found people who reported ghosting others tended to score higher in narcissism (tend towards entitlement and lack of empathy) and borderline traits (so have trouble regulating emotions and are impulsive).

    Why does it hurt so much?

    People often ghost as they hope to spare the other person the pain of rejection. But that is rarely the case.

    Being ghosted by someone you’ve been close to for a long time is often associated with grief, much like the death of the loved one. After the initial shock, there is often anger and sadness.

    Ghosting also involves “ambiguous loss”. This ambiguity – the uncertainty and lack of closure – can almost freeze the grief process, making it particularly hard to move on.

    In addition to grief-like emotions, ghosting is also often associated with self-blame, rumination, feelings of worthlessness, and trust issues that can affect how someone relates to others in the future.

    How to cope if you’ve been ghosted

    There’s no easy fix and you can’t force someone to communicate with you if they don’t want to. But research points to some strategies that may help you move on and ease the pain:

    1. Acknowledge your feelings. Grief-like emotions are a normal reaction to being ghosted. Accept your emotions and express them in healthy ways. This is better than suppressing them, which is linked to depression, low self-esteem and reduced wellbeing.

    2. Seek social support. Social support is linked to a range of mental health benefits. Talk about your experience with friends, family or a mental health professional. This can help reduce feeling of isolation, and low self-worth. Greater social support is also associated with post-traumatic growth – positive psychological change that can emerge after a challenging life event.

    3. Choose self-compassion over rumination. It’s easy to get caught in the trap of replaying what happened and wondering what went wrong. But this can prolong distress and make it harder to move on. Instead treat yourself as you would a close friend – with kindness, compassion and care. Self-compassion has been linked to reduced rumination, anxiety and depression. Exercise, mindfulness and spending time in nature are examples of self-care with similar
      psychological benefits.

    4. Create your own closure. Being ghosted can often leave you stuck in a cycle of uncertainty and unanswered questions. You may never get an explanation and waiting for answers will only make it harder to move on. Writing a letter you don’t send can help create closure. This form of expressive writing can help you articulate your thoughts and emotions and make sense of your experience – and is linked to a range of psychological benefits.

    Megan Willis 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. Ghosted by a friend? 4 expert tips on how to handle the hurt – https://theconversation.com/ghosted-by-a-friend-4-expert-tips-on-how-to-handle-the-hurt-260300

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-Evening Report: Hard labour conditions of online moderators directly affect how well the internet is policed – new study

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tania Chatterjee, Joint PhD Candidate at Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, The University of Queensland

    Getty Images/GCShutter

    Big tech platforms often present content moderation as a seamless, tech‑driven system. But human labour, often outsourced to countries such as India and the Philippines, plays a pivotal role in making judgements that involve understanding context. Technology alone can’t do this.

    Behind closed doors, hidden human moderators are tasked with filtering some of the internet’s most harmful material. They often do so with minimal mental health support and under strict non-disclosure agreements.

    After receiving vague training, moderators are expected to make decisions within seconds, keeping in mind a platform’s constantly changing content policies and ensuring at least 95% accuracy.

    Do these working conditions affect moderating decisions? To date, we don’t have much data on this. In a new study published in New Media & Society, we examined the everyday decision-making process of commercial content moderators in India.

    Our results shed light on how the employment conditions of moderators do shape the outcomes of their work – and three key arguments that emerged from our interviews.

    Efficiency over appropriateness

    “Would never recommend de-ranking content as it would take time.”

    —A 28-year-old audio moderator working for an Indian social media platform

    As moderators work under high productivity targets, it compels them to prioritise content that can be handled quickly without drawing attention from supervisors.

    In the above excerpt, the moderator explained she avoided content and processes that required more time to maintain her pace. While observing her work over a screen-share session, we noticed that reducing the visibility of content (de-ranking) involved four steps. Meanwhile ending live streams or removing posts required only two steps.

    To save time, she skipped the content flagged to be de-ranked. As a result, content marked for reduced visibility, such as impersonations, often remained on the platform until another moderator intervened.

    This shows how productivity pressures in the moderation industry easily lead to problematic content staying online.

    Decontextualised decisions

    “Ensure that none of the highlighted yellow words remained on the profile”

    —Instructions received by a text/image moderator

    Moderation work often includes automation tools that can detect certain words in text, transcribe speech, or use image recognition to scan the contents of pictures.

    These tools are supposed to assist moderators by flagging potential violations for further judgement that takes context into account. For example, is the potentially offensive language simply a joke, or does it actually violate any policies?

    In practice we found that under tight timelines, moderators frequently follow the tools’ cues mechanically rather than exercising independent judgement.

    The quoted moderator above described instructions from her supervisor to simply remove text detected by the software. During a screen-share, we observed her removing flagged words without evaluating the context.

    Often the automation tools that queue content and organise it for human moderators will also detach it from the broader conversational context. This makes it even harder for the moderator to make a context-based judgement on content that gets flagged but was actually innocent – despite that judgement being one of the reasons human moderators are hired in the first place.

    Impossibility of thorough judgements

    “If you guys can’t do the work and complete the targets, you may leave”

    —Work group message of a freelance content moderator

    Precarious employment compels moderators to mould their decision‑making processes around job security.

    They are compelled to use strategies that allow them to decide quickly and appropriately. In turn, this influences their future decisions.

    For instance, we found that over time, moderators develop a list of “dos and don’ts”. They may dilute expansive moderation guidelines into an easily remembered list of ethically unambiguous violations which they can quickly follow.

    These strategies reveal how the very structure of the moderation industry impedes thoughtful decisions and makes thorough judgement impossible.

    What should we take away from this?

    Our findings show that moderation decisions aren’t just shaped by platform policies. The precarious working conditions of moderators play a crucial role in how content gets moderated.

    Online platforms can’t put into place consistent and thorough moderation policies if the moderation industry’s employment practices are not improved too. We argue that content moderation and its effectiveness are as much a labour issue as it is a policy challenge.

    For truly effective moderation, online platforms must address the economic pressures on moderators, such as strict performance targets and insecure employment.

    We need greater transparency around how much platforms spend on human labour in trust and safety, both in‑house and outsourced. Currently, it’s not clear whether their investment in human resources is truly proportionate to the volume of content flowing through their platforms.

    Beyond employment conditions, platforms should also redesign their moderation tools. For example, integrating quick‑access rulebooks, implementing violation‑specific content queues, and standardising the steps required for different enforcement actions would streamline decision-making, so that moderators don’t default to faster options just to save time.

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

    ref. Hard labour conditions of online moderators directly affect how well the internet is policed – new study – https://theconversation.com/hard-labour-conditions-of-online-moderators-directly-affect-how-well-the-internet-is-policed-new-study-261386

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI USA: In Letter, Murray, Blumenthal, Gallego Call on Secretary Collins Stop Endangering VA Research

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Washington State Patty Murray

    “Scientific research takes years to build, and it cannot be treated like a spigot – turned on and off at will to serve the Trump Administration’s efforts to balance the budget on the backs of veterans.”

    Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senators Patty Murray (D-WA), Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee and a senior member and former chair of the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee Ranking Member Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), and Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) recently expressed their deep concerns with the ongoing setbacks to medical research at the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) as a result of VA Secretary Doug Collins’ cuts and policies at the Department, including his months-long hiring freeze on essential research staff.

    “Mr. Secretary, your hiring freeze has brought real-life impacts and pain upon our veterans – and reversing your hiring freeze for these positions months later is not enough to undo this harm,” the senators wrote in their letter to Secretary Collins. “VA researchers often work on 2- or 3-year appointments – “not to exceed” (NTE) contracts – which, as long as the researcher has funding, are typically rolled over into new appointments. Due to your hiring freeze, essential researchers whose terms were ending soon were shown the door and forced to abandon often lifesaving work, and their positions were unable to be backfilled. These actions damaged veterans’ access to cutting-edge treatments and clinical trials.” The senators cited specific examples of how the Trump VA’s hiring freeze impeded veterans’ access to critical clinical trials, including those aimed at preventing dementia and heart disease, better predicting veterans’ stroke risk, studying advanced cancers, and a substance use disorder study.

    The senators urged Collins to “rebuild this cornerstone of the United States’ medical research enterprise” by rehiring VA researchers whose terms were not extended due to the hiring freeze; addressing the backlog of research positions that were frozen but are now able to be hired again; coordinating with the National Institutes of Health to restore cancelled grants for VA researchers; and allowing researchers to publish their findings without the unprecedented step of preapproval by political appointees.

    The senators also emphasized their concerns around the prospect of politicizing VA research: “We are also concerned by reports that VA research studies may now have to be approved by political appointees before publication in academic journals. Please clarify to Congress, VA research employees, and veterans that no political appointees will be involved in approving or censoring the publication of research studies. Such clarification will support the historically bipartisan nature of VA research and help assure current and future VA researchers that VA will not censor the work of the talented staff it employs.”

    The senators concluded: “Scientific research takes years to build, and it cannot be treated like a spigot – turned on and off at will to serve the Trump Administration’s efforts to balance the budget on the backs of veterans. The consequences of your hiring freeze – and the resulting backlog in hiring VA research staff – could be severe and long-lasting. You still have the chance to correct course by immediately rehiring wrongly terminated researchers, working with OPM to quickly address the backlog in research staff hiring, coordinating with other agencies to restore all grants revoked from VA researchers, and assuring current and future VA researchers that their research will not be subject to political review.”

    Senator Murray was the first woman to join the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee and the first woman to chair the Committee—as the daughter of a World War II veteran, supporting veterans and their families has always been an important priority for her. In March, Senator Murray and her colleagues sent letters to VA Secretary Doug Collins demanding that the VA swiftly reverse moves to cut VA researchers, as well as multiple letters pressing Secretary Collins to sever DOGE’s access to any VA or other government system with information about veterans, and protect veterans, their families, and VA staff from unprecedented access to sensitive information. Senator Murray grilled Trump’s nominee for VA Deputy Secretary, Dr. Paul Lawrence, on the mass firings of VA employees and VA researchers, and voted against Doug Collins’s nomination to be VA Secretary in early February, sounding the alarm over reports of DOGE at the VA and making clear that the Trump administration’s lawlessness was putting our national security and our veterans at risk.

    The full letter is available HERE and below:

    Dear Secretary Collins,

    We write today to express our deep concerns with the setbacks to medical research at the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) under your leadership. Although VA has begun to resolve some of your self-inflicted issues, including your multiple months-long hiring freeze on essential research staff, we call on you to take additional key actions to build back VA research. To rebuild this cornerstone of the United States’ medical research enterprise, you must rehire VA researchers whose terms were not extended due to the hiring freeze, address the backlog of research positions that were frozen but are now able to be hired again, coordinate with the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to restore cancelled grants for VA researchers, and allow researchers to publish their findings without the unprecedented step of preapproval by political appointees.

    Mr. Secretary, your hiring freeze has brought real-life impacts and pain upon our veterans – and reversing your hiring freeze for these positions months later is not enough to undo this harm. VA researchers often work on 2- or 3-year appointments – “not to exceed” (NTE) contracts – which, as long as the researcher has funding, are typically rolled over into new appointments. Due to your hiring freeze, essential researchers whose terms were ending soon were shown the door and forced to abandon often lifesaving work, and their positions were unable to be backfilled. These actions damaged veterans’ access to cutting-edge treatments and clinical trials. For example:

    • A clinical trial aimed at preventing dementia and heart disease was unable to renew a without compensation appointment and had to turn veterans away from enrollment.
    • A substance use disorder study was paused due to an employee’s termination, leaving progress stalled on a major public health issue affecting veterans at a rate higher than non-veterans.
    • Critical research employees on a study predicting stroke risk were fired, leading this study to be halted.
    • Enrollment in clinical trials for advanced cancers was delayed, limiting access to promising therapies.

    To ensure there are no further impediments to this vital research, we request a list of all research positions that are still subject to the hiring freeze – including research positions at VA’s Centers of Excellence and Centers of Innovation – and call on you to rehire all researchers who, through no fault of their own, had their NTE contracts expire during the hiring freeze. We also urge you to work with the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to quickly address the backlog in research staff hiring that your hiring freeze has engendered. VA research staff nationwide are reporting a significant backlog in the hiring process for critical research employees who are finally, after months of waiting, no longer subject to your hiring freeze. Failure to swiftly address this backlog will put veterans’ health at risk, decimate the morale of an already understaffed research workforce, and undercut one of VA’s best recruiting tools.

    Furthermore, timely coordination with the National Institutes of Health – the nation’s leading biomedical research agency – is essential to restore any VA researchers’ canceled NIH grants. Our offices have heard from VA researchers whose studies on topics such as opioid use disorder among veterans have been halted due to NIH grant cancellations. We urge you to work with NIH to restore these grants and all other cancelled grants that funded studies to improve veterans’ health outcomes. We are similarly concerned that additional grants for VA researchers affiliated with academic institutions have been canceled, especially given VA’s refusal to answer repeated requests from our offices regarding the status of VA research at Harvard University. Reporting has noted that VA research projects associated with Harvard University – including studies on veteran suicide prevention, toxic exposure, and prostate cancer screening – have been proposed for termination. Veterans should not have to suffer due to this Administration’s political crusade on research and academia. We urge you to work to restore any such canceled grants without delay.

    We are also concerned by reports that VA research studies may now have to be approved by political appointees before publication in academic journals. Please clarify to Congress, VA research employees, and veterans that no political appointees will be involved in approving or censoring the publication of research studies. Such clarification will support the historically bipartisan nature of VA research and help assure current and future VA researchers that VA will not censor the work of the talented staff it employs.

    Scientific research takes years to build, and it cannot be treated like a spigot – turned on and off at will to serve the Trump Administration’s efforts to balance the budget on the backs of veterans. The consequences of your hiring freeze – and the resulting backlog in hiring VA research staff – could be severe and long-lasting. You still have the chance to correct course by immediately rehiring wrongly terminated researchers, working with OPM to quickly address the backlog in research staff hiring, coordinating with other agencies to restore all grants revoked from VA researchers, and assuring current and future VA researchers that their research will not be subject to political review.

    We appreciate your attention to this critical issue and stand ready to support swift efforts that will allow VA research to thrive once more and continue to improve veteran health outcomes.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Ranking Member Omar Opening Remarks at Subcommittee Hearing on the Future of Workplace Safety

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Ilhan Omar (DFL-MN)

    WASHINGTON Ranking Member Ilhan Omar (MN-05) delivered the following opening statement at a Workforce Protections Subcommittee hearing entitled, “Safe Workplaces, Stronger Partnerships: The Future of OSHA Compliance Assistance.”

    “Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to our witnesses for being here today.

     “Over the last six months, the Trump Administration has embarked on an aggressive assault on worker protections. And just in the past two weeks, Trump’s Department of Labor has released five dozen deregulatory rulemakings – two-thirds of which focus on health and safety issues.

     “These proposals target core worker protections, including changes to child labor rules, removing a requirement as basic and essential as having adequate lighting on construction sites, and even weakening workers’ protections against asbestos.

     “This spree of deregulation follows months of mass firing at the very agencies tasked with researching and investigating workplace conditions—and a proposed budget that would reduce inspections and slash DOL’s capacity to develop new safety standards.

     “The message is clear: workers’ rights and protections are under attack. Compliance assistance programs, such as the Voluntary Protection Program, have their place. But they are no substitute for clear standards that are actively and effectively enforced.

     “No job should ever be a death sentence. Workers deserve to come home to their families at the end of the day alive, healthy, and whole. Yet, according to the AFL-CIO, workplace hazards killed approximately one hundred forty thousand workers in 2023, including 5,283 workers from traumatic injuries and an estimated 135,000 from occupational diseases.

     “To protect workers from harm, Congress passed landmark safety laws and established important agencies like OSHA, MSHA, NIOSH, and the Chemical Safety and Hazards Investigation Board. When they are allowed to do their jobs and are fully funded, these agencies save lives and prevent harm to workers. But now, the Trump Administration is attempting to strip away safety regulations and dismantle critical agencies like NIOSH & the CSB. In doing so, they are threatening the lives of workers who rely on those safeguards and the resources these agencies provide.

     “In my own district, we are already feeling the consequences of these cuts. The University of Minnesota’s Midwest Center for Occupational Health and Safety is one of just 18 NIOSH-funded Education and Research Centers in the nation. It trains the next generation of workplace safety experts who will help protect our workers in high-risk industries.

     “Without NIOSH, the invaluable research and workforce development provided by that Center—and others like it across the country—will be lost. That means fewer trained medical and safety professionals, less research capacity on critical issues such as heat stress, and decreased investment in innovative technologies that can prevent illness and injury.

     “The Trump Administration’s deregulatory agenda will result in more injuries, more deaths, more grieving families – and lessaccountability for employers who put their workers in harm’s way.

     “Committee Democrats are committed to honoring those workers who have been harmed or killed on the job, not just with words, but with action to change the system.

     “Later today, Ranking Member Scott will reintroduce a bill that will finally bring workers the common-sense protections they deserve against heat-related injury and illness.

     “I am a proud cosponsor of the Asunción ValdiviaHeat Illness, Injury, and Fatality Prevention Act, which requires OSHA to finally issue an enforceable rule with the strongest feasible protections against heat illness, including paid rest breaks, access to water, shaded or cooled recovery areas, and training that is delivered in a language and format that workers understand. These are sensible safeguards that will save lives. 

    “Ranking Member Scott, Representative Courtney, and I also reintroduced the Protecting America’s Workers Act, which would make long-overdue improvements to the enforcement of the Occupational Safety and Health Act. This bill would expand coverage to millions of workers currently excluded from the law’s protections and strengthen whistleblower protections. These reforms are critical to preventing the most serious violations that endanger workers’ safety.

    “Democrats are offering real solutions to the problems workers face on the job instead of ripping away protections. I hope that our discussion today can center around ensuring that workers come home safely at the end of the day.

    “Finally, Mr. Chairman, I request unanimous consent to enter into the record a statement from the United Steelworkers about the compliance assistance programs we will be discussing today. 

    “Thank you, and I yield back.”

     

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Readout of Congresswoman Ilhan Omar’s US-Africa Policy Working Group Briefing on Debt Sustainability in Africa

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Ilhan Omar (DFL-MN)

    Today, the U.S.-Africa Policy Working Group convened a meeting to examine the growing debt challenges facing many African countries. Members of the Working Group heard from leading experts, including Mr. Tim Hirschel-Burns, Policy Liaison for the Global Economic Governance Initiative at Boston University’s Global Development Policy Center; Dr. Brahima Coulibaly, Vice President & Director of the Global Economy and Development Program at the Brookings Institution; and Mr. Eric LeCompte, Executive Director of Jubilee USA Network.

    The briefers discussed the structural and geopolitical drivers of Africa’s sovereign debt burden, including rising borrowing costs, external shocks, economic vulnerabilities, and institutional governance issues. They emphasized the critical role of private creditors, bilateral lenders, and multilateral institutions in shaping both the debt landscape and the policy responses available. The discussion also explored the shortcomings of current debt relief mechanisms and identified opportunities to improve global financial governance, strengthen creditor coordination, and expand fiscal space for African governments to invest in sustainable development.

    Members engaged in a constructive dialogue about how the U.S. and Congress can help advance debt fairness, economic resilience, and inclusive growth – advancing strategic and mutually beneficial partnerships across the continent.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Doctors shouldn’t be allowed to object to medical care if it harms their patients

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Julian Savulescu, Visiting Professor in Biomedical Ethics, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute; Distinguished Visiting Professor in Law, University of Melbourne; Uehiro Chair in Practical Ethics, The University of Melbourne

    HRAUN/Getty

    A young woman needs an abortion and the reasons, while urgent, are not medical. A United States Navy nurse at Guantánamo Bay is ordered to force-feed a defiant detainee on hunger strike.

    These very different real-life cases have one connecting thread: the question of whether a health professional can conscientiously object to carrying out a patient’s request.

    Freedom of conscience is often held up as a purely noble principle. But when it’s used to deny health care, it means a single person’s beliefs are dictating what is best for another person’s physical and mental health – which can have devastating, even fatal, results.

    In our recent book, Rethinking Conscientious Objection in Healthcare, colleagues and I conclude doctors should not be free to make medical decisions based on their personal beliefs.

    It’s not noble to refuse care

    Freedom of conscience is strongly – but not absolutely – protected under international human rights law. It is enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

    This principle has often been used for moral purposes: for example, to resist orders to torture or kill.

    But after researching use of conscientious objection by health professionals, I have concluded it is seriously flawed when used to deny patients health services. This is especially so when particular doctors have a monopoly on service provision, as is the case with abortion and assisted dying in many rural and regional areas of Australia.

    In Australia, doctors are allowed to conscientiously object to abortion, although nearly all states require referral to other service providers or information about how to access the relevant service.

    In practice, these laws are not enforced and sometimes disregarded.

    A doctor’s refusal can mean patients can be denied the standard of care they need, or indeed, any care at all.

    Health-care professionals are not like pacifists refusing conscription into the military, opposing something forced upon them. They freely choose health-care careers that come with obligations and with ethical stances already established by professional codes of conduct.

    People are free to hold whatever beliefs they choose, but those beliefs will inevitably close off some options for them. For example, a vegetarian will not be able to work in an abattoir. That is true for every one of us. But what shouldn’t happen is a doctor’s personal beliefs closing off legitimate options for their patient.

    4 guiding questions

    Instead of personal values, there are four key secular principles we propose that doctors should rely on when deciding how to advise patients about sensitive procedures:

    • is it legal?

    • is it a just and fair use of any resources that might be limited?

    • is it in the interests of the patient’s wellbeing?

    • is it what the patient has themselves decided they want?

    Of course, there will be times when some of these principles are in conflict – that is when it is important to apply the most crucial ones, the wellbeing of the patient and the patient’s own wishes.

    In Ireland in 2012, a young woman named Savita Halappanavar went to an Irish hospital for treatment for her miscarriage. Doctors knew there was no hope of the pregnancy surviving but refused to evacuate her uterus while there was still a fetal heartbeat, for fear of breaching Ireland’s anti-abortion laws. The result: Savita died of septicaemia at 31.

    If doctors had put the patient’s wellbeing first, they would have given her that termination, despite the law, and it would have saved her life.

    These are the principles that should have been applied to the examples above: the woman seeking an abortion for career reasons or the nurse refusing to force-feed prisoners.

    The doctor (or nurse) should ask: Is it what the patient has autonomously decided they want? Will it lead to the best outcome for both their physical and their mental health?

    If abortion will promote a woman’s wellbeing, it is in her interests. Hunger strikers should not be force-fed because it violates their autonomy.

    An unfair burden

    While doctors’ personal values are important, they should not dictate care at the bedside. Not only can this disadvantage the patient, but it places an unfair burden on colleagues who do accept such work, and must carry a disproportionate load of procedures they might find unpleasant and financially unrewarding.

    It also creates injustice. Patients who are educated, wealthy and well-connected already find it easier to access health care. Conscientious objection intensifies that unfairness in large swathes of the country because it further limits options.

    Two countries with excellent health-care systems, Sweden and Finland, do not permit conscientious objection by medical professionals.

    In Australia, it is time we do the same and strongly limit conscientious objection as a legal right for health professionals. We should also ensure those entering the discipline are prepared to take on all procedures relevant to their specialty.

    And lastly, but most importantly, we should educate them that the patient’s interests and values must always come first. An individual doctor’s sense of moral authority should not be permitted to morph into medical and moral authoritarianism.

    Julian Savulescu 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. Doctors shouldn’t be allowed to object to medical care if it harms their patients – https://theconversation.com/doctors-shouldnt-be-allowed-to-object-to-medical-care-if-it-harms-their-patients-260003

    MIL OSI

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Doctors shouldn’t be allowed to object to medical care if it harms their patients

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Julian Savulescu, Visiting Professor in Biomedical Ethics, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute; Distinguished Visiting Professor in Law, University of Melbourne; Uehiro Chair in Practical Ethics, The University of Melbourne

    HRAUN/Getty

    A young woman needs an abortion and the reasons, while urgent, are not medical. A United States Navy nurse at Guantánamo Bay is ordered to force-feed a defiant detainee on hunger strike.

    These very different real-life cases have one connecting thread: the question of whether a health professional can conscientiously object to carrying out a patient’s request.

    Freedom of conscience is often held up as a purely noble principle. But when it’s used to deny health care, it means a single person’s beliefs are dictating what is best for another person’s physical and mental health – which can have devastating, even fatal, results.

    In our recent book, Rethinking Conscientious Objection in Healthcare, colleagues and I conclude doctors should not be free to make medical decisions based on their personal beliefs.

    It’s not noble to refuse care

    Freedom of conscience is strongly – but not absolutely – protected under international human rights law. It is enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

    This principle has often been used for moral purposes: for example, to resist orders to torture or kill.

    But after researching use of conscientious objection by health professionals, I have concluded it is seriously flawed when used to deny patients health services. This is especially so when particular doctors have a monopoly on service provision, as is the case with abortion and assisted dying in many rural and regional areas of Australia.

    In Australia, doctors are allowed to conscientiously object to abortion, although nearly all states require referral to other service providers or information about how to access the relevant service.

    In practice, these laws are not enforced and sometimes disregarded.

    A doctor’s refusal can mean patients can be denied the standard of care they need, or indeed, any care at all.

    Health-care professionals are not like pacifists refusing conscription into the military, opposing something forced upon them. They freely choose health-care careers that come with obligations and with ethical stances already established by professional codes of conduct.

    People are free to hold whatever beliefs they choose, but those beliefs will inevitably close off some options for them. For example, a vegetarian will not be able to work in an abattoir. That is true for every one of us. But what shouldn’t happen is a doctor’s personal beliefs closing off legitimate options for their patient.

    4 guiding questions

    Instead of personal values, there are four key secular principles we propose that doctors should rely on when deciding how to advise patients about sensitive procedures:

    • is it legal?

    • is it a just and fair use of any resources that might be limited?

    • is it in the interests of the patient’s wellbeing?

    • is it what the patient has themselves decided they want?

    Of course, there will be times when some of these principles are in conflict – that is when it is important to apply the most crucial ones, the wellbeing of the patient and the patient’s own wishes.

    In Ireland in 2012, a young woman named Savita Halappanavar went to an Irish hospital for treatment for her miscarriage. Doctors knew there was no hope of the pregnancy surviving but refused to evacuate her uterus while there was still a fetal heartbeat, for fear of breaching Ireland’s anti-abortion laws. The result: Savita died of septicaemia at 31.

    If doctors had put the patient’s wellbeing first, they would have given her that termination, despite the law, and it would have saved her life.

    These are the principles that should have been applied to the examples above: the woman seeking an abortion for career reasons or the nurse refusing to force-feed prisoners.

    The doctor (or nurse) should ask: Is it what the patient has autonomously decided they want? Will it lead to the best outcome for both their physical and their mental health?

    If abortion will promote a woman’s wellbeing, it is in her interests. Hunger strikers should not be force-fed because it violates their autonomy.

    An unfair burden

    While doctors’ personal values are important, they should not dictate care at the bedside. Not only can this disadvantage the patient, but it places an unfair burden on colleagues who do accept such work, and must carry a disproportionate load of procedures they might find unpleasant and financially unrewarding.

    It also creates injustice. Patients who are educated, wealthy and well-connected already find it easier to access health care. Conscientious objection intensifies that unfairness in large swathes of the country because it further limits options.

    Two countries with excellent health-care systems, Sweden and Finland, do not permit conscientious objection by medical professionals.

    In Australia, it is time we do the same and strongly limit conscientious objection as a legal right for health professionals. We should also ensure those entering the discipline are prepared to take on all procedures relevant to their specialty.

    And lastly, but most importantly, we should educate them that the patient’s interests and values must always come first. An individual doctor’s sense of moral authority should not be permitted to morph into medical and moral authoritarianism.

    Julian Savulescu 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. Doctors shouldn’t be allowed to object to medical care if it harms their patients – https://theconversation.com/doctors-shouldnt-be-allowed-to-object-to-medical-care-if-it-harms-their-patients-260003

    MIL OSI

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Could the latest ‘interstellar comet’ be an alien probe? Why spotting cosmic visitors is harder than you think

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Sara Webb, Lecturer, Centre for Astrophysics and Supercomputing, Swinburne University of Technology

    Comet 3I/ATLAS International Gemini Observatory/NOIRLab/NSF/AURA/K. Meech/Jen Miller/Mahdi Zamani, CC BY

    On July 1, astronomers spotted an unusual high-speed object zooming towards the Sun. Dubbed 3I/ATLAS, the surprising space traveller had one very special quality: its orbit showed it had come from outside our Solar System.

    For only the third time ever, we had discovered a true interstellar visitor. And it was weird.

    3I/ATLAS breaking records

    3I/ATLAS appeared to be travelling at 245,000 kilometres per hour, making it the fastest object ever detected in our Solar System.

    It was also huge. Early estimates suggest the object could be up to 20km in size. Finally, scientists believe it may even be older than our Sun.

    Davide Farnocchia, navigation engineer at NASA’s JPL, explains the discovery of 3I/ATLAS.

    Could it be alien?

    Our first assumption when we see something in space is that it’s a lump of rock or ice. But the strange properties of 3I/ATLAS have suggested to some that it may be something else entirely.

    Harvard astrophysics professor Avi Loeb and colleagues last week uploaded a paper titled Is the Interstellar Object 3I/ATLAS Alien Technology? to the arXiv preprint server. (The paper has not yet been peer reviewed.)

    Loeb is a controversial figure among astronomers and astrophysicists. He has previously suggested that the first known interstellar object, 1I/ʻOumuamua, discovered in 2017, may also have been an alien craft.

    Among other oddities Loeb suggests may be signs of deliberate alien origin, he notes the orbit of 3I/ATLAS takes it improbably close to Venus, Mars and Jupiter.

    The trajectory of comet 3I/ATLAS as it passes through the Solar System, with its closest approach to the Sun in October.
    NASA/JPL-Caltech

    We’ve sent out our own alien probes

    The idea of alien probes wandering the cosmos may sound strange, but humans sent out a few ourselves in the 1970s. Both Voyager 1 and 2 have officially left our Solar System, and Pioneer 10 and 11 are not far behind.

    So it’s not a stretch to think that alien civilisations – if they exist – would have launched their own galactic explorers.

    However, this brings us to a crucial question: short of little green men popping out to say hello, how would we actually know if 3I/ATLAS, or any other interstellar object, was an alien probe?

    Detecting alien probes 101

    The first step to determining whether something is a natural object or an alien probe is of course to spot it.

    Most things we see in our Solar System don’t emit light of their own. Instead, we only see them by the light they reflect from the Sun.

    Larger objects generally reflect more sunlight, so they are easier for us to see. So what we see tends to be larger comets and asteroid, especially farther from Earth.

    It can be very difficult to spot smaller objects. At present, we can track objects down to a size of ten or 20 metres out as far from the Sun as Jupiter.

    Our own Voyager probes are about ten metres in size (if we include their radio antennas). If an alien probe was similar, we probably wouldn’t spot it until it was somewhere in the asteroid belt between Jupiter and Mars.

    If we did spot something suspicious, to figure out if it really were a probe or not we would look for a few telltales.

    Viewing 3I/ATLAS through coloured filters reveals the colours that make up its tail.
    International Gemini Observatory/NOIRLab/NSF/AURA/K. Meech (IfA/U. Hawaii) / Jen Miller & Mahdi Zamani (NSF NOIRLab), CC BY

    First off, because a natural origin is most likely, we would look for evidence that no aliens were involved. One clue in this direction might be if the object were emitting a “tail” of gas in the way that comets do.

    However, we might also want to look for hints of alien origin. One very strong piece of evidence would be any kind of radio waves coming from the probe as a form of communication. This is assuming the probe was still in working order, and not completely defunct.

    We might also look for signs of electrostatic discharge caused by sunlight hitting the probe.

    Another dead giveaway would be signs of manoeuvring or propulsion. An active probe might try to correct its course or reposition its antennas to send and receive signals to and from its origin.

    And a genuine smoking gun would be an approach to Earth in a stable orbit. Not to brag, but Earth is genuinely the most interesting place in the Solar System – we have water, a healthy atmosphere, a strong magnetic field and life. A probe with any decision-making capacity would likely want to investigate and collect data about our interesting little planet.

    We may never know

    Without clear signs one way or the other, however, it may be impossible to know if some interstellar objects are natural or alien-made.

    Objects like 3I/ATLAS remind us that space is vast, strange, and full of surprises. Most of them have natural explanations. But the strangest objects are worth a second look.

    For now, 3I/ATLAS is likely just an unusually fast, old and icy visitor from a distant system. But it also serves as a test case: a chance to refine the way we search, observe and ask questions about the universe.

    Sara Webb 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. Could the latest ‘interstellar comet’ be an alien probe? Why spotting cosmic visitors is harder than you think – https://theconversation.com/could-the-latest-interstellar-comet-be-an-alien-probe-why-spotting-cosmic-visitors-is-harder-than-you-think-261656

    MIL OSI

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Do countries have a duty to prevent climate harm? The world’s highest court is about to answer this crucial question

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Nathan Cooper, Associate Professor of Law, University of Waikato

    Getty Images

    The International Court of Justice (ICJ) will issue a highly anticipated advisory opinion overnight to clarify state obligations related to climate change.

    It will answer two urgent questions: what are the obligations of states under international law to protect the climate and environment from greenhouse gas emissions, and what are the legal consequences for states that have caused significant harm to Earth’s atmosphere and environment?

    ICJ advisory opinions are not legally binding. But coming from the world’s highest court, they provide an authoritative opinion on serious issues that can be highly persuasive.

    This advisory opinion marks the culmination of a campaign that began in 2019 when students and youth organisations in Vanuatu – one of the most vulnerable nations to climate-related impacts – persuaded their government to seek clarification on what states should be doing to protect them.

    Led by Vanuatu and co-sponsored by 132 member states, including New Zealand and Australia, the United Nations General Assembly formally requested the advisory opinion in March 2023.

    More than two years of public consultation and deliberation ensued, leading to this week’s announcement.

    What to expect

    Looking at the specific questions to be addressed, at least three aspects stand out.

    First, the sources and areas of international law under scrutiny are not confined to the UN’s climate change framework. This invites the ICJ to consider a broad range of law – including trans-boundary environmental law, human rights law, international investment law, humanitarian law, trade law and beyond – and to draw on both treaty-related obligations and customary international law.

    Such an encyclopaedic examination could produce a complex and integrated opinion on states’ obligations to protect the environment and climate system.

    Second, the opinion will address what obligations exist, not just to those present today, but to future generations. This follows acknowledgement of the so-called “intertemporal characteristics” of climate change in recent climate-related court decisions and the need to respond effectively to both the current climate crisis and its likely ongoing consequences.

    Third, the opinion won’t just address what obligations states have, but also what the consequences should be for nations:

    where they, by their acts and omissions have caused significant harm to the climate system and other parts of the environment.

    Addressing consequences as well as obligations should cause states to pay closer attention and make the ICJ’s advisory more relevant to domestic climate litigation and policy discussions.

    Representatives from Pacific island nations gathered outside the International Court of Justice during the hearings.
    Michel Porro/Getty Images

    Global judicial direction

    Two recent court findings may offer clues as to the potential scope of the ICJ’s findings.

    Earlier this month, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights published its own advisory opinion on state obligations in response to climate change.

    Explicitly connecting fundamental human rights with a healthy ecosystem, this opinion affirmed states have an imperative duty to prevent irreversible harm to the climate system. Moreover, the duty to safeguard the common ecosystem must be understood as a fundamental principle of international law to which states must adhere.

    Meanwhile last week, an Australian federal court dismissed a landmark climate case, determining that the Australian government does not owe a duty of care to Torres Strait Islanders to protect them from the consequences of climate change.

    The court accepted the claimants face significant loss and damage from climate impacts and that previous Australian government policies on greenhouse gas emissions were not aligned with the best science to limit climate change. But it nevertheless determined that “matters of high or core government policy” are not subject to common law duties of care.

    Whether the ICJ will complement the Inter-American court’s bold approach or opt for a more constrained and conservative response is not certain. But now is the time for clear and ambitious judicial direction with global scope.

    Implications for New Zealand

    Aotearoa New Zealand aspires to climate leadership through its Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Act 2019. This set 2050 targets of reducing emissions of long-lived greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide) to net zero, and biogenic methane by 25-47%.

    However, actions to date are likely insufficient to meet this target. Transport emissions continue to rise and agriculture – responsible for nearly half of the country’s emissions – is lightly regulated.

    Although the government plans to double renewable energy by 2050, it is also in the process of lifting a 2018 ban on offshore gas exploration and has pledged $200 million to co-invest in the development of new fields.

    Critics also point out the government has made little progress towards its promise to install 10,000 EV charging stations by 2030 while axing a clean-investment fund.

    Although a final decision is yet to be made, the government is also considering to lower the target for cuts to methane emissions from livestock, against advice from the Climate Change Commission.

    With the next global climate summit coming up in November, the ICJ opinion may offer timely encouragement for states to reconsider their emissions targets and the ambition of climate policies.

    Most countries have yet to submit their latest emissions reduction pledges (known as nationally determined contributions) under the Paris Agreement. New Zealand has made its pledge, but it has been described as “underwhelming”. This may present a chance to adjust ambition upwards.

    If the ICJ affirms that states have binding obligations to prevent climate harm, including trans-boundary impacts, New Zealand’s climate change policies and progress to date could face increased legal scrutiny.

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

    ref. Do countries have a duty to prevent climate harm? The world’s highest court is about to answer this crucial question – https://theconversation.com/do-countries-have-a-duty-to-prevent-climate-harm-the-worlds-highest-court-is-about-to-answer-this-crucial-question-261396

    MIL OSI

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Here’s why 3-person embryos are a breakthrough for science – but not LGBTQ+ families

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Jennifer Power, Principal Research Fellow, Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health and Society, La Trobe University

    Last week, scientists announced the birth of eight healthy babies in the United Kingdom conceived with DNA from three people. Some headlines have called it “three-person IVF”.

    The embryo uses the DNA from the egg and sperm of the intended father and mother, as well as cells from the egg of a second woman (the donor).

    This process – known as mitochondrial replacement therapy – allows women with certain genetic disorders to conceive a child without passing on their condition.

    While it’s raised broader questions about “three-parent” babies, it’s not so simple. Here’s why it’s unlikely this development will transform the diverse ways LGBTQ+ people are already making families.

    What this technology is – and isn’t

    The UK became the first country in the world to allow mitochondrial donation for three-person embryos ten years ago, in 2015.

    In other countries, such donations are banned or strictly controlled. In Australia, a staged approach to allow mitochondrial donation was introduced in 2022. Stage one will involve clinical trials to determine safety and effectiveness, and establish clear ethical guidelines for donations.

    These restrictions are based on political and ethical concerns about the use of human embryos for research, the unknown health impact on children, and the broader implications of allowing genetic modification of human embryos.

    There are also concerns about the ethical or legal implications of creating babies with “three parents”.

    Carefully and slowly considering these ethical issues is clearly important. But it’s inaccurate to suggest this process creates three parents.

    First, the amount of DNA the donor provides is tiny, only 0.1% of the baby’s DNA. The baby will not share any physical characteristics with the donor.

    While it is significant that two women’s DNA has been used in creating an embryo, it doesn’t mean lesbian couples will be rushing to access this particular in vitro fertilisation (IVF) technology.

    This technique is only used for people affected by mitochondrial disease and is closely regulated. It is not available more widely and in Australia, is not yet available even for this use.

    Second, while biological lineage is an important part of many people’s identity and sense of self, DNA alone does not make a parent.

    As many adoptive, foster and LGBTQ+ parents will attest, parenting is about love, connection and everyday acts of care for a child.

    How do rainbow families use IVF?

    Existing IVF is already expensive and medically invasive. Many fertility services offer a range of additional treatments purported to aid fertility, but extra interventions add more costs and are not universally recommended by doctors.

    While many lesbian couples and single women use fertility services to access donor sperm, not everyone will need to use IVF.

    Less invasive fertilisation techniques, such as intrauterine insemination, may be available for women without fertility problems. This means inserting sperm directly into the uterus, rather than fertilising an egg in a clinic and then implanting that embryo.

    Same-sex couples who have the option to create a baby with a sperm donor they know – rather than from a register – may also choose home-based insemination, the proverbial turkey baster. This is a cheaper and more intimate way to conceive and many women prefer a donor who will have some involvement in their child’s life.

    In recent years, “reciprocal” IVF has also grown in popularity among lesbian couples. This means an embryo is created using one partner’s egg, and the other partner carries it.

    Reciprocal IVF’s popularity suggests biology does play a role for LGBTQ+ women in conceiving a baby. When both mothers share a biological connection to the child, it may help overcome stigmatisation of “non-birth” mothers as less legitimate.

    But biology is by no means the defining feature of rainbow families.

    LGBTQ+ people are already parents

    The 2021 census showed 17% of same-sex couples had children living with them; among female same-sex couples it was 28%. This is likely an underestimate, as the census only collects data on couples that live together.

    Same-sex couples often conceive children using donor sperm or eggs, and this may involve surrogacy. But across the LGBTQ+ community, there are diverse ways people become parents.

    Same-sex couples are one part of the LGBTQ+ community. Growing numbers of trans and non-binary people are choosing to carry a baby (as gestational parents), as well as single parents who use donors or fertility services. Many others conceive children through sex, including bi+ people or others who conceive within a relationship.

    While LGBTQ+ people can legally adopt children in Australia, adoption is not common. However, many foster parents are LGBTQ+.

    When they donate eggs or sperm to others, some LGBTQ+ people may stay involved in the child’s life as a close family friend or co-parent.

    Connection and care, not DNA

    While mitochondrial replacement therapy is a remarkable advance in gene technology, it is unlikely to open new pathways to parenthood for LGBTQ+ people in Australia.

    Asserting the importance of families based on choice – not biology or what technology is available – has been crucial to the LGBTQ+ community’s story and to rainbow families’ fight to be recognised.

    Decades of research now shows children raised by same-sex couples do just as well as any other child. What matters is parents’ consistency, love and quality of care.

    Jennifer Power receives funding from the Australian Department of Health, Disability and Aged Care and the Australian Research Council.

    ref. Here’s why 3-person embryos are a breakthrough for science – but not LGBTQ+ families – https://theconversation.com/heres-why-3-person-embryos-are-a-breakthrough-for-science-but-not-lgbtq-families-261462

    MIL OSI

  • MIL-Evening Report: ICJ climate crisis ruling: Will world’s top court back Pacific-led call to hold governments accountable?

    By Jamie Tahana in The Hague for RNZ Pacific

    In 2019, a group of law students at the University of the South Pacific, frustrated at the slow pace with which the world’s governments were moving to address the climate crisis, had an idea — they would take the world’s governments to court.

    They arranged a meeting with government ministers in Vanuatu and convinced them to take a case to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the United Nations’ top court, where they would seek an opinion to clarify countries’ legal obligations under international law.

    Six years after that idea was hatched in a classroom in Port Vila, the court will today (early Thursday morning NZT) deliver its verdict in the Dutch city of The Hague.

    More than 100 countries – including New Zealand, Australia and all the countries of the Pacific – have testified before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), alongside civil society and intergovernmental organisations. Image: UN Web TV/screengrab

    If successful — and those involved are quietly confident they will be — it could have major ramifications for international law, how climate change disputes are litigated, and it could give small Pacific countries greater leverage in arguments around loss and damage.

    Most significantly, the claimants argue, it could establish legal consequences for countries that have driven climate change and what they owe to people harmed.

    “Six long years of campaigning have led us to this moment,” said Vishal Prasad, the president of Pacific Island Students Fighting Climate Change, the organisation formed out of those original students.

    “For too long, international responses have fallen short. We expect a clear and authoritative declaration,” he said.

    “[That] climate inaction is not just a failure of policy, but a breach of international law.”

    More than 100 countries — including New Zealand, Australia and all the countries of the Pacific — have testified before the court, alongside civil society and intergovernmental organisations.

    And now today they will gather in the brick palace that sits in ornate gardens in this canal-ringed city to hear if the judges of the world’s top court agree.

    What is the case?
    The ICJ adjudicates disputes between nations and issues advisory opinions on big international legal issues.

    In this case, Vanuatu asked the UN General Assembly to request the judges to weigh what exactly international law requires states to do about climate change, and what the consequences should be for states that harm the climate through actions or omissions.

    Over its deliberations, the court has heard from more than 100 countries and international organisations hoping to influence its opinion, the highest level of participation in the court’s history.

    That has included the governments of low-lying islands and atolls in the Pacific, which say they are paying the steepest price for a crisis they had little role in creating.

    These nations have long been frustrated with the current mechanisms for addressing climate change, like the UN COP conferences, and are hoping that, ultimately, the court will provide a yardstick by which to measure other countries’ actions.

    Vanuatu’s Minister of Climate Change Ralph Regenvanu . . . “This may well be the most consequential case in the history of humanity.” Image: IISD-ENB

    “I choose my words carefully when I say that this may well be the most consequential case in the history of humanity,” Vanuatu’s Minister for Climate Change Ralph Regenvanu said in his statement to the court last year.

    “Let us not allow future generations to look back and wonder why the cause of their doom was condoned.”

    But major powers and emitters, like the United States and China, have argued in their testimonies that existing UN agreements, such as the Paris climate accord, are sufficient to address climate change.

    “We expect this landmark climate ruling, grounded in binding international law, to reflect the critical legal flashpoints raised during the proceedings,” said Joie Chowdhury, a senior attorney at the US-based Centre for International Environmental Law (which has been involved with the case).

    “Among them: whether States’ climate obligations are anchored in multiple legal sources, extending far beyond the Paris Agreement; whether there is a right to remedy for climate harm; and how human rights and the precautionary principle define States’ climate obligations.”

    Pacific youth climate activist at a demonstration at COP27 in November 2022 . . . “We are not drowning. We are fighting.” Image: Facebook/Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change

    What could this mean?
    Rulings from the ICJ are non-binding, and there are myriad cases of international law being flouted by countries the world over.

    Still, the court’s opinion — if it falls in Vanuatu’s favour — could still have major ramifications, bolstering the case for linking human rights and climate change in legal proceedings — both international and domestic — and potentially opening the floodgates for climate litigation, where individuals, groups, Indigenous Peoples, and even countries, sue governments or private companies for climate harm.

    An advisory opinion would also be a powerful precedent for legislators and judges to call on as they tackle questions related to the climate crisis, and give small countries a powerful cudgel in negotiations over future COP agreements and other climate mechanisms.

    “This would empower vulnerable nations and communities to demand accountability, strengthen legal arguments and negotiations and litigation and push for policies that prioritise prevention and redress over delay and denial,” Prasad said.

    In essence, those who have taken the case have asked the court to issue an opinion on whether governments have “legal obligations” to protect people from climate hazards, but also whether a failure to meet those obligations could bring “legal consequences”.

    At the Peace Palace today, they will find out from the court’s 15 judges.

    “[The advisory opinion] is not just a legal milestone, it is a defining moment in the global climate justice movement and a beacon of hope for present and future generations,” said Vanuatu Prime Minister Jotham Napat in a statement ahead of the decision.

    “I am hopeful for a powerful opinion from the ICJ. It could set the world on a meaningful path to accountability and action.”

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-Evening Report: ‘Maybe this is the last minutes you are living’: how the war is impacting young Ukrainians

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ashley Humphrey, Lecturer in Social Sciences, Monash University

    Now into its fourth year, the war that followed Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has taken a devastating toll.

    An estimated 60,000 to 100,0000 Ukrainian lives have been lost and more than 10 million citizens displaced, and entire cities have been devastated.

    Daily life in Ukraine is disrupted by frequent power outages, significant interruptions to school and work routines and the recurrent warnings of air raid sirens.

    We sought to understand the war’s impact on young Ukrainians by interviewing those still in, and outside of Ukraine.

    Stolen youth

    Young adults (aged 18-35) tend to be in a transitional phase of life, working towards establishing a career, starting a family and making future plans.

    For many young Ukrainians, these developmental processes have been severely impeded during the war.

    Our work provides insights into how young Ukrainians have navigated the severe intrusion to their development, as well as how they have coped psychologically during this time.

    Our research drew on in-depth interviews with young Ukrainians who had lived in Ukraine for either the entirety or part of the war.

    Conducted both in person in Ukraine as well as online, these interviews looked specifically at how the ongoing war has affected young people’s employment or study situation, their aspirations for the future and mental health, while also seeking to understand what support they need.

    Responses from the participants varied.

    Those who were working were now exclusively engaged in work centred on assisting the war effort, including in some cases having joined the armed forces.

    Those who were studying had shifted to online mediums. The COVID pandemic ensured online learning platforms were largely already in place, allowing some to continue their studies from locations outside of Ukraine.

    While perhaps an alluring prospect to some, this flexibility while studying was also accompanied by chaos and disorientation, with short-term visas forcing young Ukrainians to move from one country to another.

    As one student explained:

    We went to Ukraine for two weeks and then we moved to Georgia for three months. Now we’re in Thailand for one month, and now we’re going to be in Australia for two or three months. Then we’re probably going to go to Japan for a year maybe.

    Local residents walk past buildings damaged as a result of a missile strike in Odesa.
    OLEKSANDR GIMANOV/AFP via Getty Images

    Depression, stress and surprising optimisim

    Despite enduring the horrors of the war, the participants generally spoke of their futures with admirable optimism.

    Remarkably, many commented on the way the war had redefined their goals toward helping their country in some way. One respondent told us:

    When you are starting a new project, when you are applying for a job, you are having a constant filter: how does this affect Ukraine? Am I helping Ukraine? Am I helping Ukraine enough? What else can I do?’

    Another shared:

    I know we are fighting for our future. And I want to be a part of Ukraine and be a part of its reconstruction. Because I am like this bright future – I am the youth that will be reconstructing Ukraine because of their knowledge and money and everything else.

    Unsurprisingly, some were also apathetic or dismissive of their futures, commenting on broken dreams and stating it was not a time for making future plans. They felt let down by the United Nations and the “international global order”.

    Participants commented on the ways the war has affected their mental health.

    Symptoms of PTSD, elevated stress, depression, constant anxiety as well as existential dread were raised, with one young Ukrainian telling us:

    Every time when I hear alerts […] you’re thinking, maybe this is the last minutes you are living because the bomb can strike your flat.

    The fear of loud noises, the harrowing plight of their country and the associated stress were emergent themes.

    Yet, some indicated they had become resilient to this stress:

    I think I became quite resistant to the stress as well, because I think I faced the scariest moments of my life, where I can die, and I understand that when you cannot control the situation and what’s going on, I cannot control whether a missile is going to be in my house.

    This notion of resilience was both surprising and inspiring and this finding corroborated with past studies on war-affected Ukrainians.

    As one participant explained:

    If there was no war, I wouldn’t be who I am right now. It has really changed me. It has given me strength, this optimistic outlook.

    A need for greater support

    There is much to learn from these inspiring young people. But more pressingly, they need help.

    As the relentless shelling of Ukrainian cities continues, the participants call for greater access to mental health and counselling services, ongoing investment in online learning tools and job opportunities and basic resources to support their wellbeing.

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

    ref. ‘Maybe this is the last minutes you are living’: how the war is impacting young Ukrainians – https://theconversation.com/maybe-this-is-the-last-minutes-you-are-living-how-the-war-is-impacting-young-ukrainians-260800

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI China: China’s large scientific facility attracts global scientists for cutting-edge research

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    China’s large scientific facility attracts global scientists for cutting-edge research

    BEIJING, July 22 — The Synergetic Extreme Condition User Facility (SECUF), a major scientific infrastructure in Beijing’s suburban district Huairou, has attracted scientists from multiple countries to conduct cutting-edge research with its exceptional experimental conditions.

    A recent conference based on SECUF was held in Huairou, bringing together over 50 foreign scientists from 13 countries and more than 100 Chinese scientists.

    SECUF, led and operated by the Institute of Physics (IOP) of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), is a comprehensive research infrastructure that integrates extreme experimental conditions such as ultralow temperatures, ultrahigh magnetic fields, ultrahigh pressures, and ultrafast optics.

    The facility has provided over 350,000 hours of experimental services to domestic and international research teams since its full trial operation began in early 2023, according to IOP.

    Chen Xianhui, an academician of CAS and a professor at the University of Science and Technology of China, said: “SECUF is like an ‘all-rounder’ in scientific research. Its integrated capabilities across multiple extreme conditions are rare globally. This ‘one-stop’ research platform offers unique support for fundamental studies.”

    Cheng Jinguang, deputy director of IOP, said that the essence of SECUF lies in its “openness and sharing,” which is completely consistent with the concept of international large-scale scientific facilities. Operating under international standards, SECUF opens global user applications twice a year. Proposals are reviewed and selected by a user committee, and all approved experiments are offered free of charge to global researchers.

    “SECUF allows us to conduct experiments that cannot be done in Europe,” said Igor Vinograd, a young scientist from the Grenoble High Magnetic Field Laboratory in France’s National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS), adding that SECUF enables far more complex and time-intensive precision experiments.

    Yoshiya Uwatoko, a professor from University of Tokyo, affirmed SECUF’s global standing. He said that SECUF is a world-class research facility vital to the international condensed matter physics community.

    Its stable high magnetic fields, combined with low-temperature capabilities and high-precision measurement systems, allow scientists to probe subtle quantum states under pressure. Its ability to maintain experimental conditions over extended periods is invaluable for pressure studies which have extremely high requirements for precise control and stability, Uwatoko said.

    “China has become a global leader in materials research and experimental infrastructure. Collaborating with Chinese institutions grants access to cutting-edge facilities like SECUF. Such partnerships accelerate discovery and foster long-term scientific exchange,” he added.

    In 2024, IOP and the Max Planck Institute for Chemical Physics of Solids in Germany established the Joint Research Center for Quantum Materials and Physics under Extreme Conditions, leveraging SECUF’s capabilities. Collaborative results have since been published in academic journals.

    “SECUF’s hardware is outstanding and fully capable of supporting frontier research. What impressed me most was the team’s execution efficiency — from agreement signing to project implementation. This reflects exceptional scientific management professionalism,” said Sergey Medvedev, a senior researcher at the Max Planck Institute for Chemical Physics of Solids.

    Ariando Ariando, a professor from the National University of Singapore, highlighted that China’s advancements in physics over the past two decades — both in research caliber and experimental facilities — have been astounding.

    “SECUF’s high-pressure and high-magnetic-field capabilities are precisely what our quantum research requires. We look forward to fruitful collaboration,” he said.

    In February this year, SECUF passed national acceptance inspection and is now fully operational. To create a seamless “barrier-free” soft environment, it is making efforts to enhance its global accessibility include optimizing its English website, preparing comprehensive English manuals, and ensuring all facility signage includes English descriptions, according to IOP.

    As a new facility, the experimental hours of international users at SECUF currently account for 3 percent to 4 percent of the total hours. This proportion is planned to increase to 20 percent by 2030, transforming the facility into a broader global “scientific stage,” said IOP.

    “We warmly welcome experts and scholars worldwide to conduct research here and share their valuable insights,” said Fang Zhong, a CAS academician and director of IOP.

    MIL OSI China News

  • MIL-OSI China: US withdrawal contradicts fundamental principles of multilateralism: UNESCO head

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    Audrey Azoulay, director-general of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) said on Tuesday that U.S. withdrawal from UNESCO contradicts the fundamental principles of multilateralism.

    Deeply regretting the decision made by U.S. President Donald Trump, Azoulay warned that the withdrawal might affect foremost UNESCO’s partners in the United States, in particularly communities seeking site inscription on the World Heritage List, Creative City status, and University Chairs.

    On Tuesday, the United States announced a decision to withdraw from UNESCO by the end of December 2026, just two years after rejoining the organization. This marks the third time Washington has exited UNESCO.

    According to a statement by the U.S. State Department, the withdrawal was prompted by what Washington perceived as UNESCO’s tendency to “advance divisive social and cultural causes,” particularly regarding the Israel-Palestine conflict.

    In response, the UNESCO director-general expressed regret over the U.S. decision, rejecting the stated reasons. She emphasized that UNESCO remains a “rare forum for building consensus through concrete, action-oriented multilateralism.”

    “These claims also contradict the reality of UNESCO’s efforts, particularly in the field of Holocaust education and the fight against antisemitism,” she added.

    Despite the loss of funding from the United States, Azoulay affirmed that the U.S. withdrawal from UNESCO in 2026 will not affect the organization’s normal operations, as its financial position has been significantly strengthened.

    “We have implemented major structural reforms and diversified our funding sources. Thanks to the efforts made by the Organization since 2018, the decline in U.S. financial contributions has been effectively offset,” she stated.

    Azoulay also emphasized that UNESCO has intensified its efforts to take meaningful action wherever its mission can contribute to peace, reaffirming the critical importance of its mandate, even in the wake of the last U.S. withdrawal under President Trump in 2017. 

    MIL OSI China News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Ernst Announces Another Trump Cabinet Member as Featured Speaker at Entrepreneur Expo

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Joni Ernst (R-IA)
    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), chair of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, announced that Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin will be a featured speaker at her upcoming Entrepreneur Expo.
    The third annual event, taking place at Iowa State University on Tuesday, August 12, will provide Iowa small businesses an unparalleled chance to learn about opportunities across the federal marketplace with networking and hands-on instruction.
    “Administrator Zeldin has been a champion for small businesses in Washington, and I have proudly worked with him to reform the harmful WOTUS rule and slash costly red tape,” said Ernst. “His work has empowered entrepreneurs to be able to spend less time sorting through a mountain of paperwork and more time on the shop floor, out in the fields, or serving their customers. His expertise will be invaluable to expo attendees, and I am excited to welcome him back to the great state of Iowa!”
    “Senator Ernst is a fierce advocate for Iowa small business owners and farmers. I am very excited to join her Entrepreneur Expo next month,” said Zeldin. “In the first six-months of the Trump Administration, we have been full steam ahead working hard to provide relief for Americans by protecting our precious environment while rolling back onerous regulations that have held back our economy. EPA’s goal is to get out of the way and make it easier, not harder, for American businesses to prosper. I look forward to meeting many hard working Iowans and am eager to solicit their feedback and input as we Power the Great American Comeback.”
    Click here to learn more and RSVP for the event.
    Background:
    Small Business Administration (SBA) Administrator Kelly Loeffler will also be a featured speaker at the expo.
    Last year, 40 federal and state entities came to Ernst’s Expo to connect with small businesses on opportunities in federal contracting and innovation programs.
    Hundreds of Iowans attended Ernst’s 2023 Expo, which featured 31 federal and state entities.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Cornyn Meets with UTEP President Heather Wilson

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Texas John Cornyn

    July 22, 2025

    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) met today with University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP) President Heather Wilson to discuss breaking down barriers to education, supporting UTEP students, and advancing their top-tier academic programs in fields ranging from biological sciences and nursing to education and engineering. See photo below.

    This image is in the public domain, but those wishing to do so may credit the Office of U.S. Senator John Cornyn.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Cornyn, Kim Introduce Bill to Combat AI-Generated Child Sexual Abuse Material

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Texas John Cornyn
    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators John Cornyn (R-TX) and Andy Kim (D-NJ) today introduced the Preventing Recurring Online Abuse of Children Through Intentional Vetting of Artificial Intelligence (PROACTIV AI) Data Act, which would encourage artificial intelligence (AI) developers to identify, remove, and report known child sexual abuse material (CSAM) from the datasets they compile or obtain for use in training AI models to help proactively stop AI image generators from creating child pornography:
    “Modern predators are exploiting advances in AI to develop new AI-generated child sexual abuse material, and technology companies are often unwittingly giving them the tools to do so,” said Sen. Cornyn. “By encouraging tech companies to proactively screen their datasets to remove and report explicit images of children, this legislation would mitigate the risk of AI platforms unintentionally enabling the creation of new content depicting child sexual abuse and better safeguard children online.”
    “As we develop AI models, it is important that we establish critical protections to look out for the most vulnerable in digital spaces,” said Sen. Kim. “This bill is an opportunity for Congress and AI developers to take an important step forward together and implement the necessary safeguards to keep our children safe from future misuse or exploitation.”
    Background:
    Foundational AI models require large amounts of data for training purposes. Given the size of these datasets and the amount of compute needed to work through them during training, many companies do not screen content for harmful materials. Recognizing the potential for child sexual abuse material (CSAM) to unintentionally work its way into these datasets given the methods of collection, researchers at Stanford University screened multiple data sets, including the LAION-5B data set used to train many of the leading image-generating models. Their work identified more than 3,000 data entries of likely CSAM in the dataset. This is troubling, not just because of the accessibility of known CSAM, but because many products and tools now have content from which to draw if asked to generate new CSAM by users. Left unaddressed, foundation models can be corrupted by CSAM data and make it possible for them to be coopted by predators.
    According to the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, AI-generated material has proliferated at an alarming rate in the past year with nearly half a million incidents of AI-related CSAM reported in the first half of the year, compared to fewer than 70,000 reported for all of 2024.
    The PROACTIV AI Data Act would:
    Direct the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to issue voluntary best practices for AI developers to screen their datasets used for training AI models for known CSAM;
    Direct the National Science Foundation to support research into innovative methods and technologies for identifying, removing, and reporting CSAM from datasets;
    And provide limited liability protection to AI companies that follow the new best practices so those acting in good faith aren’t legally punished for accidentally handling CSAM via automated data crawlers on the internet.
    This legislation builds on First Lady Melania Trump’s efforts to combat the rise of AI deepfake pornography and keep children safe online.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-Evening Report: Auckland is NZ’s ‘primate city’ but its potential remains caged in by poor planning and vision

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Timothy Welch, Senior Lecturer in Urban Planning, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

    Getty Images

    The recent report comparing Auckland to nine international peer cities delivered an uncomfortable truth: our largest city is falling behind, hampered by car dependency, low-density housing and “weak economic performance”.

    The Deloitte State of the City analysis was no surprise to anyone who has watched successive governments treat the city as a problem to manage, rather than an engine to fuel.

    The report’s findings were stark: Auckland rates 82nd out of 84 cities globally for pedestrian friendliness, and its car-dependent transport system is more carbon-intensive and slower to decarbonise than peer cities.

    This is the direct result of decades of planning failures, including what urban researchers call the 1970s “great down-zoning” which halved central Auckland’s housing capacity.

    This isn’t just Auckland’s problem. When we mismanage what geographers call a “primate city,” it reveals our fundamental misunderstanding of how modern economies work.

    The concept of the primate city was formalised by geographer Mark Jefferson in 1939. Such cities are defined as being “at least twice as large as the next largest city and more than twice as significant”.

    Auckland fits this definition perfectly. With more than 1.7 million people, it is over four times larger than Christchurch or the greater Wellington region. The city accounts for 34% of New Zealand’s population and is projected to hit 40% of the working-age population by 2048.

    Auckland contributes 38% of New Zealand’s gross domestic product and its per-capita GDP is 15% higher than the rest of the country’s. Its most productive area, the central business district, enjoys a 40% productivity premium over the national average.

    To economists, these numbers represent the “agglomeration benefits” research shows primate cities generate. It is the economic effect of combining businesses, talent and infrastructure.

    Yet New Zealand systematically underinvests in the very place generating this outsized economic contribution.

    A pattern of infrastructure failure

    Auckland’s infrastructure deficit follows a predictable pattern. The City Rail Link, while progressing, has grown from an initial budget of NZ$2-3 billion to $5.5 billion, with opening delayed until 2026.

    Light rail was cancelled entirely after years of planning. A second harbour crossing has been studied for decades without a shovel hitting dirt. Each represents billions in opportunity costs while congestion worsens.

    This goes well beyond project mismanagement. It is a deep structural problem.

    The Infrastructure Commission-Te Waihanga identifies a $210 billion national infrastructure shortfall, with Auckland bearing a disproportionate burden despite generating a disproportionately high level of revenue.

    International research by the OECD shows successful countries treat metropolitan regions as engines of national growth, not a burden.

    The ‘Wellington problem’

    Public policy expert Ian Shirley called it the “Wellington Problem”: the way Auckland’s governance became an obsession for politicians and bureaucrats based in Wellington.

    The tension dates to 1865 when the capital was moved from Auckland to Wellington, establishing a pattern where political power was deliberately separated from economic power.

    Auckland loses an estimated $415.35 million annually in GST collected on rates. This goes to Wellington and into government revenue rather than being reinvested locally. Central government properties in Auckland, worth $36.3 million in rates, are exempt from payment while still using Auckland’s infrastructure.

    When Auckland speaks with “one voice” through its unified council, Wellington responds with legislative overrides.

    The recent National Land Transport Programme, for example, cut Auckland’s transport funding by $564 million. Mayor Wayne Brown said the government’s transport policy “makes zero sense for Auckland”.

    Learning from others

    The contrast with international approaches reveals just how counterproductive New Zealand’s approach has been.

    London has an integrated Transport for London authority with congestion charging powers, generating £136 million annually for reinvestment. Paris is investing more than €35 billion in the Grand Paris Express transit project.

    Japan’s “Quality Infrastructure Investment” principles include ¥13.2 trillion in regional infrastructure investment. Australia’s A$120 billion infrastructure programme explicitly recognises its largest cities contribute over 50% of GDP and require proportional investment.

    Research has shown excessive urban concentration in one country can create problems. But denying the primate city resources only leads to a “deterioration in the quality of life” that drags down the entire national economy.

    The solution lies in making strategic investments that maximise the benefits of agglomeration while managing any negative costs to the national economy.

    Growing pains

    Auckland isn’t a problem to be managed, it is an asset to be leveraged. Every successful developed economy has learned this lesson. Paris generates 31% of France’s GDP and gets treated accordingly.

    Seoul produces 23% of South Korea’s output and receives massive infrastructure investment. Tokyo drives Japan’s economy.

    The international evidence is unambiguous: countries that strategically invest in their primate cities achieve higher productivity growth and maintain competitive advantages.

    Auckland doesn’t need sympathy or special treatment. It needs what every primate city in every successful economy gets: infrastructure investment proportional to its economic contribution, governance structures that reflect its scale, and political leadership that understands agglomeration economics.

    The question isn’t whether Auckland is too big. The question is whether New Zealand is big enough to nurture its primate city.

    Timothy Welch 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. Auckland is NZ’s ‘primate city’ but its potential remains caged in by poor planning and vision – https://theconversation.com/auckland-is-nzs-primate-city-but-its-potential-remains-caged-in-by-poor-planning-and-vision-261176

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-Evening Report: UK bans Gaza protest group – could the same thing happen in Australia?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Shannon Bosch, Associate Professor (Law), Edith Cowan University

    More than 100 people were arrested in the United Kingdom on the weekend for supporting Palestine Action, a protest group that opposes Britain’s support of Israel.

    Palestine Action was recently proscribed as a terrorist organisation, placing it in the same category as Hamas, al-Qaeda and Islamic State.

    Many of those arrested were simply holding signs that read: “I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action”. They were predominantly aged over 60.

    In recent weeks, an 83-year-old vicar, a former government lawyer and various pensioners have been taken into custody and could be jailed for up to 14 years if found guilty of belonging to the protest group.

    Simply holding a sign or wearing a T-shirt with the words “Palestine Action” could be punishable with a six-month jail term.

    The protesters say they refuse to be silenced:

    If we cannot speak freely about the genocide that is occurring […], if we cannot condemn those who are complicit in it […] then the right to freedom of expression has no meaning, and democracy and human rights in this country are dead.

    Police arresting protestors calling for the terrorism ban to be overturned.

    So what is Palestine Acton and why is “middle England” up in arms over its designation as a terrorist group?

    Activist network

    Palestine Action is a UK-based activist network founded in 2020 with the stated aim of “ending global participation in Israel’s genocidal and apartheid regime”.

    The group views the British government as complicit in Israeli war crimes in Gaza. It also aspires to halt UK arms exports through disruptive protests and vandalism.

    Members have generally targeted Israeli-linked businesses, such as defence company Elbit Systems, by damaging equipment or blocking entrances.

    Supporters include grassroots activists, civil liberties advocates, health professionals, clergy and prominent figures such as Pink Floyd musician Roger Waters.

    Serious concerns

    Palestine Action was officially proscribed in the UK on July 5, after campaigners sprayed paint into the engines of two Voyager aircraft at an air force base.

    The final vote was overwhelming: 385 MPs supported the ban, while just 26 opposed it.

    Under the Terrorism Act 2000, membership, support, or public endorsement of a proscribed group is a criminal offence punishable by sentences up to 14 years.

    The UK government argues the group’s actions exceeded legal protest and raised serious security concerns.

    Since then, scores of people have been searched and arrested at rallies in support of Palestine Acton.

    Blurring the lines

    Critics, including Amnesty International, civil liberties groups and The Guardian editorial board warn the ban blurs the line between non-violent civil disobedience and terrorism. They argue it also threatens democratic dissent through a statutory abuse of power.

    Counter-terrorism laws permit extraordinary interference in due process and other fundamental human rights protections. Consequently, they must always be used with the highest degree of restraint.

    The UK already had legislation in place to deal with criminal damage and violent disorder.

    United Nations legal and human rights experts have spoken out against treating the actions of protesters who damage property without the intent to injure people as terrorism:

    According to international standards, acts of protest that damage property, but are not intended to kill or injure people, should not be treated as terrorism.

    Abuse of power

    Designating Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation appears to be aimed at curtailing free expression, the assembly and association of those who support the protest action against Israel’s war on Gaza.

    Placing it in the same legal category as Hamas seems designed to reduce public sympathy for the group.

    Palestine Action is challenging its proscription in the UK High Court. Lawyers for the group argue the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre has assessed the vast majority of its activities to be lawful:

    On nature and scale, the home secretary [Yvette Cooper] accepts that only three of Palestine Action’s at least 385 actions would meet the statutory definition of terrorism […] itself a dubious assessment.

    The lawyers further argue proscription was “repugnant” and an “authoritarian abuse of power”.

    Australian version?

    There are no indications from the intelligence community that any direct affiliate of Palestine Action (UK) operates in Australia.

    However, there are pro-Palestinian activist organisations, including a Palestine Action Group Sydney, which is part of the Australian Palestine Advocacy Network (APAN).

    Broader solidarity movements such as Students for Palestine, are active in protests on university campuses and against arms shipments to Israel.

    Domestic terrorism powers

    Traditional boundaries between “activism”, “extremism”, “hate-crime” and “terrorism” are rapidly blurring in Australia.

    The attorney general may list (“proscription” is a UK term) any organisation as a “terrorist organisation” if they are satisfied it is “advocating terrorism”. This would mean criminalising the expression of support, instruction, or praise of terrorist acts or offences.

    The latest addition to the 31-member list is Terrorgram, an online terrorism advocacy chatroom.

    Australia’s extensive definition of “terrorist act”, currently under review, expressly excludes

    advocacy, protest, dissent or industrial action and which is not intended to cause serious or life-endangering harm or death or to create a serious risk to the safety or health of the public.

    This suggests an Australian version of a Palestine Action undertaking similar conduct to its UK cousin would not meet the legal threshold for listing.

    However, the recent Terrorgram listing makes reference to advocacy for “attacks on minority groups, critical infrastructure and specific individuals”.

    This suggests the UK and Australian governments are becoming more aligned in interpreting “violent” protest to include violence against property, rather than just against people.

    Short of listing, a significant suite of investigative, coercive and preventative executive exists that could be deployed if a similar organisation appears in Australia.

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

    ref. UK bans Gaza protest group – could the same thing happen in Australia? – https://theconversation.com/uk-bans-gaza-protest-group-could-the-same-thing-happen-in-australia-261562

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-Evening Report: Climate disasters are pushing people into homelessness – but there’s a lot we can do about it

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Timothy Heffernan, Lecturer in Anthropology, Australian National University

    Almost half of all Australian properties are at risk of bushfire, while 17,500 face risk of coastal erosion. By 2030, more than 3 million will face riverine flood risk.

    Meanwhile, housing demand continues to outpace supply. With climate-related disasters projected to increase in frequency and severity, the task of ensuring safe and adequate housing for all Australians remains a challenge.

    In other words, disasters are worsening the housing shortage, rendering more people at risk of homelessness.

    There is growing consensus in the homelessness and emergency management sectors that Australia needs a national policy response.

    We must ensure secure and safe housing options are a disaster planning priority.

    Like ‘living a disaster every day’

    Climate disasters displace 22,261 Australians on average each year. People with the lowest incomes make up 80% of this. The very poorest 3%, despite being small, make up 14% of displaced households.

    Australia is not alone. Globally, 70% of internal displacement in 2024 resulted from disasters, often disproportionately affecting low socioeconomic areas.

    Loss of housing affects everything from a person’s health and employment to education and relationships. One person who’d experienced disaster-related housing loss said it was like

    living a disaster every day, but without the assistance and support given to most disaster survivors.

    Renters, rough sleepers and people living in unattached dwellings are most vulnerable.

    Slipping through the cracks

    The catastrophic Northern Rivers floods in 2022 provide an instructive example.

    The floods rendered over 3,500 homes uninhabitable and more than 8,000 were damaged. Over 1,400 people were displaced and offered emergency accommodation by the New South Wales government.

    The total number of people experiencing homelessness post-floods remains unclear. This is due to existing overcrowding and because people left the area or became uncontactable.

    Recent research colleagues and I conducted with homeowners and renters, commissioned by the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, examined 17 people’s experiences of securing shelter after disaster.

    In Lismore, a key barrier was poor communication and increased competition for rental housing. One person told us:

    The real estate basically dropped the ball after a month. I had to chase them up, and the return of my bond and all that. […] I applied for ten different properties and never heard back. […] I ended up sourcing my own accommodation, a camper trailer, and camped out at the local showgrounds.

    For renters, the disaster couldn’t have come at a worse time. A preexisting rental crisis across the region meant the private market was already tight.

    Homeowners, by contrast, were able to use insurance to cover transitional housing costs or were eligible for several funding sources to repair properties. This highlights a policy emphasis toward homeowners.

    In this context, people can slip through the cracks, increasing the risk of homelessness.

    Post-disaster housing can compound vulnerability

    Temporary shelters – such as crisis shelters, motels, short-term rentals, pods, cabins and caravans – can be a stop-gap against the risk of homelessness after disaster. However, temporary shelter comes with trade-offs and downsides.

    Crisis and commercial options can be damaged during disaster, limiting their use. Pod villages provide mass shelter but are costly, slow to deliver, and there’s often no meaningful plan for people to transition out of them.

    Some 18 months after the 2022 Northern Rivers floods, 1,021 people were still living in temporary pod villages and 257 people remained in caravans.

    Rent is not usually charged. When relied on beyond the immediate term, this can compound vulnerability by creating gaps in people’s rental history.

    A NSW government audit found 724 households were on the waitlist for temporary housing a year after the floods, though this list was rarely updated.

    Overall, relatively few households have secured long-term housing solutions. This year, four pod villages will be demobilised amid the region’s ongoing rental crisis.

    This comes at a time when Australia is facing a shortfall of 640,000 social and affordable homes.

    Around 110,000 requests for homelessness services go unassisted annually.

    A national framework is needed

    In 2024, a national symposium, convened by the Australian Red Cross, Homelessness Australia and UNSW Sydney’s HowWeSurvive initiative, brought together 125 professionals from the housing, homelessness, emergency management, government and academic sectors.

    The report, released in June 2025, called for a national framework focused on disasters, housing and homelessness.

    Several policies deal separately with these areas at the Commonwealth, state and territory levels. A unified approach, however, would reposition shelter after disaster from a stop-gap to a central part of disaster planning.

    The aim is to strengthen housing options before a natural hazard occurs and prevent disaster-related homelessness.

    Australia needs a coordinated strategy and taskforce to align housing, homelessness, and disaster policies and programs. Homelessness planning should be part of disaster planning, and vice versa, to ensure housing type and tenure does not place people at risk of homelessness when disaster strikes.

    This requires going beyond just linking displaced households with crisis services.

    We must plan for each stage of housing before and after a disaster and anticipate diverse needs, especially for renters and those at risk of homelessness.

    Responses should be trauma-informed and able to adapt individual experiences.

    Now is the time to act – before the next disaster strikes.

    This article was developed with the Australian Red Cross and Homelessness Australia, co-facilitators of the Housing, Homelessness and Disasters National Symposium held in Melbourne in 2024. The symposium was supported by National Shelter and the Community Housing Industry Association, and event funding was provided by the Lord Mayor’s Charitable Foundation.

    Timothy Heffernan has received funding from the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI), the NSW government and the National Health and Medical Research Council. He is an Honorary Research Fellow at HowWeSurvive, UNSW Sydney.

    ref. Climate disasters are pushing people into homelessness – but there’s a lot we can do about it – https://theconversation.com/climate-disasters-are-pushing-people-into-homelessness-but-theres-a-lot-we-can-do-about-it-259149

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz