Spanning more octaves than a piano, humpback whales sing powerfully into the vast ocean. These songs are beautifully complex, weaving phrases and themes into masterful compositions. Blue and fin whales richly fill out a bass section with their own unique versions of song.
Together, these three species can create a marvellous symphony in the sea.
Published today in PLOS One, our new research reveals these baleen whale species’ response to major changes in their ecosystem can be heard in their songs.
Food for long-distance travel
The six-year study took place in whale foraging habitat in the eastern North Pacific, off the coast of California in the United States. From this biologically rich foraging habitat, the whales migrate long distances each year to breeding habitats at lower latitudes.
They eat little to nothing during their migration and winter breeding season. So they need to build up their energy stores during their annual residence in foraging habitat.
This energy, stored in their gigantic bodies, powers the animals through months of long-distance travel, mating, calving, and nursing before they return to waters off California in the spring and summer to resume foraging.
The whales eat krill and fish that can aggregate in massive schools. However, their diets are distinct.
While blue whales only eat krill, humpback whales eat krill and small schooling fish such as anchovy. If the prey species are more abundant and more densely concentrated, whales can forage more efficiently. Foraging conditions and prey availability change dramatically from year to year.
We wanted to know if these changes in the ecosystem were reflected in the whales’ acoustic behaviour.
Piecing together a complex puzzle
To track the occurrence of singing, we examined audio recordings acquired through the Monterey Accelerated Research System. This is a deep-sea observatory operated by the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute and funded by the US National Science Foundation.
Analysis of sound recordings is a highly effective way to study whales because we can hear them from quite far away. If a whale sings anywhere within thousands of square kilometres around the hydrophone, we will hear it.
Yet, piecing together the complex puzzle of whale behavioural ecology requires diverse research methods.
Our study used observations of the whales, including sound recordings, photo identification and diet analysis. It also used measurements of forage species abundance, characterisation of ecosystem conditions and theoretical modelling of sound propagation.
Our ability to probe the complex lives of these giants was enhanced for humpback whales because we had a unique data resource available for this species: extensive photo identification.
The Happywhale community science project combines photos supplied by researchers and ecotourists, and identification enabled by artificial intelligence, to recognise individual whales by the shape and coloration of their flukes.
This unique resource enabled us to examine the local abundance of humpback whales. We could also study the timing of their annual migration and how persistently individual whales occupied the study region.
Scientists used a deep-sea hydrophone to keep a nearly continuous record of the ocean soundscape. MBARI
An increase in food – and in song
The study began in 2015, during a prolonged marine heatwave that caused major disruption in the foraging habitat of whales and other animals throughout the eastern North Pacific.
All three whale species sang the least during the heatwave, and sang more as foraging conditions improved over the next two years.
These patterns provided the first indications that the singing behaviour by whales may be closely related to the food available. Remarkably, whale song is an indicator of forage availability.
Further evidence was found in the striking differences between humpback and blue whales during the later years of the study.
Continued increases in detection of humpback whale song could not be explained by changes in the local abundance of whales, the timing of their annual migration, or the persistence of individuals in the study region.
However, humpback song occurrence closely tracked tremendous increases in the abundances of northern anchovy — the largest increase in 50 years. And when we analysed the skin of the humpback whales, we saw a clear shift to a fish-dominated diet.
In contrast, blue whales only eat krill, and detection of their songs plummeted with large decreases in krill abundance. Our analysis of blue whale skin revealed they were foraging over a larger geographic area to find the food they needed during these hard times in the food web.
Humpback song occurrence closely tracked tremendous increases in the abundances of northern anchovy. evantravels/Shutterstock
Predicting long-term changes
This research shows listening to whales is much more than a rich sensory experience. It’s a window into their lives, their vulnerability, and their resilience.
Humpback whales emerge from this study as a particularly resilient species. They are more able to readily adapt to changes in the ecology of the foraging habitats that sustain them. These findings can help scientists and resource managers predict how marine ecosystems and species will respond to long-term changes driven by both natural cycles and human impacts.
At a time of unprecedented change for marine life and ecosystems, collaboration across disciplines and institutions will be crucial for understanding our changing ocean.
This work was enabled by private research centres, universities and federal agencies working together. This consortium’s past work has revealed a rich new understanding of the ocean soundscape, answering fundamental questions about the ecology of ocean giants.
Who knows what more we will learn as we listen to the ocean’s underwater symphony?
The study’s findings can help scientists better understand how blue whales and other baleen whales respond to long-term changes in the ocean. Ajit S N/Shutterstock
This work was led by John Ryan, a biological oceanographer at the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute (MBARI), with an interdisciplinary team of researchers from MBARI, Southern Cross University, Happywhale.com, Cascadia Research Collective, University of Wisconsin, NOAA Southwest Fisheries Science Centre, University of California, Santa Cruz, Naval Postgraduate School, and Stanford University.
Ted Cheeseman is the co-founder of citizen science project, Happywhale.
Jarrod Santora receives funding from NOAA, NASA, and NSF.
In May 2023, two satellites jointly developed by teams from Macao and the mainland were launched. Immediately afterwards, 18 faculty members and students at Macao University of Science and Technology who had worked on the project, wrote to Xi Jinping to tell him about their success. Not only did President Xi reply to their letter, he also visited their university during his December 2024 trip to Macao and praised the young team for their success.
The Government is ramping up a programme to boost sustainably and farm productivity.
Agriculture Minister Todd McClay has announced the ‘Science for Farmers’ initiative will be rolled out at agricultural events around the country starting with the Dargaville, Wānaka, Feilding, and Kirwee Agricultural Shows over the next two months.
“Science for Farmers brings leading scientists to the regions to talk directly with farmers about research and innovation that’s already paying dividends on farms around the country,” Mr McClay says.
The programme is a collaboration between the Ministry for Primary Industries’ On Farm Support service and key research partners, including AgResearch, AgriZeroNZ, LIC, Massey University, Manaaki Whenua – Landcare Research, and the New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre.
It provides detailed information and access to experts in many areas including on:
Alternative pasture types that can help farmers future-proof their pasture-based systems in a warming climate.
Advanced genetics to increase production whilst helping to meet environmental and emissions obligations.
On-farm management systems that increase profit and enhance business resilience.
“The Government is committed to lifting rural productivity, increasing jobs and unlocking New Zealand’s potential by going for growth.
“Small steps can make a big difference. Every extra kilo of milksolids, kg of meat or wool, and extra tray of fruit we produce through innovation and science, puts more money into the pockets of rural New Zealand and helps achieve our goal of doubling the value of exports within 10 years”.
Researchers have recently completed the inaugural series of sea trials for marine equipment at the offshore test site in Yazhou Bay in Sanya, south China’s Hainan Province, signifying that the site is now equipped to perform such testing. The marine engineering team from Shanghai Jiao Tong University conducted extensive evaluations on a range of marine equipment at the test site, such as instruments for monitoring the marine environment, seafloor mining vehicle prototypes and unmanned surface vessels, reported Hainan Daily on Tuesday. The team successfully carried out a variety of experimental tasks, including the observation of dynamic conditions of marine winds, waves and currents, assessment of the functions of intelligent marine devices, accurate positioning and navigation of submersible equipment, and surveillance of disturbances in the seabed environment. The team leader disclosed that the successful completion of these sea trials has thoroughly confirmed the site’s ability to perform real-time observations of the marine dynamic environment, and to conduct tests of marine equipment within a three-dimensional marine testing zone that encompasses the surface, the underwater environment and the seabed. The team leader also noted that this achievement represents a significant advancement in the development of the test site and underscores its evolution into a crucial maritime testing base in China.
New Zealand’s animal welfare system is failing – and in urgent need of a dedicated police unit, researcher warns.
The animal protection system in Aotearoa is ineffective, underfunded, and at risk of collapse, according to new research.
University of Auckland law scholar associate professor Marcelo Rodriguez Ferrere warns that without major reform, animals will continue to suffer harm without adequate legal consequences.
His doctoral thesis with the University of Alberta, which compares New Zealand’s system with Alberta, Canada, identifies deep structural flaws. These include overlapping responsibilities, jurisdictional confusion, and a reliance on the SPCA – an under-resourced charity – to carry out much of the enforcement.
“The effect of this enforcement gap is clear: breaches of animal welfare laws go consistently undetected and under-prosecuted,” says Rodriguez Ferrere.
“Not only does this directly harm animals, but it weakens the deterrent effect of the law, allowing a cycle of neglect and cruelty to continue. In this way, animal welfare underenforcement frustrates the rule of law.”
A lack of financial support for the sector has resulted in inadequate training for animal protection officers, reactive and delayed enforcement, and areas where no enforcement occurs at all. Our reliance on private enforcement is outdated and the biggest flaw in the system. We need a specialised animal welfare unit within the police.
In New Zealand, three agencies – police, the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA), and Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) – theoretically share responsibility for enforcing the Animal Welfare Act. But in reality, that enforcement falls to the MPI and the SPCA and neither of them, Rodriguez Ferrere argues, have the resources to do the job effectively.
“The SPCA has been given the responsibility to enforce animal welfare legislation with regards to companion animals, even though police and MPI also have jurisdiction,” he says. “It’s a strange quirk of our system that we rely on a charity with limited funding to do this work. They do their best, but it’s not working.”
He believes New Zealand should consider removing enforcement responsibilities from the SPCA, which remains one of the few charities in the world still conducting private animal welfare prosecutions. Instead, he argues that their expertise could be shifted to state-funded enforcement bodies dedicated to animal welfare.
“The SPCA has done an amazing job, despite limited resources, but our reliance on private enforcement is outdated and the biggest flaw in the system,” he says. “We need a specialised animal welfare unit within the police.”
Rodriguez Ferrere also sees broader issues at play, linking New Zealand’s weak enforcement to institutional speciesism. He says people prioritise the interests of their own species, while treating other animals as ‘property’.
“The legal classification of animals as property is speciesism in action,” he says. “As long as animals are treated as commodities, their well-being is directly linked to the value they represent to their owners and society.”
While removing the property status of animals would be too radical a shift, Rodriguez Ferrere says a more immediate and achievable step is to strengthen regulatory enforcement. A properly funded police unit focused on animal welfare, he argues, would go a long way toward ensuring the law is upheld. Such a unit operates within the city of Edmonton, Alberta, with significant success.
A new study by Te Pūnaha Matatini and Auckland University reveals that Healthline, operated by Whakarongorau Aotearoa, prevents approximately 83 unnecessary Emergency Department (ED) visits per day across the Te Manawa Taki (Midlands) region, with potential to reduce ED pressure further.
Analysis of data from July 2019 to June 2024 demonstrates that Healthline advice has successfully diverted 14.6% of potential ED presentations, while identifying an additional 6% of current ED visits that could be managed through the telehealth service.
“These findings confirm what we’ve always believed — that Healthline plays a crucial role in connecting New Zealanders with the right care at the right time,” says Glynis Sandland, CEO of Whakarongorau Aotearoa. “By providing 24/7 clinical advice, we’re not only making healthcare more accessible but also reducing unnecessary pressure on our emergency departments.
“The study showed particularly strong impact in the Bay of Plenty, where Healthline prevented 29.6% of potential ED visits, followed by Lakes (23.5%) and Waikato (14.1%).
“Every unnecessary ED presentation we prevent allows hospital clinicians to work at the top of their scope, focusing on patients who truly need emergency care,” Sandland adds. “This is about creating a more efficient healthcare system that works better for everyone — patients, whānau, and healthcare providers alike.
“The research identified that Healthline is particularly effective at supporting younger and older individuals, Māori communities, and people from higher deprivation areas who might otherwise default to ED services due to uncertainty about care options or access barriers.
About Whakarongorau Aotearoa: Whakarongorau Aotearoa is New Zealand’s national telehealth service provider, operating Healthline and other essential health and wellbeing support services. We connect the people of New Zealand with healthcare professionals 24/7, providing clinical advice, support, and information when and where it’s needed most.
Finance Opposition spokesperson, the Hon Pesetatamalelagi Barbara Edmonds visited her alma mater, the University of Auckland to talk with Business academics and learn more about the Pacific Strategy and Pacific Academy initiatives launching this year.
Edmonds (Fale’ula, Faleatiu, Safotu, Fasito’o/Sāmoa) is the MP for Mana and visited the University on 24 February. She met with leaders from the School of Business, Schools and Community Engagement, and the Office of the Pro Vice-Chancellor Pacific.
“It’s nice to be back home, it does feel like home, this is my alma mater where I did my Law and Arts degree that set me up for my career.”
Edmonds says it was good to be amongst Pacific students and to have in-depth discussions focused on economic policies.
“We had good discussions with the School of Business, around macro and micro economic policies that we will be testing as part of our policies that we will be forming,” she says.
Pro Vice-Chancellor Pacific Professor Jemaima Sipaea Tiatia-Siau says drafting the University’s first Pacific Strategy in 142 years has been a huge task over the last year; having someone with the expertise and calibre of the Finance Opposition Spokesperson view the work undertaken highlights the strategy’s significance.
“We’re grateful to have had the Hon Barbara Edmonds come onto campus, to be able to share with her the work we have undertaken.
“She’s a great example of why drawing up a road map for Pacific success here at the University is important, so that our young people can flourish at the University and leave ready to take on the world.”
Professor Tiatia-Siau says the Mana MP relished learning about initiatives to prepare school leavers for the university environment such as Auckland Maths Challenge and the Pacific Academy, ensuring Pacific youth were able to thrive.
Edmonds says it was also important to encourage the Pacific community into the Business space. She pivoted during her career path starting out in Health Sciences before graduating with a Bachelor of Laws and Bachelor of Arts in 2008, going on to become a specialist tax lawyer.
A mother of eight, her path to becoming a Cabinet Minister began eight years ago while working as a private secretary for the National Party’s Ministers of Revenue, Michael Woodhouse and Judith Collins. The following year in 2017 she was appointed as a political adviser for the Labour Government’s Revenue and Police Minister Stuart Nash. She entered Parliament in 2020 as the MP for Mana and became a Cabinet Minister in 2023, holding the Internal Affairs and Pacific Peoples portfolios.
“I came into the business space through the Arts and through Law, it was a very different pathway, says the 44-year-old.
“I got into the area of tax through law, it’s a good indicator of broadening [your scope]. The Humanities and the Arts are important, it means you have a good grounding for a diverse career.
“I’ve been really fortunate that I had a good grounding here, with the Law School and with the Faculty of Arts, and that means decades later you become a Finance Opposition spokesperson for a major political party – don’t knock the Arts!”
Professor Tiatia-Siau says Edmonds’ visit to give guidance and moral support to developing the Pacific Strategy was timely.
“We are this week welcoming our first-year students and we are also on the eve of a great milestone. The presence of Pesetatamalelagi the Hon. Barbara Edmonds is a show of support for the work we are doing, and she is a wonderful role model of what can be accomplished once you have secured a university education.”
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Hawkins, Senior Lecturer, Canberra School of Politics, Economics and Society, University of Canberra
Peter Dutton and his Coalition colleagues have dithered for several weeks on their plans for the Commonwealth public sector.
While being upfront that public service jobs would be targeted, they’ve made numerous contradictory statements about the number of public servants who would be sacked if the Coalition wins the coming election.
But Peter Dutton’s most recent comments confirm that he clearly wants to make significant cuts.
And it’s hard to see how the sackings wouldn’t erode important front line services that many Australians depend on for help and support.
36,000 jobs on the line
This week the opposition leader declared the Coalition would achieve A$24 billion in savings by reducing the size of the public service.
He was unequivocal. The money would be clawed back over four years and would more than cover the Coalition’s promised $9 billion injection into Medicare.
Dutton explicitly tied the $24 billion in savings to the 36,000 Commonwealth public servants who have been hired since the last election
Under the Labor Party, there are 36,000 additional public servants, that’s at a cost of $6 billion a year, or $24 billion over the forward estimates. This program totals $9 billion over that period. So, we’ve well and truly identified the savings.
While still not nominating a precise number of job cuts, it’s Peter Dutton’s clearest statement of intent to date. By “truly” identifying the savings, 36,000 jobs are on the line. And it accords with Dutton’s earlier comments that the extra workers are not providing value for money for Australian taxpayers.
(They have) not improved the lives of Australians one iota
While this sounds like he wants to dismiss them all, senior colleagues are more circumspect.
According to Nationals leader David Littleproud, the number of job cuts has not yet been decided. Shadow Public Service Minister Jane Hume further muddied the waters by referring to the cuts being by attrition, and excluding frontline services.
Frontline services
The public service head count has grown to 185,343, as of June 2024. So cutting 36,000 staff, or even a large proportion of that number, would be a very significant reduction.
The agencies that added the most public servants between June 2023 and June 2024 were the National Disability Insurance Agency (up 2,193), Defence (up 1,425), Health and Aged Care (up 1,173) and Services Australia (up 1,149).
Many of these extra staff would be providing invaluable front line services to clients and customer who are accessing essential support.
And some of the new public servants replaced more expensive outsourced workers. Finance Minister Katy Gallagher has claimed the Albanese government has saved $4 billion of taxpayers’ money by reducing spending on consultants and contractors.
Rather than the alleged explosion in the size of the bureaucracy, the growth in public service numbers has closely matched the increase in the population. Last year, they accounted for 1.36% of all employed persons, up by only a minuscule degree on the 1.35% in 2016.
Canberra bashing
According to Dutton, the 36,000 additional public servants hired under Labor all work in Canberra. It was not a slip of the tongue. The claim is also in the Liberal Party’s pre-election pamphlet.
But only 37% of the public service workforce is located in the national capital. Half are based in state capitals. A full quarter of those involved in service delivery work in regional Australia.
The Liberals clearly think they have nothing to lose among Canberra voters, given they have no members or senators from the Australian Capital Territory.
The coming election will no doubt tell us if Canberra bashing still resonates with voters elsewhere in the country. Dutton has clearly made the political judgement that it does.
Another night of the long knives?
A change of government often precipitates a clean out at the top of the public service.
When the Howard government was elected in 1996, no fewer than six departmental secretaries were sacked on the infamous night of the long knives. Then prime minister Tony Abbott dismissed four departmental chiefs in one fell swoop after taking office in 2013. He didn’t even consult his treasurer before dumping the head of Treasury.
This pattern of culling senior public servants represents a chilling risk to good policy development. Departmental secretaries concerned about losing their jobs may be reluctant to give the “frank and fearless advice” their positions demand.
Voters are entitled to know what the Coalition has planned for the public service before they cast their ballots.
The lack of detail on job losses is matched by a reluctance to outline spending cuts elsewhere. Dutton has ruled out an Abbott-style audit commission. He is prepared to cut “wasteful” spending, but won’t say if it may be necessary to also chop some worthwhile outlays to dampen inflationary pressures.
Dutton is adamant that any spending cuts by a government he leads will be determined after the election, not announced before it. This does nothing for democratic accountability. It does not give the electorate the chance to cast their votes on the basis of an alternative vision from the alternative government.
All Australians, not just public servants, deserve to know before polling day just how deep Dutton and the Coalition are really planning to cut.
John Hawkins is a former public servant and lives in Canberra.
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
Press release
Ministers approve long awaited A47 road scheme to support over 40,000 homes and 30,000 new jobs
Road scheme will speed up journeys and revive economic growth across Norwich.
A47 road scheme which was held up in the courts given the green light for construction as the government delivers another vital road project
long-awaited A47/A11 Thickthorn junction scheme will speed up journey times, support 44,000 new homes in the area and creating 33,000 new jobs as part of the wider city deal
over £200 million set aside for the scheme as part of the government’s commitment to renew national infrastructure and drive growth as part of the Plan for Change
Norwich residents are set to see faster journeys and thousands of new homes and jobs in the region as ministers approve the long delayed A47/A11 Thickthorn Junction scheme, the government has announced today (27 February 2025).
Backed by over £200 million, this road development will significantly speed up journey times, reduce pressure on the junction and save commuters, businesses and freight hundreds of hours off journeys each week.
On the eastbound A11 to A47, drivers will save 3 to 4 minutes off journeys in the morning and afternoon travel peaks. Along the A11, the route will also shave off 2 to 3 minutes in the morning and afternoon peaks.
The scheme is supporting the Greater Norwich City Deal, attracting more businesses to operate in Norwich and is expected to create over 44,000 homes, 33,000 new jobs and 360 additional hectares of new commercial land by 2038.
Today’s announcement follows the Prime Minister’s commitment to ‘clear the path to get Britain building’ by overhauling rules that allow vital infrastructure projects including the A47 to be challenged in courts 3 times – causing years of delays and costing taxpayers hundreds of millions of pounds.
The A47 is an example of an infrastructure project which has been delayed by over a year due to expensive legal challenges which have been dismissed by the courts as having ‘no logical basis’ – preventing areas like Norwich from unlocking their full potential.
Ministers have now finally given the go ahead to the project as part of a wider drive to unblock vital transport infrastructure development. Since entering office, the government has approved the A130 Fairglen Interchange, the A647 scheme in Leeds and is supporting expansion of Heathrow Airport.
This is an important milestone for this pro-growth and pro-infrastructure government, cutting the red tape which has for too long held up vital schemes and cost the taxpayer millions as part of the Plan for Change.
To mark this significant milestone for drivers in Norwich, the Future of Roads Minister, Lilian Greenwood, has visited the A47 to mark the approval of the scheme and understand its impact on the local economy.
The Future of Roads Minister, Lilian Greenwood, said:
This scheme is finally getting to go-ahead it deserves, after years of expensive legal blocks, as we are now able to unlock this vital scheme that Norwich has waited long for. We are determined to get Britain building again as this scheme is set to not only improve journeys but create thousands of new homes and jobs.
To help deliver our Plan for Change, we’re investing in more vital road schemes such as this over £200 million funding for Norwich, and the recently announced £90 million for other schemes across England, to renew our national infrastructure, speed up journeys and revive economic growth.
The upgraded junction will also improve links between Norwich and Peterborough, expanding job opportunities and better connecting communities, and is also a key route to Norwich University Hospital.
The new design will also improve safety, with rerouted traffic and safer pedestrian and cycle routes, projected to save as many as 26 fatal or serious injury collisions over the next 60 years.
The plans include the construction of 2 new free-flowing slip roads that will connect the A47 with the A11, re-routing traffic away from the junction and flowing it under new underpasses.
The government is providing over £200 million for the scheme which is expected to generate millions more for the local economy of Norfolk. It is part of the government’s Plan for Change to renew infrastructure and grow the economy.
With the aim to accelerate the delivery of infrastructure across the UK, the government is focused on improving the UK’s road network to increase economic growth.
Nicola Bell, Executive Director of Major Projects at National Highways, said:
Getting the green light to improve the junction at Thickthorn is great news for local people and those who regularly work or travel in and around Norwich.
This will help support economic growth in the area, significantly reduce congestion, improve journey times, and make the road safer.
Councillor Graham Plant, Cabinet member for Highways Infrastructure and Transport, Norfolk County Council, said:
We’re thrilled that this long-anticipated project has received approval. Thickthorn Junction has been a persistent bottleneck and we’ve been pushing for these improvements for a number of years.
This scheme will unlock significant economic growth, helping to supercharge the vital connection between the A11 and the nationally significant businesses that have found a home in Norfolk. Norfolk residents will benefit from safer and more reliable journeys as they make their way to Norwich and beyond.
Nova Fairbank, Chief Executive, Norfolk Chambers of Commerce, said:
The Norfolk business community has long campaigned for improvements to the whole of the A47, our main route from east to west and a key part of this route is the Thickthorn Junction, which connects the A11 to the A47. As a result, they welcome the allocation of much needed funding for the Thickthorn Junction scheme. Businesses are looking forward to seeing safety improvements and the reduction of congestion and journey times.
The ability to deliver further housing, jobs and new commercial opportunities, as a result of this junction upgrade, will make a significant difference. This infrastructure investment will give more businesses confidence to invest in their own growth and thus, help unlock wider economic growth for our region.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rebecca Strating, Director, La Trobe Asia, and Professor of International Relations, La Trobe University
Debating Australia’s role in world politics is not always high on the political agenda. Elections here are more often fought on economic issues than foreign or defence policy. And while the major parties have different views on foreign policy, there tends to be bipartisanship on the central tenets of our strategic policy, including Australia’s alliance with the United States.
In recent years, however, Australia has found itself wedged between two great powers: its security guarantor, the US, and its major trading partner, China. The increasing strategic competition between these two great powers, especially in Asia, has raised new questions about how Australia should manage these relationships and conceive of its role in the world.
For some countries, having a prominent role on the global stage may be more obvious than for others. Wealthy states with large militaries and populations, for example, often play the part of “great powers”. These countries tend to make claims about their unique rights and responsibilities, such as having a greater say in multilateral institutions (like the United Nations) and the “rules” intended to govern international conduct.
However, most of the world’s countries are not great powers. For a middle-sized nation like Australia, its role on the global stage is not necessarily static but determined by how our leaders balance national interests and values.
These, in turn, are shaped by “material factors”, such as geography, population and economy size, natural resources, shared political ideals (for example, our belief in democratic institutions), norms and culture.
In addition, a middle-sized country’s global role can change depending on how leaders perceive contemporary threats and challenges to their security.
Australia as a ‘middle power’
The National Defence Strategy released in 2024 describes Australia as an “influential middle power”. According to the strategy, this is demonstrated by several things:
our enduring democratic values
our history of safeguarding international rules and contributing to regional partnerships
the strong foundations of our economy
the strength of our partnerships in the Indo-Pacific.
Whether Australia should be described as a “middle power”, though, has long been the subject of political debate. Since H.V. “Doc” Evatt, then-attorney general and minister for external affairs, used the term in 1945, it has been most often (but not always) associated with the Labor Party.
Recent Coalition governments have been more reluctant to view Australia as “just” a middle power.
Alexander Downer, the foreign minister in the Howard government, would occasionally use the term “pivotal power”. Pivotal powers, as one political analyst put it, are “destined to shape the contours of geopolitics in key regions of the world” due to their strategic location, economic power and political influence.
Meanwhile, Julie Bishop, foreign minister in the Abbott and Turnbull administrations, preferred the term “top 20 country”, arguing this better reflected Australia’s standing and level of influence on the global stage.
At the core of this historical debate is the extent to which a country like Australia can – and does – have influence in the region and globally.
Middle powers have different characteristics from great or smaller powers. Size, geography and economic wealth affect the extent to which they can shape the world. As a result, middle powers often adopt certain types of actions or behaviours to enhance their influence.
There are a number of ways middle powers do this, such as by:
supporting adherence to international law and rules (because these can help restrain more powerful states from imposing their will on others)
encouraging cooperation through multilateralism (cooperation between multiple states)
finding creative new solutions to global problems, such as climate change
taking the diplomatic lead on specific, but important, issues.
A liberal-democratic middle power, such as Australia, may also seek to promote its values internationally, including the respect for human rights, free and open trade, and the principles of democratic governance and accountability.
Australia’s reliance on ‘great and powerful friends’
In addition, middle powers often choose to align themselves with a bigger power to boost their influence even further.
In Australia’s case, its strategic dependence on the United States developed, in part, by historical anxieties that faraway “great and powerful friends”, as former diplomat Allan Gyngell phrased it, might abandon it in a potentially hostile region.
Prior to the second world war, Australia relied on its former colonial ruler, Britain, for its security. The Fall of Singapore in 1942, in which Japanese forces routed British and Australian troops defending the island, demonstrated the risks of our overdependence on a distant ally.
In the aftermath of the war, Australia forged a new security alliance with a new global superpower, the United States, through the ANZUS Treaty. Yet, replacing one “great and powerful” but distant friend with another did not alleviate Australia’s abandonment anxieties.
Since then, debates about Australia’s international role have largely focused on the extent to which it can – and should be – self-reliant in the context of the US alliance, or if it should pursue a more independent foreign policy.
US domestic politics – particularly during President Donald Trump’s time in office – have also driven uncertainty about Washington’s reliability, as well as its commitment to Asia and the implications for allies like Australia.
Despite such concerns, Australia’s relationship with the US is as strong and deeply entwined as it has ever been. In fact, it only got stronger during Trump’s first term. While Canberra has sought to deepen engagement with regional states it views as “like-minded”, such as Japan, South Korea and India, it has done so firmly in the context of its broader alliance with the United States.
This, of course, is driven by the new anxieties over China’s rise as a major economic and military power in the region. In recent years, Beijing’s assertive and coercive behaviours in the region have made it the key national security threat facing Australia.
This is a break from the past, when Australian leaders – both Labor and Liberal – broadly agreed that a “pragmatic approach” to engaging great powers meant Canberra would not have to “choose sides” between China and the US.
In 2023, the Albanese government sought a détente of sorts with China, attempting to return to this pragmatic approach. But wariness of Beijing remains.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s visit to Beijing in late 2023.
An Indo-Pacific power?
In the context of these new challenges presented by a rising China, Australia has increasingly leaned into becoming an “Indo-Pacific” power in recent years. There are a number of ways in which this shift is observable.
First, Australia has been instrumental in encouraging the global adoption of this phrase, “Indo-Pacific”, as a new way of referring to the region. This is partly driven by the desire to maintain US leadership and presence in Australia’s neighbourhood. The US is a Pacific state, so this concept anchors the US in our region in a way that “Asia” does not.
And when people used the term “Asia-Pacific” to talk about the region in the past, this had a primarily economic connotation. This is due to the importance of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum and the move towards free-trade agreements between Australia and other countries in the region.
As such, the new term “Indo-Pacific” has become more of a security concept centred on the region’s waters. Generally, it is used to incorporate South, Southeast and Northeast Asia, Oceania (Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific Islands) and the United States. By connecting the Indian (“Indo”) and the Pacific Oceans, it has become primarily a maritime strategic concept.
The narratives usually associated with the Indo-Pacific also relate to the need to protect the international rules-based order, and freedom of navigation and overflight for ships and aircraft in the region. This, again, reflects the growing geopolitical anxieties about a rising China, particularly in the disputed South and East China seas and the Taiwan Strait.
Australia does not have territorial or maritime claims in either sea, but we are nonetheless concerned about China’s efforts to undermine the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and what this might mean for the “rules-based order” more generally.
The second way Australia is moving more towards becoming a regional power is in the narrowing of its core defence interests to an “inner ring” focused on the South Pacific and maritime Southeast Asia, and to a lesser extent, an “outer ring” in the broader Indo-Pacific and wider world. These geographical boundaries have consequences for how Australia views its international role.
After nearly two decades of military engagement in the Middle East and Afghanistan, Australia is shifting its focus back on its home region. This reflects not just the limits of our military capabilities, but also new concerns about the changing balance of power in Asia.
Third, Australia is increasingly focusing on a more strategic, narrower form of multilateralism. This, too, has been more centred on our region.
Multilateralism has always been seen as an important part of middle power identity. Australia, for instance, played a key role in setting up institutions like the United Nations.
However, this began to shift under recent Coalition governments. Prime Minister Scott Morrison expressed scepticism about such institutions, criticising them as an “often ill-defined borderless global community” that promoted “negative globalism”.
Under successive Coalition governments, Australia instead became a key player in two smaller groups of nations – the re-branded “Quad” in 2017 (along with Japan, the US and India) and AUKUS in 2021 (with the US and United Kingdom).
Under the Albanese government, global multilateralism was reinstated as an important pillar of foreign policy. But Australia’s investment and involvement in these smaller groups has only deepened.
Both AUKUS and the Quad demonstrate Australia’s changing role as a regional power in the Indo-Pacific. These groups offer Australia an opportunity to shape the regional security agenda by joining forces with other powerful states. They also provide a way of encouraging the US to maintain its presence and leadership in the region and to counterbalance China’s rise.
As part of this, Australia has become a key proponent of what the Biden administration coined “integrated deterrence”.
This is a central pillar of the US’ Indo-Pacific strategy that seeks to mobilise “like-minded” states – especially its regional allies such as Australia, Japan and South Korea – to form a regional coalition against rival states. This strategy reflects a growing awareness the US can’t provide security in Asia alone.
The AUKUS security agreement, including the commitment to develop new nuclear-powered submarines for Australia, is a part of this strategy.
Since the announcement of the submarine plan in 2021, both the procurement plan and the language that American and Australian leaders have been using suggest that Canberra is preparing to play a bigger security role in the region alongside the US.
Time for a new ‘strategic imagination’?
Has Australia’s shift to an Indo-Pacific regional power served it well?
It has allowed the deepening of defence relationships with partners like Japan and India. And through its roles in the Quad and AUKUS, Australia has a seat at the table and is more visible in regional security discussions.
But there are risks to a more assertive regional power stance. Australia could be viewed by its neighbours as too focused on military and not invested enough (or in the right way) in diplomacy or regional development. Australia’s overseas aid contribution, for example, has been declining for three decades.
It is also unclear which other regional states are likely to participate in a US-led coalition if a real conflict with China ever broke out. The Quad and AUKUS groups may be viewed by others as exclusionary or contributing to increasing tensions in the region.
How nuclear-powered submarines will “deter” potential adversaries is also yet to be clearly explained. These submarines could potentially entangle Australia in a regional conflict instead. Being able to clearly articulate and distinguish between Australian and US interests will remain vital for ensuring that future governments don’t “sleepwalk” into war.
Finally, Australia’s advocacy of the “rules-based order” has left it – and the US – exposed to criticisms of hypocrisy and double standards, particularly with Washington’s support for Israel’s war on Gaza.
…one which can develop a coherent security strategy by working with old and new allies and partners to shape the regional order in ways that ensure its security.
The approach emphasises the need for all parts of our government to work in coordination to protect Australians from the range of complex conventional and unconventional challenges it faces (including climate change).
Australia’s security and its international role should not be viewed through the lens of the “China threat” alone. Doing so is counter-productive, as many states in the region do not share the same perception about China.
Instead, as Wallis and I wrote, Australia needs a “more comprehensive, nuanced and contingent understanding of the range of security opportunities and threats” we face.
This is an edited extract from How Australian Democracy Works, a new collection of essays from The Conversation on all aspects of the country’s political landscape.
Rebecca Strating receives funding from Australia’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Hawkins, Senior Lecturer, Canberra School of Politics, Economics and Society, University of Canberra
Peter Dutton and his Coalition colleagues have dithered for several weeks on their plans for the Commonwealth public sector.
While being upfront that public service jobs would be targeted, they’ve made numerous contradictory statements about the number of public servants who would be sacked if the Coalition wins the coming election.
But Peter Dutton’s most recent comments confirm that he clearly wants to make significant cuts.
And it’s hard to see how the sackings wouldn’t erode important front line services that many Australians depend on for help and support.
36,000 jobs on the line
This week the opposition leader declared the Coalition would achieve A$24 billion dollars in savings by reducing the size of the public service.
He was unequivocal. The money would be clawed back over four years and would more than cover the Coalition’s promised $9 billion injection into Medicare.
Dutton explicitly tied the $24 billion in savings to the 36,000 Commonwealth public servants who have been hired since the last election
Under the Labor Party, there are 36,000 additional public servants, that’s at a cost of $6 billion a year, or $24 billion over the forward estimates. This program totals $9 billion over that period. So, we’ve well and truly identified the savings.
While still not nominating a precise number of job cuts, it’s Peter Dutton’s clearest statement of intent to date. By “truly” identifying the savings, 36,000 jobs are on the line. And it accords with Dutton’s earlier comments that the extra workers are not providing value for money for Australian taxpayers.
(They have) not improved the lives of Australians one iota
While this sounds like he wants to dismiss them all, senior colleagues are more circumspect.
According to Nationals leader David Littleproud, the number of job cuts has not yet been decided. Shadow Public Service Minister Jane Hume further muddied the waters by referring to the cuts being by attrition, and excluding frontline services.
Frontline services
The public service head count has grown to 185,343, as of June 2024. So cutting 36,000 staff, or even a large proportion of that number, would be a very significant reduction.
The agencies that added the most public servants between June 2023 and June 2024 were the National Disability Insurance Agency (up 2,193), Defence (up 1,425), Health and Aged Care (up 1,173) and Services Australia (up 1,149).
Many of these extra staff would be providing invaluable front line services to clients and customer who are accessing essential support.
And some of the new public servants replaced more expensive outsourced workers. Finance Minister Katy Gallagher has claimed the Albanese government has saved $4 billion of taxpayers’ money by reducing spending on consultants and contractors.
Rather than the alleged explosion in the size of the bureaucracy, the growth in public service numbers has closely matched the increase in the population. Last year, they accounted for 1.36% of all employed persons, up by only a minuscule degree on the 1.35% in 2016.
Canberra bashing
According to Dutton, the 36,000 additional public servants hired under Labor all work in Canberra. It was not a slip of the tongue. The claim is also in the Liberal Party’s pre-election pamphlet.
But only 37% of the public service workforce is located in the national capital. Half are based in state capitals. A full quarter of those involved in service delivery work in regional Australia.
The Liberals clearly think they have nothing to lose among Canberra voters, given they have no members or senators from the Australian Capital Territory.
The coming election will no doubt tell us if Canberra bashing still resonates with voters elsewhere in the country. Dutton has clearly made the political judgement that it does.
Another night of the long knives?
A change of government often precipitates a clean out at the top of the public service.
When the Howard government was elected in 1996, no fewer than six departmental secretaries were sacked on the infamous night of the long knives. Then prime minister Tony Abbott dismissed four departmental chiefs in one fell swoop after taking office in 2013. He didn’t even consult his treasurer before dumping the head of Treasury.
This pattern of culling senior public servants represents a chilling risk to good policy development. Departmental secretaries concerned about losing their jobs may be reluctant to give the “frank and fearless advice” their positions demand.
Voters are entitled to know what the Coalition has planned for the public service before they cast their ballots.
The lack of detail on job losses is matched by a reluctance to outline spending cuts elsewhere. Dutton has ruled out an Abbott-style audit commission. He is prepared to cut “wasteful” spending, but won’t say if it may be necessary to also chop some worthwhile outlays to dampen inflationary pressures.
Dutton is adamant that any spending cuts by a government he leads will be determined after the election, not announced before it. This does nothing for democratic accountability. It does not give the electorate the chance to cast their votes on the basis of an alternative vision from the alternative government.
All Australians, not just public servants, deserve to know before polling day just how deep Dutton and the Coalition are really planning to cut.
John Hawkins is a former public servant and lives in Canberra.
Source: United States Senator for Washington Maria Cantwell
02.26.25
Spokane Police Chief Joins Cantwell for Hearing on Fentanyl Trafficking on U.S. Transportation Networks
Cantwell bill to help law enforcement detect more fentanyl traffickers has been endorsed by Seattle, King Co., Vancouver, Spokane, and Spokane Co. Police Departments; SPD Chief: “Any tool will help us down this road, whether it’s x-ray technology, vapor technology [or] canine technology”
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell, ranking member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and senior member of the Senate Finance Committee, invited Spokane Chief of Police Kevin Hall to participate in a Commerce Committee hearing titled, “Interdicting Illicit Drug Trafficking: A View from the Front Lines.”
During the hearing, Sen. Cantwell discussed how her legislation, the Stop Smuggling Illicit Synthetic Drugs on U.S. Transportation Networks Act, could boost law enforcement’s ability to detect fentanyl being smuggled via commercial aircraft, railroads, vehicles, and ships.
In his opening remarks, Spokane Police Chief Kevin Hall explained how cartels utilize U.S. transportation networks to traffic fentanyl across state lines: “Recent seizures highlight the scale of trafficking along transportation routes,” said Chief Hall. “[The] Spokane supply chain follows similar patterns, moving drugs from Mexico along interstates, I-19, I-10 and I-5, before reaching Eastern Washington via I-90. Spokane officers have recently encountered bulk powder fentanyl, an emerging and highly dangerous trend.”
“The supply chain is clear: the Chinese Triad sells precursor chemicals to Mexican drug cartels, hidden on ships and in air cargoes, and cartels make fentanyl and smuggle it through the United States,” said Sen. Cantwell. “They hide fentanyl and personal vehicles, commercial trucks, buses, trains, planes and even on unmanned aerial vehicles. So, this is a danger to our national security and our transportation security. It is very highly toxic.”
During the hearing, Chief Hall – who previously served 32 years for the Tucson Police Department, about an hour’s drive from the Southern border — described the elaborate methods used by cartels to smuggle fentanyl pills into the country: “The investment by the cartels — and make no mistake, this is all cartel driven — is such that they will completely disassemble a vehicle, a brand new vehicle, put as much narcotics into every single void inside that vehicle, and then assemble it again. They will go through that amount of energy, put the vehicle back together, and put it on the road and it’s off on the freeways.”
That was the case in a pair of busts led by the Tucson Police Department in October and November of 2024, when 1.7 million pills were discovered stashed away in vehicles just north of the border: “Two nondescript sedans that had to be completely disassembled in order to recover all of those narcotics,” Chief Hall said.
“This is why I want us to have a more collaborative effort here. . . . they’re tearing cars apart, and so, what do you think a new vapor technology could help us do?” Sen. Cantwell asked.
“Any tool will help us down this road, whether it’s x-ray technology, vapor technology, even going to like, I call old school, canine technology. They’re all very effective in different ways,” said Chief Hall.
In September 2024, Sen. Cantwell introduced the Stop Smuggling Illicit Synthetic Drugs on U.S. Transportation Networks Act. This bill would create first-ever inspection strategies to stop drug smuggling by commercial aircraft, railroads, vehicles, and ships. The legislation would boost local, state, federal, and tribal law enforcement resources, increase inspections at ports of entry, and deploy next generation non-intrusive detection technologies – similar to handheld security wands that can detect traces of illicit substances in vehicles or on persons during inspections.
Sen. Cantwell held a press conference with Spokane Police Chief Hall and Spokane County Sheriff John Nowels on this legislation at Spokane Fire Station 1 this past October. Photos from that press conference are available HERE.
Sen. Cantwell’s bill aims to support law enforcement in stemming the flow of fentanyl into our communities. The bill would supply more resources to carry out actions like the major bust at SeaTac Airport and the University District neighborhood completed by the Seattle office of Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) last fall, or the bust led by the Drug Enforcement Administration, Bureau of Indian Affairs, and others that prevented more than 100 pounds of illegal drugs from being trafficked across the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation in April 2023.
At today’s hearing, Chair Ted Cruz (R-TX) committed to working with Sen. Cantwell on legislation to stop illicit fentanyl smuggling in the United States.
“Intercepting illicit drugs like fentanyl at airports is challenging, but we’re grateful to be working with partners at all levels to combat drugs being imported into our communities,” said Port of Seattle Commission President Toshiko Hasegawa. “Many of these drugs are in checked bags and go through a screening process, but the struggle lies in bridging the gap between technology and legal restrictions. The POSPD drug interdiction unit, alongside our drug detection canines, are successfully seizing large quantities of fentanyl pills and other substances and remain committed to making our communities and the airport safer.”
Sen. Cantwell has pursued multiple paths to addressing the fentanyl crisis, including holding a statewide listening tour to hear directly from people on the front lines of the fentanyl crisis; urging committees of jurisdiction to convene hearings and consider legislative solutions; voting for new laws to provide funding and tools to confront the crisis; and securing funding specifically for Washington state to respond to the crisis.
Among other measures to fight fentanyl trafficking, last year Sen. Cantwell voted for $1.69 billion in new federal funding to combat fentanyl and other illicit drugs coming into the United States, including an additional $385.2 million to increase security at U.S. ports of entry, with the goal of catching more illegal drugs like fentanyl before they make it across the border. That funding included critical resources for Non-Intrusive Inspection (NII) technology at land and seaports of entries. NII technologies—like large-scale X-ray and Gamma ray imaging systems, as well as a variety of portable and handheld technologies—allow U.S. Customs and Border Protection to help detect and prevent contraband from being smuggled into the country without disrupting flow at the border.
A background document on Sen. Cantwell’s legislative track record and advocacy to combat the fentanyl crisis is available HERE.
Video of Chief Hall’s full opening remarks is HERE and a transcript is HERE. Video of Sen. Cantwell’s opening remarks is HERE; video of their Q&A is HERE; and a transcript is HERE.
Professor of Animal Welfare Science Ngaio Beausoleil, from Te Kunenga ki Pūrehuroa Massey University’s Tāwharau Ora School of Veterinary Science, who carried out the assessment, recommended Charlie remain where she is to provide stability and allow her to adapt to her new environment over time.
Department of Conservation Fauna Science Manager Ash Murphy says DOC is working with wildlife husbandry experts at the Dunedin Botanic Garden Aviary (DBGA) and an avian specialist veterinarian at the Dunedin Wildlife Hospital on a plan to address recommendations in Professor Beausoleil’s report.
“The plan includes keeping Charlie with her enclosure mate in their current aviary and maintaining her high standard of care.
“Her keepers will gradually introduce more opportunities for Charlie to choose to have positive human interactions through training for rewards to increase her wellbeing, as recommended.
“Any changes made to Charlie’s care including training activities will be recorded and her behaviour closely monitored to gauge whether she’s responding positively. Her diet, eating habits and weight will also continue to be monitored.
“We encourage the public to give Charlie the time she needs to settle in, bond with her mate and enjoy her life at the Dunedin Botanic Garden Aviary,” Ash Murphy says.
Professor Beausoleil’s assessment concluded that Charlie is in good physical health and is well cared for at DBGA, including appropriate management of her chronic arthritis from old injuries.
It found Charlie exhibited abnormal repetitive behaviours such as swaying and toe nibbling which had increased since her move to DBGA, as she struggled to adapt to changes in her environment.
Charlie does not behave like a normal captive kākā because of ingrained behaviours she developed in her first year of captivity as a young bird in severely impoverished conditions prior to her transfer to Te Anau Bird Sanctuary. When Charlie is stressed, these behaviours are amplified.
Charlie was moved from Te Anau Bird Sanctuary to Dunedin in June 2024 to join other South Island kākā at the Dunedin Botanic Garden Aviary as part of the captive breed-for-release programme. She has been an excellent Mum and foster parent and raised multiple clutches of chicks previously.
In Dunedin she is currently paired up with male kākā, Bling, who she successfully bred with when they were both in Te Anau. Despite positive early signs with mating recorded several times, the pair did not produce any offspring this season.
Following concerns raised by people about Charlie’s behaviour in Dunedin, the Ministry for Primary Industries recommended DOC commission an independent welfare assessment.
Professor Beausoleil also made some recommendations for the kākā breed-for-release programme more generally, including developing an ‘ethogram’ or catalogue of behaviour in captive kākā and guidelines to be incorporated in an updated Kākā Husbandry Manual to enable better monitoring of kākā welfare in captive facilities.
DOC is considering these recommendations as they relate to the South Island kākā breed-for-release programme.
Quantum technology is no longer confined to the lab – it’s making its way into our everyday lives. Now, it’s about to transform something even more fundamental: how we navigate the world.
Imagine submarines travelling beneath the ocean, never needing to surface for location updates. Planes flying across continents with unshakeable precision, unaffected by signal disruptions.
Emergency responders could navigate smoke-filled buildings or underground tunnels with flawless accuracy, while autonomous vehicles chart perfect courses through dense urban environments.
These scenarios might sound like science fiction, but they can all be made possible with an emerging approach known as quantum navigation.
This game-changing tech will one day redefine movement, exploration and connectivity in ways we’re only just beginning to imagine. So, what is it?
Satellite navigation is at the heart of many things
Global navigation satellite systems, like GPS, are deeply embedded in modern society. We use them daily for navigation, ordering deliveries and tagging photo locations. But their impact goes far beyond convenience.
Timing signals from satellites in Earth’s orbit authenticate stock market trades and help balance the electricity grid. In agriculture, satellite navigation guides autonomous tractors and helps muster cattle.
Emergency services rely on navigation satellite systems for rapid response, reducing the time it takes to reach those in need.
Despite their benefits, systems like GPS are quite vulnerable. Satellite signals can be jammed or interfered with. This can be due to active warfare, terrorism or for legitimate (or illegitimate) privacy concerns. Maps like GPSJAM show real-time interference hotspots, such as those in the Middle East, areas around Russia and Ukraine, and Myanmar.
The environment of space isn’t constant, either. The Sun regularly ejects giant balls of plasma, causing what we know as solar storms. These emissions slam into Earth’s magnetic field, disrupting satellites and GPS signals. Often these effects are temporary, but they can also cause significant damage, depending on the severity of the storm.
An outage of global navigation satellite systems would be more than an inconvenience – it would disrupt our most critical infrastructure.
Estimates suggest a loss of GPS would cost just the United States economy about US$1 billion per day (A$1.5 billion), causing cascading failures across interconnected systems.
Quantum navigation to the rescue
In some environments, navigation signals from satellites don’t work very well. They don’t penetrate water or underground spaces, for example.
If you’ve ever tried to use Google Maps in a built-up city with skyscrapers, you may have run into issues. Tall buildings cause signal reflections that degrade accuracy, and signals are weakened or completely unavailable inside buildings.
This is where quantum navigation could step in one day.
Quantum science describes the behaviour of particles at scales smaller than an atom. It reveals mind-boggling effects like superposition – particles existing in multiple states simultaneously – and entanglement (when particles are connected through space and time in ways that defy classical understanding).
These effects are fragile and typically collapse under observation, which is why we don’t notice them in everyday life. But the very fragility of quantum processes also lets them work as exquisite sensors.
A sensor is a device that detects changes in the world around it and turns that information into a signal we can measure or use. Think automatic doors that open when we walk near them, or phone screens that respond to our touch.
Quantum sensors are so sensitive because quantum particles react to tiny changes in their environment. Unlike normal sensors, which can miss weak signals, quantum sensors are extremely good at detecting even the smallest changes in things like time, gravity or magnetic fields.
Their sensitivity comes from how easily quantum states change when something in their surroundings shifts, allowing us to measure things with much greater accuracy than before.
This precision is critical for robust navigation systems.
Our team is researching new ways to use quantum sensors to measure Earth’s magnetic field for navigation. By using quantum effects in diamonds, we can detect Earth’s magnetic field in real time and compare the measurements to pre-existing magnetic field maps, providing a resilient alternative to satellite navigation like GPS.
Since magnetic signals are unaffected by jamming and work underwater, they offer a promising backup system.
A quantum magnetometer used in our research. Swinburne University/RMIT/Phasor
The future of navigation
The future of navigation will integrate quantum sensors to enhance location accuracy (via Earth’s magnetic and gravitational fields), improve orientation (via quantum gyroscopes), and enable superior timing (through compact atomic clocks and interconnected timekeeping systems).
These technologies promise to complement and, in some cases, provide alternatives to traditional satellite-based navigation.
However, while the potential of quantum navigation is clear, making it a practical reality remains a significant challenge. Researchers and companies worldwide are working to refine these technologies, with major efforts underway in academia, government labs and industry.
Startups and established players are developing prototypes of quantum accelerometers (devices that measure movement) and gyroscopes, but most remain in early testing phases or specialised applications.
Key hurdles include reducing the size and power demands of quantum sensors, improving their stability outside of controlled laboratory settings, and integrating them into existing navigation systems.
Cost is another barrier – today’s quantum devices are expensive and complex, meaning widespread adoption is still years away.
If these challenges can be overcome, quantum navigation could reshape everyday life in subtle but profound ways. While quantum navigation won’t replace GPS overnight, it could become an essential part of the infrastructure that keeps the world moving.
Allison Kealy is affiliated with Quantum Australia as a board member.
Allison Kealy is a research collaborator with RMIT University and Phasor Quantum.
Headline: Independent experts selected to advise Government on investments from Regional Development Trust
Published: 27 February 2025
Released by: Minister for Regional NSW
Six independent experts across regional and rural economics, primary industries, natural resources, and Aboriginal economic development have been appointed to help guide the NSW Government as it invests in new regional businesses and job creation projects throughout NSW.
The NSW Government’s Regional Development Trust and its Advisory Council are part of the Minns Labor Government’s long-term commitment to regional NSW, jobs creation and businesses development and a direct response to a decade of pork barrelling and poor decision making by the previous National Liberal Government.
The 2025 Regional Development Advisory Council has been appointed by the Minister for Regional NSW, Tara Moriarty, to ensure regional and rural communities continue to be placed at the centre of government investment decision making.
Through the Advisory Council the Minns Government has restored integrity to how government funds are used, ensuring they reflect the needs of regional communities and deliver real outcomes.
The Council provides independent and strategic advice to support investment decisions made from the Regional Development Trust, ensuring independent oversight and transparency for the allocation of public funds.
Since the Regional Development Trust was announced in September 2023 more than $37 million has been invested in strategic initiatives that are evidence-based, meet regional needs and achieve real outcomes for communities, including:
$15 million to upgrade airstrips in Deniliquin, Bourke and White Cliffs to future proof access to essential services in these communities.
$10 million to improve workforce participation in Western NSW by supporting increased childcare availability and service upgrades in Bourke, Broken Hill and Cobar.
$5 million to support Aboriginal businesses and organisations in regional NSW to expand and reach their potential, delivering improved economic and employment outcomes.
$5 million for alow interest loans pilot program to enable eligible small and medium enterprises in the food and beverage manufacturing sectors to increase productivity and create jobs in regional NSW.
$2 million to support the continuation of subsidised commercial flights to Cobar, Bourke, Walgett and Lightning Ridge.
In addition, a further $50 million is currently being assessed to fund regional projects and programs. Successful applicants will be announced within the coming months following advice from the new Advisory Council.
The 2025 Advisory Council members have been appointed for a 12-month term following an extensive public expression of interest process.
Regional Development Advisory Council members
Professor Alison Sheridan – Chairperson
Professor Alison Sheridan is Emeritus Professor at the University of New England (UNE). Professor Sheridan holds a Bachelor of Agricultural Economics (Hons) from the University of Sydney and PhD in Management from the University of New England (UNE).
Professor Sheridan has been based in regional NSW for 35 years and was previously head of UNE’s Business School. In this role, she led the establishment of the UNE Smart Region Incubator and co-led the development of the Master of Economic and Regional Development course.
Alison Stone – Member
Alison Stone is an executive leader with 40 years’ experience working across rural and regional communities in the public sector, board and advisory roles. Ms Stone specialises in land and infrastructure management and development, fire and emergency management and primary industries at state and national levels. Ms Stone is also the first statutory Agriculture Commissioner for NSW.
David Harding – Member
David Harding is Executive Director at Business NSW. In this role, he provides leadership and a voice to businesses across metropolitan and regional NSW. Mr Harding is experienced in policy and major projects development working with all three levels of government.
Dianna Somerville – Ex-Officio member
Dianna Somerville is Chairperson of Regional Development Australia Riverina. She holds a Bachelor of Arts from the Australian Defence Force Academy University of New South Wales.
Mrs Somerville has extensive experience working across the public and not-for-profit sectors including with defence industries.
Phil Usher – Member
Phil Usher is a Wiradjuri man, born and raised on Gomeroi Country.
Mr Usher is the CEO of First Nations Foundation, which works to build capacity and financial prosperity of Aboriginal organisations, businesses and communities.
Thomas McKeon – Member
Thomas McKeon is an accomplished professional with over 40 years of experience in the agriculture, asset, and investment management industries.
Based in South East NSW, and having strong connections to regional areas and communities, Mr McKeon has an extensive background in senior and executive management roles both in Australia and internationally.
“The Regional Development Advisory Council and the Regional Development Trust Fund ensure NSW Government investments are made where they are needed most in regional NSW.”
“The 2025 Advisory Council members have been appointed following an extensive public expression of interest process. I congratulate all the members on their appointment and look forward to working with them for the next year.”
“I’d also like to congratulate the Interim Council who helped steer the Trust investment decisions over the course of its 12-month term.”
“The Regional Development Trust and its Advisory Council marks a completely new direction in the way the NSW Government supports rural and regional development in NSW.”
“After a decade of waste and poor decision making by the former Government, the establishment of the Regional Development Advisory Council is an important step towards the provision of independent and expert advice on what projects and programs should be funded.”
“Our intention is to ensure rural, remote and regional communities receive their fair share and money is spent on projects that are actually needed and will be delivered.”
Advisory Council Chairperson Professor Alison Sheridan said:
“This is a wonderful opportunity to deliver robust and sustainable investment for regional and rural NSW, knowing how important strategic investment is for achieving real outcomes for our communities.”
The re-election of Donald Trump is proof that the Right’s most powerful weapon is media manipulation, ensuring the public sphere is not engaged in rational debate, reports the Independent Australia.
COMMENTARY:By Victoria Fielding
I once heard someone say that when the Left and the Right became polarised — when they divorced from each other — the Left got all the institutions of truth including science, education, justice and democratic government.
The Right got the institution of manipulation: the media. This statement hit me for six at the time because it seemed so clearly true.
What was also immediately clear is that there was an obvious reason why the Left sided with the institutions of truth and the Right resorted to manipulation. It is because truth does not suit right-wing arguments.
The existence of climate change does not suit fossil fuel billionaires. Evidence that wealth does not trickle down does not suit the capitalist class. The idea that diversity, equity and inclusion (yes, I put those words in that order on purpose) is better for everyone, rather than a discriminatory, hateful, destructive, divided unequal world is dangerous for the Right to admit.
The Right’s embrace of the media institution also makes sense when you consider that the institutions of truth are difficult to buy, whereas billionaires can easily own manipulative media.
Just ask Elon Musk, who bought Twitter and turned it into a political manipulation machine. Just ask Rupert Murdoch, who is currently engaged in a bitter family war to stop three of his children opposing him and his son Lachlan from using their “news” organisations as a form of political manipulation for right-wing interests.
Right-wingers also know that truthful institutions only have one way of communicating their truths to the public: via the media. Once the media environment is manipulated, we enter a post-truth world.
Experts derided as untrustworthy ‘elitists’ This is the world where billionaire fossil fuel interests undermine climate action. It is where scientists create vaccines to save lives but the manipulated public refuses to take them. Where experts are derided as untrustworthy “elitists”.
And it is where the whole idea of democratic government in the US has been overthrown to install an autocratic billionaire-enriching oligarchy led by an incompetent fool who calls himself the King.
Once you recognise this manipulated media environment, you also understand that there is not — and never has been — such as thing as a rational public debate. Those engaged in the institutions of the Left — in science, education, justice and democratic government — seem mostly unwilling to accept this fact.
Instead, they continue to believe if they just keep telling people the truth and communicating what they see as entirely rational arguments, the public will accept what they have to say.
I think part of the reason that the Left refuses to accept that public debate is not rational and rather, is a manipulated bin fire of misleading information, including mis/disinformation and propaganda, is because they are not equipped to compete in this reality. What do those on the Left do with “post-truth”?
They seem to just want to ignore it and hope it goes away.
A perfect example of this misunderstanding of the post-truth world and the manipulated media environment’s impact on the public is this paper, by political science professors at the Australian National University Ian McAllister and Nicholas Biddle.
Stunningly absolutist claim Their research sought to understand why polling at the start of the 2023 Indigenous Voice to Parliament Referendum showed widespread public support for the Voice but over the course of the campaign, this support dropped to the point where the Voice was defeated with 60 per cent voting “No” and 40 per cent, “Yes”.
In presenting their study’s findings, the authors make the stunningly absolutist claim that:
‘…the public’s exposure to all forms of mass media – as we have measured it here – had no impact on the result’.
A note is then attached to this finding with the caveat:
‘As noted earlier, given the data at hand we are unable to test the possibility that the content of the media being consumed resulted in a reinforcement of existing beliefs and partisanship rather than a conversion.’
This caveat leaves a gaping hole in the finding by failing to account for how media reinforcing existing beliefs is an important media effect – as argued by Neil Gavin here. Since it was not measured, how can they possibly say there was no effect?
Furthermore, the very premise of the author’s sweeping statement that media exposure had no impact on the result of the Referendum is based on two naive assumptions:
that voters were rational in their deliberations over the Referendum question; and
that the information environment voters were presented with was rational.
Dual assumption of rationality This dual assumption of rationality – one that the authors interestingly admit is an assumption – is evidenced in their hypothesis which states:
‘Voters who did not follow the campaign in the mass media were more likely to move from a yes to a no vote compared to voters who did follow the campaign in the mass media.’
This hypothesis, the authors explain, is premised on the assumption ‘that those with less information are more likely to opt for the status quo and cast a no vote’, and therefore that less exposure to media would change a vote from “Yes” to “No”.What this hypothesis assumes is that if a voter received more rational information in the media about the Referendum, that information would rationally drive their vote in the “Yes” direction. When their data disproved this hypothesis, the authors used this finding to claim that the media had no effect.
To understand the reality of what happened in the Referendum debate, the word “rational” needs to be taken out of the equation and the word “manipulated” put in.
We know, of course, that the Referendum was awash with manipulative information, which all supported the “No” campaign. For example, my study of News Corp’s Voice coverage — Australia’s largest and most influential news organisation — found that News Corp actively campaigned for the “No” proposition in concert with the “No” campaign, presenting content more like a political campaign than traditional journalism and commentary.
A study by Queensland University of Technology’s Tim Graham analysed how the Voice Referendum was discussed on social media platform, X. Far from a rational debate, Graham identified that the “No” campaign and its supporters engaged in a participatory disinformation propaganda campaign, which became a “truth market” about the Voice.
The ‘truth market’ This “truth market” was described as drawing “Yes” campaigners into a debate about the truth of the Voice, sidetracking them from promoting their own cause.
What such studies showed was that, far from McAllister and Biddle’s assumed rational information environment, the Voice Referendum public debate was awash with manipulation, propaganda, disinformation and fear-mongering.
The “No” campaign that delivered this manipulation perfectly demonstrates how the Right uses media to undermine institutions of truth, to undermine facts and to undermine the rationality of democratic debates.
The completely unfounded assumption that the more information a voter received about the Voice, the more likely they would vote “Yes”, reveals a misunderstanding of the reality of a manipulated public debate environment present across all types of media, from mainstream news to social media.
It also wrongly treats voters like rational deliberative computers by assuming that the more information that goes in, the more they accept that information. This is far from the reality of how mediated communication affects the public.
The reason the influence of media on individuals and collectives is, in reality, so difficult to measure and should never be bluntly described as having total effect or no effect, is that people are not rational when they consume media, and every individual processes information in their own unique and unconscious ways.
One person can watch a manipulated piece of communication and accept it wholeheartedly, others can accept part of it and others reject it outright.
Manipulation unknown No one piece of information determines how people vote and not every piece of information people consume does either. That’s the point of a manipulated media environment. People who are being manipulated do not know they are being manipulated.
Importantly, when you ask individuals how their media consumption impacted on them, they of course do not know. The decisions people make based on the information they have ephemerally consumed — whether from the media, conversations, or a wide range of other information sources, are incredibly complex and irrational.
Surely the re-election of Donald Trump for a second time, despite all the rational arguments against him, is proof that the manipulated media environment is an incredibly powerful weapon — a weapon the Right, globally, is clearly proficient at wielding.
It is time those on the Left caught up and at least understood the reality they are working in.
Dr Victoria Fielding is an Independent Australia columnist. This article was first published by the Independent Australia and is republished with the author’s permission.
Source: Australian Ministers for Regional Development
The Australian Government has appointed Mrs Penny Fowler AM and Mr Jay Weatherill AO and reappointed Ms Ilana Atlas AO as members of the Council of the National Gallery of Australia for three-year terms.
The Council is responsible for overseeing the Gallery’s strategic and organisational goals and positioning it for the future so it can continue to deliver on its aim to inspire all Australians through art.
Minister for the Arts, Tony Burke, congratulated the new and returning appointees.
“Ilana has been serving on the Council since 2022 and was appointed as Deputy Chair by the Council in November 2023 and we’re thankful she’s agreed to continuing lending her talents.
“I’d also like to welcome Jay and Penny. As former Premier of South Australia and Minister for the Arts, Jay was a strong advocate for the sector and will be an excellent addition to the board.
“Penny has been the Chair of the National Portrait Gallery Board and understands the important role institutions have in preserving and showcasing some of our nation’s greatest treasures.”
The National Gallery is dedicated to collecting, sharing and celebrating art from Australia and the world. It is home to the country’s most valuable collection of art, with 155,000 works worth around $7 billion. This includes the world’s largest collection of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander art.
Ms Ilana Atlas AO has served on the National Gallery of Australia Council since March 2022 and was elected Deputy Chair by Council members in November 2023. She is Chair of Jarwun Limited and Scentre Group Limited and is a non-executive director of Origin Energy Limited, the Paul Ramsay Foundation and is also a Panel Member of Adara Partners and a director of Adara Development. Her previous non-executive director roles include Chairman of the Bell Shakespeare Company and Coca-Cola Amatil Limited and Director of ANZ Banking Group and the Human Rights Law Centre. Prior to serving on these Boards, Ms Atlas had a 10 year career at Westpac. Ms Atlas was also a partner in law firm Mallesons Stephen Jaques (now known as King & Wood Mallesons). In 2020 she was appointed an Officer of the Order of Australia for distinguished service to the financial and manufacturing sectors, to education, and to the arts.
Mr Jay Weatherill AO is the former Premier of South Australia from 2011 to 2018. He currently leads the Thrive by Five campaign within the Minderoo Foundation and is an Ambassador for Reggio Children. He will soon join the Susan McKinnon Foundation pursuing their democracy reform agenda. Previously Mr Weatherill worked as a lawyer between 1987 to 1995 becoming the founder and principal of his own firm between 1995 and 2002. In 2002 he became a member for the Parliament of South Australia and later Premier where he oversaw various portfolios including Minister for the Arts. Following his term Mr Weatherill became an Industry Professor at the University of South Australia from 2019 to 2024. He serves on several government and industry and philanthropic boards. In 2021 Mr Weatherill was appointed an Officer of the Order of Australia for distinguished service to the people and Parliament of South Australia, particularly as Premier, and to early childhood and tertiary education.
Mrs Penny Fowler AM is Chairman of the Herald & Weekly Times and is News Corp Australia’s Community Ambassador. Mrs Fowler has been a member of the National Portrait Gallery Board since March 2016 and served as Chair since January 2022 (her term will end on 8 March 2025). She chairs the Royal Children’s Hospital Good Friday Appeal, the Royal Botanic Gardens Victoria and the Tourism Australia Board. She is also on the Advisory Board of Visy/Pratt USA and is a board member of Tech Mahindra & the Bank of Melbourne (St. George) Foundation. Mrs Fowler is a member of Chief Executive Women and an Ambassador for the Australian Indigenous Education Foundation and SecondBite. In 2024 Mrs Fowler was appointed a Member of the Order of Australia for significant service to the community through a range of organisations.
The Australian Government has appointed Mrs Penny Fowler AM and Mr Jay Weatherill AO and reappointed Ms Ilana Atlas AO as members of the Council of the National Gallery of Australia for three-year terms.
The Council is responsible for overseeing the Gallery’s strategic and organisational goals and positioning it for the future so it can continue to deliver on its aim to inspire all Australians through art.
Minister for the Arts, Tony Burke, congratulated the new and returning appointees.
“Ilana has been serving on the Council since 2022 and was appointed as Deputy Chair by the Council in November 2023 and we’re thankful she’s agreed to continuing lending her talents.
“I’d also like to welcome Jay and Penny. As former Premier of South Australia and Minister for the Arts, Jay was a strong advocate for the sector and will be an excellent addition to the board.
“Penny has been the Chair of the National Portrait Gallery Board and understands the important role institutions have in preserving and showcasing some of our nation’s greatest treasures.”
The National Gallery is dedicated to collecting, sharing and celebrating art from Australia and the world. It is home to the country’s most valuable collection of art, with 155,000 works worth around $7 billion. This includes the world’s largest collection of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander art.
Ms Ilana Atlas AO has served on the National Gallery of Australia Council since March 2022 and was elected Deputy Chair by Council members in November 2023. She is Chair of Jarwun Limited and Scentre Group Limited and is a non-executive director of Origin Energy Limited, the Paul Ramsay Foundation and is also a Panel Member of Adara Partners and a director of Adara Development. Her previous non-executive director roles include Chairman of the Bell Shakespeare Company and Coca-Cola Amatil Limited and Director of ANZ Banking Group and the Human Rights Law Centre. Prior to serving on these Boards, Ms Atlas had a 10 year career at Westpac. Ms Atlas was also a partner in law firm Mallesons Stephen Jaques (now known as King & Wood Mallesons). In 2020 she was appointed an Officer of the Order of Australia for distinguished service to the financial and manufacturing sectors, to education, and to the arts.
Mr Jay Weatherill AO is the former Premier of South Australia from 2011 to 2018. He currently leads the Thrive by Five campaign within the Minderoo Foundation and is an Ambassador for Reggio Children. He will soon join the Susan McKinnon Foundation pursuing their democracy reform agenda. Previously Mr Weatherill worked as a lawyer between 1987 to 1995 becoming the founder and principal of his own firm between 1995 and 2002. In 2002 he became a member for the Parliament of South Australia and later Premier where he oversaw various portfolios including Minister for the Arts. Following his term Mr Weatherill became an Industry Professor at the University of South Australia from 2019 to 2024. He serves on several government and industry and philanthropic boards. In 2021 Mr Weatherill was appointed an Officer of the Order of Australia for distinguished service to the people and Parliament of South Australia, particularly as Premier, and to early childhood and tertiary education.
Mrs Penny Fowler AM is Chairman of the Herald & Weekly Times and is News Corp Australia’s Community Ambassador. Mrs Fowler has been a member of the National Portrait Gallery Board since March 2016 and served as Chair since January 2022 (her term will end on 8 March 2025). She chairs the Royal Children’s Hospital Good Friday Appeal, the Royal Botanic Gardens Victoria and the Tourism Australia Board. She is also on the Advisory Board of Visy/Pratt USA and is a board member of Tech Mahindra & the Bank of Melbourne (St. George) Foundation. Mrs Fowler is a member of Chief Executive Women and an Ambassador for the Australian Indigenous Education Foundation and SecondBite. In 2024 Mrs Fowler was appointed a Member of the Order of Australia for significant service to the community through a range of organisations.
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Department of Labor today announced the appointment of Randel Johnson as the Chair of the Administrative Review Board. The board issues agency decisions in cases arising from worker protection laws, including whistleblower and public contract laws.
From August 2020 to 2022, Johnson served as an ARB judge and later as an academic fellow at Cornell Law School and as a distinguished lecturer at Syracuse College of Law. He was formerly partner with the law firm of Seyfarth Shaw LLP and was based in Washington, D.C.
In addition to his time with the department’s ARB, Johnson has also served as labor counsel to the U.S. House of Representatives’ Education and Workforce Committee and worked as senior vice president for Labor Immigration & Employee Benefits at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
“Returning to the U.S. Department of Labor is truly an honor,” Johnson said. “As chair of its Administrative Review Board, I am committed to ensuring justice is done by rendering legally correct and well-reasoned appellate decisions and treating those who come before the board fairly and impartially while concurrently managing resources as efficiently as possible.”
A graduate of the University of Maryland Law School, Judge Johnson holds a Master of Laws from the Georgetown University Law Center and a Graduate Certificate from Harvard University’s Senior Managers in Government Program. He is a member of the Maryland, District of Columbia, and various federal bars, and a member of the College of Labor and Employment Lawyers.
Johnson cites his work supporting the enactments of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Congressional Accountability Act which, for the first time, extended private sector employment laws to the Congress, as bookend achievements of his time on Capitol Hill.
People in the UK need to adopt heat pumps and electric vehicles as fast as they once embraced refrigerators, mobile phones and internet connection according to a new report by the Climate Change Committee (CCC).
This government watchdog says the next 15 years will be critical for decarbonising the UK, one of the world’s largest (and earliest) carbon polluters. Eighty-seven percent of its climate-heating emissions must be eliminated by 2040 to keep the country on track for net zero emissions by mid-century, per the report. The majority (60%) of these cuts are expected to come via a single source: electricity.
Out of possible alternatives to a fossil fuelled economy, electrification has emerged as the favoured solution of experts at the CCC.
Ran Boydell, an associate professor in sustainable development at Heriot-Watt University, agrees. “Home boilers will very soon move into the realm of nostalgia,” he says.
The reason why heat pumps are increasingly touted as the future of home heating – and not retooled boilers that burn hydrogen instead of methane – is efficiency.
Boydell points out that green hydrogen fuel is made using electricity from solar and wind farms. We could eliminate emissions a lot quicker, he argues, if that electricity went directly to heat pumps instead.
Electricity can be turned into a fuel – or power appliances directly. Piyaset/Shutterstock
“This is because you end up with only two-thirds of the energy in the hydrogen that you started with from the electricity,” he says.
Likewise, battery-powered vehicles have an advantage that has allowed them to race ahead of hydrogen fuel cells to comprise almost a fifth of all new vehicles sold in the UK in 2024.
“An electric vehicle can be recharged wherever there is access to a plug socket,” say Tom Stacey and Chris Ivory, supply chain experts at Anglia Ruskin University. “The infrastructure that exists to support hydrogen vehicles is limited in comparison and will require extensive investment to introduce.”
If the route to zero emissions is largely settled, we need to travel it quickly.
Electric dreams
One of the fastest energy transitions in history occurred over a decade in South Korea, according to energy system researchers James Price and Steve Pye (UCL). Between 1977 and 1987, the generation of electricity from oil in the east Asian country collapsed – from roughly 7 million gigawatt-hours to nearly 7,000 – and was replaced with, among other sources, nuclear power.
There are historic analogues for the rapid shift necessary to arrest climate change. But a zero-carbon power sector, which the UK government aims to achieve by 2030, is just the start.
“Wind and solar, which provide more than 28% of the UK’s electricity, will soon overtake gas as the main generation source as more wind farms come online,” say energy system modeller Andrew Crossland and engineer Jon Gluyas, both of Durham University.
“But successive governments have failed to achieve the same result in homes and communities where so much high-carbon gas is burned, despite their decarbonisation being critical to net zero.”
Crossland and Gluyas note that solar panels, batteries and heat pumps can be installed “in days” to rapidly cut emissions, and that doing so would create “skilled jobs across the country”. As things stand, however, it would also present a severe challenge to the grid.
Mechanical engineer Florimond Gueniat of Birmingham City University predicts that converting UK transport to battery power wholesale would require expanding grid capacity by 46% – the equivalent of erecting 5,800 skyscraper-sized wind turbines. And that’s even accounting for the greater efficiency of electric vehicles, which waste less of the energy we put into them compared with oil-powered cars.
A massive upgrade to the electricity network is needed, and ordinary people have a part to play. Charging cars could serve as batteries that grid operators draw from during a supply pinch. The same goes for the power generated by solar panels on top of houses.
“Such policies in Germany have … already offset 10% of the national demand,” says Gueniat.
Getting to net zero requires the public’s involvement. But some of the CCC’s advice may be difficult to swallow. Not least the implication that people will have to eat 35% less meat and dairy in 2050 compared with 2019.
So are people ready for a world that runs on electrons alone? Aimee Ambrose, a professor of energy policy at Sheffield Hallam University, thinks heat pumps will struggle to compete with the inviting warmth of wood stoves and coal fires. Over three years she spoke with hundreds of people in the UK, Finland, Sweden and Romania and found strong attachments to high-carbon fuels even among people committed to solving climate change.
Human behaviour is the most difficult variable for experts who study climate change to model. There will certainly be drawbacks to abandoning fossil fuelled conveniences at breakneck speed. Yet, there are bound to be benefits too – some of which might only materialise once we get going.
In mid-April 2020, while much of humanity was under some form of lockdown to halt the spread of COVID-19, atmospheric chemist Paul Monks of the University of Leicester was marvelling at the sudden drop in air pollution, which kills millions of people each year and is predominantly caused by burning coal, oil and gas.
Source: United States Senator for Delaware Christopher Coons
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Chris Coons (D-Del.) and Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) today introduced the Realizing Engineering, Science, and Technology Opportunities by Restoring Exclusive (RESTORE) Patent Rights Act of 2025. This bipartisan, bicameral bill would restore the presumption that courts will issue an injunction to stop patent infringers, strengthening protections for U.S. inventors, entrepreneurs, universities, and startups. This legislation was initially introduced in the 118th Congress. Representatives Nathaniel Moran (R-Texas) and Madeleine Dean (D-Pa.) also introduced the House companion bill.
“Thanks to a wrongheaded decision from the Supreme Court, there are now companies who steal patented technologies rather than license them from inventors and then justify their actions as simply the cost of doing business. Innovators at universities and startups who lack resources are often unable to stop patent infringement in court and are forced into licensing deals they do not want,” said Senator Coons. “The RESTORE Patent Rights Act will protect innovators across the country, stop the infringe-now, pay-later model in its tracks, and strengthen America’s economic competitiveness for generations to come.”
“American ingenuity should be rewarded and protected,” said Senator Cotton. “Current patent law fails to protect inventors and leaves them vulnerable to intellectual property theft from adversaries like China. This bipartisan legislation will help solidify America’s edge in technological innovation.”
For more than two centuries, courts granted injunctive relief in most patent cases upon a finding of infringement, preventing patent infringers from continuing to produce goods that ran afoul of patent laws. However, this practice was upended in 2006 when the Supreme Court’s decision in eBay v. MercExchange created a four-factor test to determine whether a permanent injunction is warranted in infringement cases, altering the longstanding remedy for patent infringement.
Since that decision, obtaining injunctive relief in patent cases has become significantly more difficult and rare. A recent study found that requests for permanent injunctions in patent cases fell by 65% for companies that use their patented technology to manufacture a product; grants of permanent injunctions to those companies fell even more significantly. Requests and grants for licensing patent owners like universities and research clinics dropped even further: Requests fell by 85%, and grants fell by 90%.
The RESTORE Patent Rights Act would undo the damage of the eBay decision by returning to patent owners a rebuttable presumption that an injunction is warranted after a court makes a final ruling that their rights are being infringed. This would deter predatory infringers and restore meaning to the right to exclude.
“American innovation is only as strong as the confidence in knowing ideas cannot be stolen by competitors. In the last two decades, innovators have found it harder to obtain a permanent injunction from U.S. courts, which stops bad actors from stealing their intellectual property (IP). Our legislation will restore the rights of American innovators by ensuring permanent injunctions are accessible from U.S. courts. This bill will provide greater certainty in the protection of IP and prevent cases from being taken overseas to countries like China. When U.S. courts enforce the exclusivity of patent rights, America becomes a world leader in innovation,” said Congressman Moran.
“Enforceable patents are vital to our ability to invent, improve and advance – yet today, it is increasingly difficult for patent holders to enforce their rights through permanent injunctions, even after proving infringement in court,” said Congresswoman Dean. “The bipartisan, bicameral RESTORE Act addresses this issue and safeguards American innovation. I’m grateful to be joined by Congressman Moran, Senator Coons, and Senator Cotton in our push to protect patentholders, including universities, research laboratories, and startups.”
The Innovation Alliance, Council for Innovation Promotion, Association of University Technology Managers, Conservatives for Property Rights, Alliance of U.S. Startups & Inventors for Jobs, The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers-USA, Inventors Defense Alliance, and the Medical Device Manufacturers Association have endorsed the RESTORE Patent Rights Act.
“The Innovation Alliance applauds Senators Coons and Cotton and Representatives Moran and Dean for reintroducing the bipartisan, bicameral RESTORE Patent Rights Act. With a simple, single-sentence clarification of the law, RESTORE will bring balance back to patent law and allow small inventors to stand toe to toe with Big Tech after a court has ruled that Big Tech is stealing their inventions. We urge Congress to pass this vital bill,” said Brian Pomper, Executive Director of the Innovation Alliance.
“Our nation’s economic success and national security depend on inventors having confidence that their intellectual property will not be unfairly exploited,” said Andrei Iancu, board co-chair of C4IP and former Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and USPTO Director from 2018 to 2021. “The RESTORE Patent Rights Act will provide inventors with the reassurance they need to propel American leadership in critical technology fields.”
“Now more than ever, it’s critical that our leaders stand up for the startups and entrepreneurs who drive our nation’s economy and create life-changing breakthroughs,” said David Kappos, board co-chair of C4IP and former Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and USPTO Director from 2009 to 2013. “By passing the RESTORE Patent Rights Act, Congress can reinvigorate the U.S. patent system and reaffirm America’s commitment to protecting its innovators.”
“AUTM thanks Senator Coons and the other co-sponsors for introducing this legislation. Strengthening the ability of patent holders to protect their patents via injunction is crucial to incentivizing innovation. We look forward to working with the committee on this important legislation,” said Steve Susalka, CEO of AUTM.
“The RESTORE Patent Rights Act restores meaning to the promised exclusive rights to one’s invention. Without fully enforceable exclusive rights, the inventor’s end of the ‘patent bargain’ is broken. Since 2006, the Supreme Court’s eBay v. MercExchange ruling has made permanent injunction extremely difficult to obtain in patent infringement cases. Courts have thereby turned the right to exclude into a compulsory licensing clause. This is unjust. The RESTORE Patent Rights Act ends the judicially created categorical rule of routinely denying injunctions. It restores the historical remedy of injunctive relief in patent cases, as it is with other forms of property, including other intellectual property,” said James Edwards, Executive Director, Conservatives for Property Rights.
“The RESTORE Patent Rights Act is, perhaps, the most impactful thing that can be done to empower American inventors, entrepreneurs and disruptive startups. The ability to pursue injunctive relief when a competitor infringes on a patented invention was the standard in the United States for over 200 years. The Supreme Court moved the goalposts in 2006 and set up a convoluted test that makes it nearly impossible for a growth tech startup to stop the predatory infringement of their intellectual property by larger competitors. This practice has been perfected by Big Tech companies that now routinely ingest the innovations of disruptive competitors knowing that they cannot be stopped. Patent law and legislation is often complicated. The RESTORE Act is not. It is a clear and unambiguous bill that simply restores balance between large corporations that ingest others’ IP and the startups and entrepreneurs that invent it,” said Chris Israel, Executive Director of The Alliance of U.S. Startups & Inventors for Jobs (USIJ).
“A functioning IP system must be fair, and as importantly, be perceived to be fair. Nondiscriminatory access to the legal system for enforcing and defending IP property rights is essential for securing the property rights necessary for investment. When innovators are unable to secure the property right embodied in a patent, investment is deterred and commercial activity, innovation and job creation impeded,” said Timothy Lee, IEEE-USA president.
“The RESTORE Patent Rights Act is a crucial step in safeguarding America’s small businesses, startups, and entrepreneurs from predatory patent infringement. By providing a clear path for justice and injunctive relief, this bill empowers innovators and fosters a more equitable patent system that benefits American inventors and consumers,” said Kristen Osenga, the chief policy counselor at the Inventors Defense Alliance.
“There unfortunately continues to be ongoing efforts across the world to steal American innovations and intellectual property, and it is critical that Congress establishes new protections so that the United States can remain the global leader in medical technology innovation,” said Mark Leahy, President and CEO, Medical Device Manufacturers Association. “The ‘RESTORE Patent Rights Act’ would help restore a level playing field if enacted, and would codify the presumption that a permanent injunction will be granted after infringement is proven. MDMA applauds Senators Coons and Cotton and Representatives Moran and Dean for their leadership in helping America’s innovators protect their intellectual property, and we will continue to work closely with them so the medical technology ecosystem can deliver the cures, therapies and diagnostics that patients and providers need.”
Australians are being manipulated online every day through digital tactics designed to trick them into handing over personal data, making unintended purchases and engaging with online platforms in ways they had never intended.
A new report by the University of South Australia reveals that these deceptive patterns – also known as ‘dark patterns’ – are found in 95% of the world’s most popular apps, and more than 11% of major online shopping platforms.
They are widespread across social media, e-commerce and mobile applications, posing significant risks to consumers’ autonomy, privacy and financial security.
The report, commissioned by the Federal Treasury, highlights the deceptive patterns that influence and manipulate consumer behaviour.
These include misleading countdown timers that create a sense of urgency, hidden fees, pre-selected consent options, and obstacles to unsubscribing from services and websites.
“These tactics are designed to manipulate users into actions they wouldn’t normally take, whether it’s making an unintended purchase, giving away more data than necessary, or simply struggling to cancel an unwanted subscription,” Dr Baumeister says.
The report reveals that no one is immune to deceptive patterns, but some groups are more vulnerable than others.
Older Australians and those with lower digital literacy are at higher risk, often failing to recognise misleading online tactics. Teenagers are also targeted through social media platforms, where deceptive engagement techniques keep them scrolling for hours longer than intended.
“The financial impact is substantial,” Dr Baumeister says. “One in four Australians report difficulty understanding promotional price tags in physical stores and this issue is exacerbated online, with hidden fees and misleading sales tactics leading to unexpected costs.”
Report co-author, UniSA Enterprise Fellow Dr James Walsh, says companies are using artificial intelligence profiling to predict and manipulate user behaviour with increasing accuracy.
“Fake reviews, manipulative cookie consent pop-ups, and misleading product recommendations are all being enhanced through AI technologies, making consumers even more vulnerable,” Dr Walsh says.
The report argues that awareness alone is not enough to protect consumers. Regulatory reform and enforcement are urgently needed to curb deceptive practices and hold companies to account.
“While Australian consumer laws address some blatant deceptive patterns, many subtle tactics still fall through legal loopholes.
“We need a multi-faceted approach. Regulators must act, companies need to be held accountable, and consumers should be equipped with the knowledge and tools to protect themselves,” Dr Walsh says.
Note to editors
The report, titled “Patterns in the Dark: Deceptive Practices in Online Interactions,” was prepared by IVE researchers Dr James Baumeister, Ji-Young Park, Dr Andrew Cunningham, Associate Professor Stewart Von Itzstein, Professor Ian Gwilt, Dr Aaron Davis and Dr James Walsh.
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
Press release
Secretary of State for Northern Ireland meets Tánaiste in Dublin
The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP met with the Tánaiste, Minister for Foreign Affairs, Trade and Minister for Defence, Simon Harris TD, this evening at Iveagh House, Dublin.
Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP and the Tánaiste, Minister for Foreign Affairs, Trade and Minister for Defence, Simon Harris TD.
The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP, and the Tánaiste, Minister for Foreign Affairs, Trade and Minister for Defence, Simon Harris TD, met this evening [Wednesday 26 February] at Iveagh House, Dublin.
The discussions marked the first official in-person engagement between the two following the formation of the new Irish Government.
Speaking afterwards, the Secretary of State said:
It was a pleasure to meet with the Tánaiste this evening in Dublin, to congratulate him in person, and wish him well in his new role. The UK’s relationship with Ireland is of great importance and I look forward to continuing to work closely with the Tánaiste, and the whole Irish Government, to further enhance the partnership between our two countries.
We had a warm and productive discussion, focusing on the strength of the bilateral relationship, our shared commitment to the Good Friday Agreement, and the importance of upholding political stability in Northern Ireland. I also outlined the importance of the Northern Ireland Executive’s work to reform and modernise public services, an issue that is so important to people, as I set out in my speech at Ulster University last month.
In addition, the Tánaiste and I discussed progress in discussions between our two governments in seeking an approach to addressing the legacy of the past in Northern Ireland that all communities can have confidence in.
We agreed on the importance of a continuing strong and close relationship between the UK and Irish Governments as we work together on a range of issues. This will be reaffirmed by the first UK-Ireland Summit next month between the Prime Minister and Taoiseach.
WEST DES MOINES, Iowa, Feb. 26, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Athene Holding Ltd. (“Athene”), the leading retirement services company and subsidiary of Apollo Global Management, Inc. (NYSE:APO), announced today that it has appointed Louis-Jacques (LJ) Tanguy as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, effective March 1, 2025.
LJ has served as the Chief Accounting Officer for Apollo since early 2022 and has over 25 years of extensive accounting and financial experience. Prior to joining Apollo, he spent 13 years at Deutsche Bank as a Managing Director in various finance leadership roles in London and New York. Prior to that, LJ was the Head of the Asia Pacific Product Valuation Group for Merrill Lynch Japan Securities in Tokyo and has also worked at Société Générale in Paris and Asia in various roles in Finance and Risk. He holds a Ph.D. in Business Management, a Master’s in Finance and a Bachelor’s in Economics from the University of Aix-Marseille.
“We are very pleased that LJ will be Athene’s new CFO,” said Jim Belardi, CEO of Athene. “As Apollo’s Chief Accounting Officer, he successfully built and led a multifaceted organization spanning across the asset manager and retirement services businesses and played a key role in our successful merger. LJ is a champion for excellence and cross-functional collaboration, and his appointment appropriately supports the business now and for the long term.”
“I am excited to support the continued growth and innovation of our firm by serving as Athene’s next CFO,” said Tanguy. “I look forward to working even more closely with my outstanding colleagues who have driven Athene to be the leading retirement services provider and partnering with them to achieve the next phase of our growth.”
About Athene Athene is the leading retirement services company, with over $360 billion of total assets as of December 31, 2024 and operations in the United States, Bermuda, Canada, and Japan. Athene is focused on providing financial security to individuals by offering an attractive suite of retirement income and savings products and also serves as a solutions provider to corporations. For more information, please visit www.athene.com.
The Trump administration’s attacks on diversity, equity and inclusion have continued in the form of a “Dear Colleague” letter from the Department of Education to educational institutions – from preschools through colleges and universities.
This letter demands that schools abandon what the Trump administration refers to as “DEI programs” and threatens to withhold federal funding if schools don’t comply.
Although the letter does not have the force of law, it nonetheless signals how the Trump administration plans to aggressively take legal and financial action against educational institutions that refuse to comply, starting on Feb. 28.
As a result, the Trump administration’s threat to remove federal funding, which both public and private educational institutions relyheavily on, is likely to coerce compliance, at least to some degree.
As the letter explains, “The Department will vigorously enforce the law on equal terms as to all preschool, elementary, secondary, and postsecondary educational institutions, as well as state educational agencies, that receive financial assistance.”
Thus, these directives have the potential to fundamentally change education in America.
As professors of legal studies, we’ve taken a close look at the “Dear Colleague” letter. Here’s how the letter infringes on free speech, misunderstands the law and undermines education.
By directing schools, colleges and universities to stop DEI policies, the “Dear Colleague” letter clearly restricts free speech rights. That’s the case because creating and pursuing DEI policies is a type of freedom of expression. Banning DEI practices is a form of viewpoint discrimination, which is prohibited by Supreme Court precedent that covers the speech of educational institutions as well as their faculty and staff.
For instance, the letter aims to prevent educational institutions from pursuing missions and policies that promote the concepts of DEI. Such missions are common in higher education and can be found in universities from the conservative Brigham Young University to the liberal University of Vermont.
While the letter is not clear about which courses it would consider a problem, targeting any topics serves to suppress the free speech rights and academic freedom of faculty, including their freedom to design and teach courses.
This vagueness may be part of the threat. After all, if teachers aren’t sure what they might get punished for, they may be extra cautious and censor themselves.
In that case, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote a narrow majority opinion declaring simply that university admissions policies could not aim to create incoming classes with particular racial balances.
Roberts’ opinion was silent on any other type of educational policy. It also states explicitly that “nothing in this opinion should be construed as prohibiting universities from considering an applicant’s discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise,” so long as they are evaluated for admission as an individual.
And yet, the “Dear Colleague” letter takes this decision and runs with it in multiple different directions. First, it falsely claims that the decision prohibits schools from eliminating standardized testing in their admissions process, something many schools have chosen to do in recent years.
Second, the letter falsely states, in contradiction with the ruling’s own text, that the decision applies much more broadly than the context of admissions, to “hiring, promotion, compensation, financial aid, scholarships, prizes, administrative support, discipline, housing, graduation ceremonies, and all other aspects of student, academic, and campus life.”
Thus, according to the letter, any program that targeted a particular group for differential treatment based on their race would come under government scrutiny, including programs designed to assist students of color, to house students according to affinity groups, and to diversify university faculty.
There is simply no reading of the Students for Fair Admissions decision that suggests such an encroachment on the inner workings of educational institutions. Roberts’ majority opinion says only that students should be evaluated as individuals when applying to colleges and universities.
In sum, the letter places educators, especially those of us who teach about American law and government, in an impossible position.
It states that “educational institutions have toxically indoctrinated students with the false premise that the United States is built upon ‘systemic and structural racism,’” suggesting that the U.S. does not have such a history.
But, for example, in order to teach why affirmative action is now unconstitutional, we would have to explain the concept of strict scrutiny to our students. Strict scrutiny is when a court examines a law very carefully to make sure that it does not promote an unconstitutional racial or religious classification. It is a kind of review that is used routinely and appropriately by courts, and was used to strike down affirmative action in Students for Fair Admissions.
That level of judicial review exists because, in the words of Roberts in Students for Fair Admissions, “for almost a century after the Civil War, state-mandated segregation was in many parts of the Nation a regrettable norm. This Court played its own role in that ignoble history, allowing in Plessy v. Ferguson the separate but equal regime that would come to deface much of America.”
In other words, the Supreme Court created strict scrutiny as a judicial antidote to the systemic racism that it had helped perpetuate.
Even more basically, it is impossible to teach constitutional law without acknowledging the Three-Fifths Compromise or the Fugitive Slave Clause, both of which embedded the property rights of slaveowners into the founding documents of this country, denying enslaved people full citizenship and its rights.
To not teach students about such topics is, we believe, to fail in our role as educators. To forbid teaching it is an attack on the core mission of educational institutions in a democracy. And even more, this letter aims to prevent teachers from critiquing what the letter itself says and from explaining its own context and history.
The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
From the supermarket to the petrol pump, many Australians are concerned about the power of large corporations. Are consumers getting a fair deal? Do they have enough choice?
This week, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) is due to hand the government the final report from its inquiry into Australia’s supermarket sector. They have already said the sector is highly concentrated, with just a few sellers controlling prices and exploiting small suppliers.
This advocacy highlights a key source of pressure on wallets. The ACCC is also pursuing consumer law claims against the big supermarkets for creating the “illusion” of discounted prices.
But across the economy, it is unlikely consumer interests are being protected as much as they could be. Further reforms in competition law would help.
In some countries, consumers can band together to sue private companies and demand compensation if they’ve been harmed by anti-competitive behaviour.
Australian consumers can sue companies too – but it can be burdensome, expensive and complicated. In fact, consumer suits seeking damages for such conduct are rare. Australia could make it easier to fight back.
The problem
Treasury will wrap up a major review of competition law in August.
Two areas of reform have rightly been given particular attention: a merger law for the whole economy, and special rules for large digital platforms.
The ACCC is Australia’s competition regulator and consumer law advocate. Jarretera/Shutterstock
The merger reform has led to amendments to help the ACCC protect markets and a consultation on regulating platforms which has recently concluded.
Treasury is considering other reforms as well. However, putting consumers in a better position to claim damages for anti-competitive conduct is not on the agenda.
That is unfortunate. Consumers should feel more secure using competition law to demand compensation for anti-competitive harm. As the ACCC has said, the annual damage caused by cartels could amount to hundreds of millions of dollars, a staggering figure.
Even when the ACCC and the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions succeed in bringing cartellists to court to obtain penalties or even criminal sentences, it is a way to punish and deter. It does not make victims whole.
Overseas solutions
Australia lags behind its global counterparts.
In 2005, the European Union launched a debate on this subject. Laws were passed to ensure victims of anti-competitive conduct have a right to full compensation.
The European Union has seen a growth in private competition law actions. MDart10/Shutterstock
Since then, it appears to have become easier for consumers there to seek damages. From 2014 to 2019, one study showed a fivefold increase in the number of cases lodged in the EU, from 50 up to 239 private claims seeking compensation.
In the United States, private antitrust enforcement thrives due to large class actions, where consumers with a similar grievance come together to take action against corporate defendants.
US antitrust law allows treble damages, which means consumers can in theory receive three times the value of any harm suffered plus the costs of the lawsuit. In reality they recover less than that, but with large classes of claimants, the incentives to pursue claims through litigation and settlements are strong.
The Australian situation
On paper, private enforcement of competition law already exists in Australia. However, incentives appear weaker here.
In the EU and US, class actions are designed to encourage claimants to seek compensation for anti-competitive harm, but the rarity of such claims in Australia suggests the settings aren’t quite right.
A class action against major banks for allegedly rigging exchange rates, and a recently lodged class action against Google relating to its AdTech operations, are the exceptions, not the rule.
A 2012 article in the UNSW Law Journal said it was “time for an Australian debate”, but little has happened since.
What now? Here are some possible reforms
Various reforms and initiatives could bolster private enforcement in Australia, including:
1. Reviewing evidence rules to allow judges to order the disclosure of documents collected during investigations, provided the public interest is not compromised. If evidence is too hard to access, victims of cartels have no chance of proving their case.
2. Making it easier for a willing defendant to settle out of court. Sometimes, one defendant in a cartel case may be open to settling out of court but the other defendants are not. In such a case, to make it easier for the willing defendant to settle, it could be clarified that the non-settling defendants – if eventually ordered to pay the claimants – cannot then reclaim part of those damages as a “contribution” from the defendant that did settle.
Without this assurance, individual defendants that would otherwise be ready to settle may hesitate for fear of paying more than their share.
3. The ACCC could also more aggressively seek redress for consumers, which would reduce the need for damages actions. So far, the ACCC and the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions have not made enough use of their ability to seek orders granting such compensation in cartel cases.
Competition law should also be about securing relief for victims to make them whole, and to boost their trust in markets. Facilitating private rights of action for consumers can help to elevate justice in this area of the law.
Mel Marquis has in the past received research grants funded by the Commonwealth of Australia and administered by the ACCC. He is a member of the Competition and Consumer Committee of the Law Institute of Victoria. The views expressed are personal to the author.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Fiona MacDonald, Principal Research Fellow, Institute for Sustainable Industries and Liveable Cities, Victoria University
About one in four students report being regularly bullied in Australian schools.
Children who are bullied can feel anxious and excluded, stop sleeping and eating well, and lose interest in school. There are serious potential long-term effects, which include anxiety and depression. Being bullied is also a risk factor for suicidal thoughts and behaviours.
Following the 2024 death of Sydney Year 7 student Charlotte O’Brien, the federal government wants to develop a national standard to address bullying in schools.
It has just announced a “rapid review” of bullying in schools, to be done in six months (though not before the federal election). This will look at what schools currently do to address bullying and what they should be doing.
What does the research tell us works when it comes to addressing bullying in schools?
It also involves a power imbalance in favour of the perpetrator.
As well as physical abuse, these behaviours can involve verbal teasing, harassment, damaging property, and antisocial behaviours such as spreading gossip or excluding someone. It can happen in person or online.
Much of the early research response to incidents on school bullying focused on the perpetrator and victim, and what the school should do in response to the bullying incident.
This involved senior teachers such as the principal and school counsellor meeting with the perpetrator and victim and their parents/guardians. Here they would work out strategies to try and make amends and prevent future incidents.
For example, a perpetrator may have had to apologise to the victim and take on additional responsibilities in the school. They may also be warned about suspension or exclusion.
But these responses do not address the complexity of bullying. This includes the reasons why a child might bully another as well as its broader impact. Often other students are also inadvertently involved in or affected by bullying. Seeing someone else being bullied can be upsetting, students may feel angry, sad or concerned they may also be bullied.
The shift to prevention
So more recent research has emphasised the importance of prevention to reduce rates of school bullying. This could include anti-bullying policies, classroom rules and discussions about bullying as well as information for parents.
This relies on what researchers call a “whole school approach”. Instead of bullying being seen as the responsibility of the principal or other senior teachers to deal with a few “at risk” kids, it is the responsibility of all staff, students and parents – and even the broader community.
This means students are educated to understand what is and is not bullying and what to do if they witness it. It also means teachers have clear policies to follow and a clear understanding of “gateway behaviours,” which can escalate into bullying. Parents likewise know what to do if their child is being bullied or the kinds of behaviours that can lead up to it – such as namecalling or eyerolling.
Other measures could include a dedicated staff member to champion anti-bullying measures in the school and partnerships with community members and organisations. This could be junior sporting clubs or even the school crossing guard (who can provide information about antisocial behaviours they observe).
The aim is to create a school culture which is safe and supportive for students, where harmful behaviour is clearly understood and dealt with early if it happens.
Current research also emphasises the importance of schools regularly collecting, analysing and acting on data about bullying and the school environment. This enables schools to identify changes within the school environment before they escalate to bullying.
Schools already collect data about their students and behaviours, including attendance, playground incidents and their attitudes to school. But many don’t have the time or expertise to analyse it.
Listening to students
Research also shows anti-bullying efforts are more effective when students are involved.
This helps build trust between students, families and school staff, gives students a sense of ownership about solutions. Importantly it also enables young people to share their perspectives about what will work in their lives and classrooms.
This could include schools regularly asking students about bullying and other issues they are having at schools and genuinely considering their suggestions about how to improve both prevention and responses.
Fiona MacDonald received funding from Alannah & Madeline Foundation for this research.
Nina Van Dyke received funding from the Alannah & Madeline Foundation for this research.
Heat takes it out of you. After a long, hot day, we feel tired and grumpy.
But sustained periods of heat do more than that – they age us faster. Cumulative heat stress changes our epigenetics – how our cells turn on or off gene switches in response to environmental pressure.
Now, new research from the United States explores the pressing question of how extreme heat affects humans. The findings are concerning. The more days of intense heat a participant endured, the faster they aged. Longer periods of extreme heat accelerated ageing in older people by more than two years.
As the climate heats up, humans will be exposed to more and more heat – and our bodies will respond to these stresses by ageing faster. These findings are especially pertinent to Australia, where heatwaves are expected to become more frequent and intense in a warmer world.
How, exactly, does heat age us?
Ageing is natural. But the rate of ageing varies from human to human. As we go through life, our bodies are affected by stresses and shocks. For instance, if we don’t get enough sleep over a long period, we will age faster.
While heat can directly sicken or kill us, it also has a long tail. Sustained heat stresses our bodies and make them less efficient at doing the many jobs needed to stay alive. This is what we mean when we say it accelerates biological ageing. This deterioration is likely to precede the later development of diseases and disabilities.
What does that look like on a genetic level? You might think your genes don’t change over your life, and this is mostly true (apart from random mutations).
But what does change is how your genes are expressed. That is, while your DNA stays the same, your cells can switch some of its thousands of genes off or on in response to stresses. At any one time, only a fraction of the genes in any cell are turned on – meaning they are busy making proteins.
This is known as epigenetics. The most common and best understood pathway here is called DNA methylation (DNAm). Methylation here refers to a chemical our cells can use to block a DNA sequence from activating and producing proteins with various functions. Cellular changes in DNAm can lead to proteins being produced more or less, which in turn can flow on to affect physiological functions and our health status. This can be both bad or good.
Heat stress can alter the pattern of which genes are turned off or on, which in turn can affect our rate of ageing.
Severe heat stress can be remembered in cells, leading them to change their DNAm patterns over time. In laboratory testing, the effect is pronounced in fish, chickens, guinea pigs and mice.
To date, much research on how heat affects epigenetics has focused on animals and plants. Here, the evidence is clear – even a single episode of extreme heat has been shown to have a long-lasting effect on mice.
But only a couple of studies have been done involving humans, and they have been limited. This is the gap this new research is intended to help fill.
The study by researchers at the University of Southern California involved almost 3,700 people, with an average age of 68 years.
Heat affects older people more than younger people. Our ability to control our body temperature drops as we age, and we are less resilient to outside stresses and shocks. We also know periods of extreme heat trigger a wave of illness and death, especially among older people.
The study set out to better understand what happens to human bodies at a biological level when they’re exposed to intense heat over the short, medium and longer term.
To do this, the researchers took blood samples and measured epigenetic changes at thousands of sites across the genome, which were used to calculate three clocks measuring biological age, named PcPhenoAge, PCGrimAge and DunedinPACE.
Then, they looked at the levels of heat each participant would have been exposed in their geographic areas over the preceding six years, which was 2010–16. They used the US heat index to assess heat, from caution (days up to 32°C), extreme caution (32–39°C) and danger (39–51°C). They used regression modelling to see how much faster people were ageing over the normal rate of ageing.
The effect of heat was clear in the three biological clocks. Longer term exposure to intense heat increased biological age by 2.48 years over the six year period of the study according to PCPhenoAge, 1.09 years according to PCGrimAge and 0.05 years according to DunedinPACE.
Over the period of the study, the effect was up to 2.48 years faster than normal ageing, where one calendar year equals one biological year of ageing. That is, rather than their bodies ageing the equivalent of six years over a six year period, heat could have aged their bodies up to 8.48 years.
Importantly, the biological clocks differ quite substantially and we don’t yet know why. The authors suggest the PCPhenoAge clock may capture a broader spectrum of biological ageing, covering both short term and longer term heat stress, while the other two may be more sensitive to long term heat exposure.
The way these researchers have conducted their study gives us confidence in their findings – the study sample was large and representative, and the use of the heat index rather than air temperature is an improvement over previous studies. However, the findings don’t account for whether the participants had airconditioning in their homes or spent much time outside.
We need to know more
Perhaps surprisingly, there has been little research done to date on what heat does to human epigenetics.
In 2020, we conducted a systemic review of the science of how environment affects human epigenetics. We found only seven studies, with most focused on the effect of cold rather than heat.
Now we have this new research which sheds light on the extent to which heat ages us.
As we face a warmer future, our epigenetics will change in response. There is still a lot of work to do to see how we can adapt to these changes – or if we even can, in some parts of the world.
Rongbin Xu received funding from VicHealth.
Shuai Li receives funding from NHMRC, Cancer Australia, Victorian Cancer Agency, Cancer Council Victoria and NIH.
Anyone who needs to make their first appointment with a psychiatrist may expect a bit of a wait. Our new research shows Australians are waiting an average 77 days for this initial appointment. But some were waiting for at least eight months.
We also showed people are waiting longer and longer for these appointments over the past decade or so, particularly in regional and remote areas. And telehealth has not reduced this city-country disparity.
Our study is the first of its kind to look at the national picture of wait times for a first appointment with a psychiatrist. Here’s why our findings are so concerning.
What we did
We analysed data from the Medicare Benefits Schedule from 2011 to 2022. This allowed us to analyse trends in wait times without accessing individual patients’ medical records.
The particular dataset we used allowed us to look at the time from a GP referral to the first appointment with a private psychiatrist.
A first appointment with a psychiatrist is crucial as it may lead to an official diagnosis if there is not one already, or it may map out future treatment options, including whether medicine or hospital admission is needed. Depending on the situation, treatment may start immediately, then be reviewed at subsequent appointments. However, with a delayed initial appointment, there’s the risk of delayed diagnosis and treatment, and symptoms worsening.
We focused on wait times for initial outpatient appointments with private psychiatrists, and looked at wait times for face-to-face and telehealth attendances separately.
We did not include wait times to see psychiatrists at public hospitals. And we couldn’t see what psychiatry appointments were for, and how urgent it was for a patient to see a psychiatrist at short notice.
What we found
We found wait times for the first psychiatry appointment after a GP referral had increased steadily in the past decade or so, especially since 2020. In 2011, the mean waiting time was 51 days, rising to 77 days by 2022.
Waiting times varied substantially between patients. For example, in 2022, 25% of the wait times for a face-to-face appointment were under ten days. But 95% of wait times were under 258 days. This means the longest wait times were more than 258 days.
For telehealth services in 2022, the equivalent wait times ranged from 11 to 235 days.
Wait times also varied by location. People in regional and remote areas consistently had longer wait times than those living in major cities, for both in-person and telehealth services.
The disparity remained over time, except for in-person services during the early years of the COVID pandemic. This is when rural areas in Australia had fewer lockdowns and less stringent movement restrictions compared to major cities.
Why didn’t telehealth help?
Our study did not look at reasons for increasing wait times. However, longer waits do not appear to be due to increased demand, considering the total number of visits has not gone up. For example, we showed the total number of visits for combined in-person and telehealth first appointments was 108,630 in 2020, 111,718 in 2021, and 104,214 in 2022.
But what about telehealth? This has widely been touted as a boon for regional and remote Australians, as it allows them to access psychiatry services without the time and expense of having to travel long distances.
Telehealth took off in 2020 due to COVID. There were 2,066 total first psychiatry visits between 2011 and 2019, increasing to 12,860 in 2020. But in 2022, there were 27,527.
However, we found the number of telehealth visits offset the number of face-to-face visits, and the total visits remained stable in recent years. As telehealth still takes up psychiatrists’ time, it did not help to reduce wait times.
What are the implications?
The national rise in wait times over the past decade or so is concerning, especially for high-risk patients with severe mental disorders, such as schizophrenia, severe depression and bipolar disorder. Any delays in treatment for these patients could cause substantial harms to them and others in their communities.
Our results also come at a time of increased pressure on mental health services more broadly including:
long wait times for people with a mental health concern to be admitted from the emergency department to a hospital ward
Now, more than ever, we need to pay continued attention to access and distribution of psychiatric services across Australia.
Yuting Zhang has received funding from the Australian Research Council (future fellowship project ID FT200100630), Department of Veterans’ Affairs, the Victorian Department of Health, and National Health and Medical Research Council. In the past, Professor Zhang has received funding from several US institutes including the US National Institutes of Health, Commonwealth fund, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. She has not received funding from for-profit industry including the private health insurance industry.
Ou Yang 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.
When Kim Kardashian posted on Instagram about having had a full-body MRI, she enthused that the test can be “life saving”, detecting diseases in the earliest stages before symptoms arise.
What Kardashian neglected to say was there’s no evidence this expensive scan can bring benefits for healthy people. She also didn’t mention it can carry harms including unnecessary diagnoses and inappropriate treatments.
With this post in mind, we wanted to explore what influencers are telling us about medical tests.
In a new study published today in JAMA Network Open, we analysed nearly 1,000 Instagram and TikTok posts about five popular medical tests which can all do more harm than good to healthy people, including the full-body MRI scan.
We found the overwhelming majority of these posts were utterly misleading.
5 controversial tests
Before we get into the details of what we found, a bit about the five tests included in our study.
While these tests can be valuable to some, all five carry the risk of overdiagnosis for generally healthy people. Overdiagnosis is the diagnosis of a condition which would have never caused symptoms or problems. Overdiagnosis leads to overtreatment, which can cause unnecessary side effects and stress for the person, and wasted resources for the health system.
Overdiagnosis is a global problem, and it’s driven in part by healthy people having tests like these. Often, they’re promoted under the guise of early screening, as a way to “take control” of your health. But most healthy people simply don’t need them.
These are the five tests we looked at:
The full-body MRI scan claims to test for up to 500 conditions, including cancer. Yet there is no proven benefit of the scan for healthy people, and a real risk of unnecessary treatment from “false alarm” diagnoses.
The “egg timer” test (technically known as the AMH, or anti-mullarian hormone test) is often falsely promoted as a fertility test for healthy women. While it may be beneficial for women within a fertility clinic setting, it cannot reliably predict the chance of a woman conceiving, or menopause starting. However, low results can increase fear and anxiety, and lead to unnecessary and expensive fertility treatments.
Multi-cancer early detection blood tests are being heavily marketed as the “holy grail of cancer detection”, with claims they can screen for more than 50 cancers. In reality, clinical trials are still a long way from finished. There’s no good evidence yet that the benefits will outweigh the harms of unnecessary cancer diagnoses.
The gut microbiome test of your stool promises “wellness” via early detection of many conditions, from flatulence to depression, again without good evidence of benefit. There’s also concern that test results can lead to wasted resources.
Multi-cancer early detection blood tests are heavily marketed. Yuri A/Shutterstock
What we found
Together with an international group of health researchers, we analysed 982 posts pertaining to the above tests from across Instagram and TikTok. The posts we looked at came from influencers and account holders with at least 1,000 followers, some with a few million followers. In total, the creators of the posts we included had close to 200 million followers.
Even discounting the bots, that’s a massive amount of influence (and likely doesn’t reflect their actual reach to non-followers too).
The vast majority of posts were misleading, failing to even mention the possibility of harm arising from taking one of these tests. We found:
87% of posts mentioned test benefits, while only 15% mentioned potential harms
only 6% of posts mentioned the risk of overdiagnosis
only 6% of posts discussed any scientific evidence, while 34% of posts used personal stories to promote the test
68% of influencers and account holders had financial interests in promoting the test (for example, a partnership, collaboration, sponsorship or selling for their own profit in some way).
Further analysis revealed medical doctors were slightly more balanced in their posts. They were more likely to mention the harms of the test, and less likely to have a strongly promotional tone.
As all studies do, ours had some limitations. For example, we didn’t analyse comments connected to posts. These may give further insights into the information being provided about these tests, and how social media users perceive them.
Nonetheless, our findings add to the growing body of evidence showing misleading medical information is widespread on social media.
What can we do about it?
Experts have proposed a range of solutions including pre-bunking strategies, which means proactively educating the public about common misinformation techniques.
However, solutions like these often place responsibility on the individual. And with all the information on social media to navigate, that’s a big ask, even for people with adequate health literacy.
What’s urgently needed is stronger regulation to prevent misleading information being created and shared in the first place. This is especially important given social media platforms including Instagram are moving away from fact-checking.
In the meantime, remember that if information about medical tests promoted by influencers sounds too good to be true, it probably is.
Brooke Nickel receives fellowship funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC). She is on the Scientific Committee of the Preventing Overdiagnosis Conference.
Joshua Zadro receives fellowship funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC).
Ray Moynihan has received research funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council.
