The spread of H5N1 birdflu is worsening.

At the time of writing, Australia has 53 confirmed detections in wild seabirds across five states. In South Australia there are 39 confirmed cases, including a silver gull at Robe and 19 greater crested terns found along the Limestone Coast and Seal Bay on Kangaroo Island.

South Australian authorities are also investigating 49 dead and 35 sick greater crested terns found by aerial surveillance teams at an offshore location south of Cape Jaffa.

Samples are still being tested, but if confirmed, this would represent the first mass mortality of Australian animals associated with the virus.

Until recently, Australia’s detections were mostly isolated migratory seabirds arriving from the Southern Ocean. But these detections show this has changed, with local transmission among wildlife that live in Australia.

Which species are most at risk?

Animals that gather densely in breeding colonies face the greatest danger. Terns, gulls, gannets and albatrosses can transmit the virus rapidly through close contact and contaminated environments, with these groups experiencing devastating mortality in other parts of the world.

The silver gull infections are particularly concerning because they move between beaches, towns, rubbish tips, wetlands and inland waterways. A suspected case at Monarto, SA, does not prove H5N1 is yet established inland, but it shows infected seabirds cannot be “coastally contained”.

Seals and sea lions also require urgent surveillance. H5N1 killed more than 17,000 southern elephant seals in Argentina in 2023, with 95% pup mortality at one monitored colony. Around 13,000 elephant seal pups later died on Heard Island. While it was not possible to carry out postmortem examinations on all individuals at this remote location, H5N1 was confirmed as present and recorded as the most likely cause of death.

Five infected terns have now been confirmed at Seal Bay, a critical breeding site for the endangered Australian sea lion. Australian sea lions and fur seals breed in dense colonies where disease could spread quickly.

Can we predict how far it will spread?

We cannot reliably predict the spread of H5N1 in Australia. The 53 confirmed detections are not the true number of infections – they are the birds found, reported and tested. Many infected animals will never be detected.

Cases from the rest of the world show this strain of H5N1 is capable of spreading huge distances, carried by migratory wildlife. Every other continent, including Antarctica, has been infected by this strain of H5N1 over the past five years, with deaths in the millions.

Hundreds of species of birds have been infected, and the virus has evolved to spread more efficiently between mammals. This pattern makes it very difficult to confidently predict how the virus will spread in Australia, but we must be prepared for a widespread and devastating outbreak.

What about poultry farms and backyard chooks?

There are still no detections of H5N1 in Australian poultry or other livestock, but the risk has increased as confirmed infections rise among resident wild birds.

Wild birds can introduce influenza to poultry through direct contact or by contaminating water, feed, footwear and equipment.

Backyard owners should prevent contact with wild birds, cover feed and water, avoid untreated surface water, and clean footwear and equipment. Sudden illness or deaths should be reported immediately.

Australia’s response now needs to evolve

Sadly, the impacts of bird flu on species and ecosystems will play out for decades to come.

Australia’s pre-outbreak preparation and coordination has been strong. Federal and state governments established response plans, increased surveillance and prepared the poultry industry before H5N1 arrived.

As wild bird infections increase, the poultry industry needs to be supported in implementing biosecurity procedures, and strategic surveillance is needed for both farms and wildlife.

Reliable mortality estimates are essential to understand the long-term impacts, and support species to recover. Australia should also assess whether vaccination could protect vulnerable marine mammals before mass deaths begin.

We cannot stop wild birds from flying. But we can decide whether this becomes an unmanaged wildlife catastrophe or a closely tracked outbreak, with farms and vulnerable species given timely protection.

Please do not touch sick or dead birds or marine mammals. Record the location, take photographs from a safe distance, keep pets away, and report the sighting to the Emergency Animal Disease Hotline on 1800 675 888.

Jane Younger, Senior Lecturer in Southern Ocean Vertebrate Ecology, Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Support our Journalism

No-nonsense journalism. No paywalls. Whether you’re in Australia, the UK, Canada, the USA, or India, you can support The Australia Today by taking a paid subscription via Patreon or donating via PayPal — and help keep honest, fearless journalism alive.

The post The warning signs are over: Australia now faces a devastating bird flu outbreak in wildlife first appeared on The Australia Today.

US President Donald Trump has announced that Hamas and other militant groups in Gaza have agreed to disarm. He’s calling it a “critical step” toward lasting peace and security in the strip.

Trump said Hamas’ disarmament would allow for a Palestinian committee to take over governing in Gaza and Israel’s military withdrawal from the enclave, as mandated under his 20-point peace plan, to which Hamas and Israel agreed last October.

Hamas officials say they have agreed to the process, though a member of the negotiating team cautioned that its disarmament was dependent on Israel’s full withdrawal from Gaza.

So, is this a major step forward, or are there still too many questions left unresolved?

Hamas’ legitimacy

If Hamas does agree to a complete disarmament, this would be an enormous concession by the movement in its nearly 40-year resistance to Israel’s occupation of the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem.

Hamas was launched in 1987 with the dual goals of resisting Israel’s occupation and challenging the Fatah party’s domination of Palestinian politics.

In its 2017 charter, Hamas said it “rejects any attempt to undermine the resistance and its arms”. It added that “armed restistance … is regarded as the strategic choice for protecting the principles and the rights of the Palestinian people”.

Additionally, Hamas’ armed resistance lies at the heart of its legitimacy among Palestinians. And for Palestinians, this resistance is linked inextricably with the advancement of efforts to attainment statehood.

This means that while Palestinians may not necessarily support Hamas politically or agree with its Islamist agenda, they do respect the movement. Many view its continued armed resistance to Israel’s occupation as either advancing efforts to achieve statehood or inhibiting Israel’s efforts to make its occupation permanent.

In the most recent polling of Palestinians by the People’s Company for Polls and Survey Research (PCPSR) in October 2025, 60% of respondents (66% in the West Bank and 51% in Gaza) were satisfied with Hamas’ performance and 69% (87% in the West Bank and 55% in Gaza) were opposed to the disarmament of Hamas in the Gaza Strip.

Given this, it is hard to believe Hamas will risk this level of support among Palestinians.

Details are vague

According to initial media reports, Hamas’ disarmament would consist not only of surrendering its weapons, but also the dismantling of its military infrastructure in Gaza. This would include its tunnel network, heavy weapons, production facilities and weapon depots.

Given the wholesale destruction of the Gaza Strip, it is unclear how much of this infrastructure still exists.

It’s also unclear how many weapons its military wing actually has. Recent reports suggest it may have tens of thousands of automatic rifles and heavy weapons like anti-tank rockets, but it could be far fewer now.

Other details also remain unclear: who would undertake the task of disarming Hamas and how it would be confirmed? A US official told the BBC a third-party committee would be responsible for this, without elaborating.

Also, Hamas does not just exist in the Gaza Strip – it has a presence in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, too. It’s unclear whether the disarmament would extend to those elements of the group.

Given the continued violence being perpetrated by radical Jewish settlers against Palestinians in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, it is not inconceivable that members of Hamas or other Palestinian armed movements may seek to resist this violence with their own.

Agreeing to disarm and give up its administrative responsibilities in Gaza could very well be a strategic move on the part of Hamas. It could enable the group to recover organisationally from the severe battering it took from Israel, while still retaining its resistance agenda among the broader Palestinian population.

What will Israel do?

Israel’s response to the agreement is the other major challenge. Initial reports suggest the government is objecting to Trump’s plan.

According to an Israeli official quoted by the Times of Israel:

There will be no Israeli withdrawal from the Yellow Line in the Gaza Strip before Hamas is disarmed and the Strip is fully demilitarised.

Just two weeks ago, Israel’s far-right defence and finance ministers also proposed the creation of three “nahal” outposts in northern Gaza.

These types of outposts combine a military presence with agricultural and community activities. Historically, they have been the precursor for permanent Israeli settlements.

This opposition from Israel is where the agreement could likely break down, unless Trump can put suitable pressure on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to allow the peace process to continue. This pressure was already starting to mount on Friday, with a US official saying Trump would be “very disappointed” if Israel stood in the way.

Martin Kear, Lecturer, Department of Government and International Relations, University of Sydney

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Support our Journalism

No-nonsense journalism. No paywalls. Whether you’re in Australia, the UK, Canada, the USA, or India, you can support The Australia Today by taking a paid subscription via Patreon or donating via PayPal — and help keep honest, fearless journalism alive.

The post Trump is hailing it as a ‘breakthrough’, but will Hamas actually disarm in Gaza? first appeared on The Australia Today.

Today’s inflation figures showed inflation pressures have eased, just a day after the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) warned inflation was still too high.

The Australian Bureau of Statistics reported the consumer price index (CPI) rose 3.8% in the year to June, down from 4.0% in the year to May. The RBA’s preferred measure of underlying inflation, the trimmed mean, was steady at 3.6%.

(The trimmed mean shows core inflation after excluding or “trimming” away the items with the largest price rises or falls, leaving the weighted average of the middle 70% of items.)

This is the most important piece of domestic economic data the RBA will receive before its next interest rates meeting on August 10–11.

Financial markets cut the chances of a rate rise next month to close to zero after the softer-than-expected inflation report. But there is still a meaningful chance of one more rate rise later in the year if inflation risks rise.

How the picture has changed since June

The largest contributors to annual inflation were housing (up 6.8% in the year), food and non-alcoholic beverages, and transport. The largest monthly decline was in automotive fuel prices in June, as global oil prices fell.

Services inflation remained persistent, particularly in housing-related categories such as rents. This suggests underlying domestic price pressures have not fully subsided.

Although inflation moderated in June, slightly below the RBA’s forecasts, it remains well above the central bank’s 2–3% target.

However, the world has changed since June.

This month, a renewed escalation in the conflict in Iran sent oil prices back above US$100 a barrel, although they have eased again this week. This has created fresh inflation risks that are not reflected in the June report. The June CPI tells us where inflation was. The RBA must decide where inflation is heading.

Last week’s employment figures reinforced the complexity of the RBA’s task. Employment rose by a stronger-than-expected 76,300 in June. The figures suggest labour market conditions remain resilient, giving the RBA scope to focus on inflation risks.

Australia’s inflation problem has changed markedly over the past two years.

The broad-based inflation that followed the pandemic has eased as supply chains recovered and higher interest rates slowed demand. While trimmed mean inflation remained at 3.6% in June, it was considerably lower than the post-pandemic peak of 6.8% in December 2022.

Remaining price pressures are concentrated in services such as rents, insurance and healthcare, where inflation has proved more persistent.

Why higher oil prices remain a threat

Looking ahead, global energy markets have been shifting dramatically in recent weeks, with oil briefly surging back above US$100 a barrel.

Higher oil prices do far more than increase the cost of filling up the car. They raise transport, freight and production costs throughout the economy. Businesses eventually pass some of those higher costs on to consumers, placing renewed upward pressure on inflation.

Australia is less vulnerable to oil shocks than it once was, but sustained oil prices above US$100 would still complicate the inflation outlook. Unlike demand-driven inflation, this is a supply shock that interest rates cannot directly offset.

Close to the RBA’s worst-case scenario?

A sustained oil price near US$100 is remarkably close to the scenario the RBA has been warning about, with inflation still tracking above the RBA’s 2–3% target.

The RBA has already raised the cash rate three times this year — in February, March and May — as it sought to return inflation to target.

On Tuesday, RBA Governor Michele Bullock warned the bank was “prepared to act as required” to get inflation under control, including by increasing the cash rate further.

When the RBA raises interest rates, it slows economic growth and helps bring down inflation. Bullock’s comments suggest the RBA remains prepared to raise rates further if new inflationary pressures emerge.

She made clear the RBA is not simply assessing today’s inflation numbers. It is assessing the risks to inflation over the months ahead.

If higher oil prices prove temporary, the RBA is likely to look through the direct effect on inflation. The greater concern is that higher energy costs begin feeding into transport charges, business costs, wages and inflation expectations, making inflation more persistent and more difficult to bring back to target.

What happens next?

Today’s CPI figures confirm inflation was continuing to move in the right direction through June. But because the figures predate the recent surge in oil prices, they are unlikely to settle the policy debate on their own.

When the RBA meets on August 10–11, it will weigh evidence that inflation was continuing to ease against the risk it might prove short-lived.

Whether another interest rate increase becomes necessary will depend on how persistent the oil shock proves to be – and whether businesses pass higher energy costs on to consumers.

The RBA’s challenge is no longer understanding where inflation stood in June. It is judging where inflation is likely to be over the months ahead.

Stella Huangfu, Associate Professor, School of Economics, University of Sydney

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Support our Journalism

No-nonsense journalism. No paywalls. Whether you’re in Australia, the UK, Canada, the USA, or India, you can support The Australia Today by taking a paid subscription via Patreon or donating via PayPal — and help keep honest, fearless journalism alive.

The post Australian inflation has eased a little, An August interest rate rise now looks unlikely first appeared on The Australia Today.

Every generation inherits institutions that need repair and India has no shortage of them.

Education, the police and the judiciary all need reform, each having accumulated structural weaknesses over decades. In many respects, India’s policing and judicial architecture still bear the imprint of a colonial state, designed to govern and control rather than serve citizens in a confident democratic republic.

The education system, meanwhile, has struggled to keep pace with the aspirations of a young and ambitious nation. Too often, it rewards rote learning over curiosity, conformity over creativity, and examinations over genuine education. Layered onto these weaknesses is a reservation system that many Indians increasingly regard as inequitable, fuelling resentment and raising difficult questions about how India can balance social justice with merit in the decades ahead.

It is education, however, that now finds itself at the centre of national debate following the NEET paper leak.

Questions over accountability are entirely legitimate, and public anger is understandable. This government, simply by virtue of being in office, bears responsibility not only for addressing the immediate failure but also for repairing systemic deficiencies that have disadvantaged students for decades.

India’s Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan resigned on 25 July after 36 days of protests by the Cockroach Janta Party led by 30-year-old Abhijeet Dipke. But the debate extends far beyond one examination or one minister. It raises a more fundamental question: How should a democracy pursue reform?

The challenge is not merely to protest when institutions fail, but to ensure that protest ultimately produces better institutions rather than deeper political divisions.

Peaceful protest is one of democracy’s essential safety valves. Throughout history, it has exposed institutional weakness that governments were reluctant or slow to address.

The greater concern, however, is that many now believe peaceful, reasoned engagement is no longer enough. Across political parties, governments too often appear deaf to measured criticism and proposals for reform. The lesson citizens increasingly draw is a troubling one: unless they take to the streets, they simply will not be heard.

That is precisely where the problem begins. Once a protest gathers momentum and starts exerting political pressure, it rarely remains the preserve of those who initiated it.

Political parties, ideological groups, public personalities and professional activists inevitably hitch their wagons to the movement. The success of a protest often attracts new actors whose priority is no longer the original grievance but the political opportunities it presents.

They certainly bring organisational muscle, funding and media attention, amplifying a movement far beyond its original reach. Too often, however, they also bring their foot soldiers, veterans of agitation politics and performative outrage that overwhelms the cause they claim to champion.

The conversation gradually shifts from repairing a failing institution to assigning political blame. Cameras drift away from students and settle on politicians, celebrities and, increasingly, social media influencers. Television studios stop debating reform and begin keeping score of political winners and losers.

Soon, citizens are left wondering what the protest is actually about. Is it examination reform, ministerial accountability, institutional credibility or simply another opportunity to weaken a political opponent? Once those questions eclipse the original grievance, the movement has begun to lose its way.

There were other signs that the conversation had travelled well beyond NEET. Alongside demands for examination reform, some slogans carried overt religious overtones, including remarks that many viewed as deliberately provocative towards the country’s majority community and its revered deities.

Whatever the intent behind those slogans, they had little to do with the integrity of a national examination. Their presence suggested that, for some participants, the protest had become a vehicle for airing far broader ideological and cultural grievances.

And once substance gives way to spectacle, the quality of public debate also declines with it. What also disturbed many citizens during the recent demonstrations was not merely the anger but the coarsening of public discourse. Political disagreement gave way to crude abuse, sexualised insults and the dehumanisation of opponents. Regardless of one’s political persuasion, that represented a lowering of democratic standards rather than an elevation of democratic debate. It also left many wondering whether those who dominated the headlines genuinely represented the students whose future was at stake.

Some of those who attracted the greatest attention appeared more intent on creating the next viral sensation, using language calculated to shock, than on explaining what had disillusioned them or why they had taken to the streets in the first place. Whether that reflected youthful exuberance, the incentives of online platforms or political coaching is open to debate.

A Prime Minister who has repeatedly been returned to office by the electorate became the central character in a debate that ought to have remained focused on students, examinations and structural reform.

Encouragingly, the conversation now appears to be moving back towards where it always belonged. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has chosen to communicate directly with young Indians, acknowledging both their anxieties and the need to restore confidence in the examination system. More significantly, the constitution of a high-powered committee to recommend systemic changes signals an acceptance that the answer lies not merely in fixing responsibility for one paper leak, but in fixing the system itself.

That is a welcome shift. Committees, however, are only the beginning. The real test will be whether their recommendations translate into a more secure, transparent and resilient examination system.

Yesterday’s (27 July) debate in Parliament exposed the difference between supporting a protest and supporting reform. Several parties that had stood shoulder to shoulder with the protesters chose to oppose the introduction of the Anti-Paper Leak Bill. They are fully entitled to challenge the contents of any legislation. But opposing reform at the very moment it enters Parliament inevitably raises questions.

It is one thing to march with students demanding change. It is another to engage with the legislative process when change is actually placed before the House. Citizens are entitled to ask whether the objective was always examination reform or whether the protest had become another instrument in a larger political contest.

The question, therefore, is why reform in India has become so politically charged?

The immediate controversy may be about NEET. The larger story is about India itself and a political landscape transformed by successive electoral victories for one side and repeated setbacks for the other.

As the Opposition has seen its footprint shrink over successive elections, the incentive to convert public discontent into political momentum has only grown stronger. That reality now forms part of the backdrop against which almost every major national protest unfolds.

Politics alone, however, does not explain the intensity of these contests. The other part of the story is India’s own transformation.

For decades, India was dismissed as being trapped in what economists famously called the Hindu rate of growth. It became shorthand for a country supposedly destined for permanent mediocrity. Slow growth, bureaucratic inertia and a lack of ambition were assumed to be permanent features of the Indian story.

Today, India stands among the world’s fastest-growing major economies. A nation once lectured about its limitations now finds itself being studied for its scale, resilience and growing strategic importance.

Economic transformation has been accompanied by something equally significant – a renewed confidence in its civilisational identity.

Increasing numbers of Hindus today express their faith publicly and unapologetically, much as followers of other major religions have long done.

Whether one welcomes or questions that change, it represents a profound departure from the cultural hesitancy that characterised much of post-Independence India.

A society that for decades often viewed itself through borrowed intellectual frameworks is increasingly seeking to understand itself through its own history, traditions and civilisational memory.

That shift has generated admiration in some quarters and unease in others. The trajectory of a nation of 1.4 billion people inevitably matters beyond its borders, ensuring that India’s internal debates attract growing international attention. For some, they also present opportunities to amplify existing political and social fault lines.

Indeed, a pattern has become discernible over the past decade, one sufficiently consistent that it now merits examination as something more than coincidence. A local grievance erupts; within days, a coordinated ecosystem of activists, commentators and sympathetic platforms mobilises around it; and sections of the global media amplify it as fresh evidence of a democracy supposedly in crisis.

The sequencing repeats itself with a regularity that appears too structured to be organic. What this pattern suggests, on analysis, is that the underlying objective is rarely confined to the original grievance at all — it appears, instead, to extend toward destabilising India and weakening, or ultimately dislodging, a government that has been repeatedly re-elected by its own citizens.

Underpinning this ecosystem, moreover, is what looks increasingly like a layer of foreign funding, channelled through advocacy networks and non-profits — an architecture whose deeper aim seems to be fraying India’s internal cohesion and, in its most extreme expression, nudging the country toward balkanisation. No single grievance proves this by itself; it is the recurrence of the pattern, protest after protest, that makes the analysis compelling. The shape of this phenomenon is now familiar enough that it cannot be dismissed and requires serious investigation.

Given the above, India is likely to see one agitation after another between now and 2029 till the next general elections are held in the country. Some will arise from genuine public grievances. Others will be driven principally by electoral strategy or even more nefarious motives. That is the geo-political reality of the unease caused by India’s rise as a global powerhouse.

The challenge now for India is to ensure that every legitimate public grievance becomes an opportunity to strengthen institutions rather than deepen political divisions and become issues to be hijacked by the enemies of the state.

This generation has inherited a country that requires courage to reform its systems. The next generation will inherit the consequences of whether we succeeded.

Building stronger institutions is rarely dramatic work. There will be setbacks and we know there will be resistance. There will also be days when progress appears painfully slow. Yet that is the nature of nation-building. It is a marathon, not a sprint.

In all of this, it is worth remembering that history rarely remembers who shouted the loudest. It remembers who built what lasted.

Contributor: Nandini Bahri Dhanda is an Interior Architect. She has lived across sixteen states in India and travelled extensively around the world. She is a well-known commentator whose interests span art, culture, history and politics.

Support our Journalism

No-nonsense journalism. No paywalls. Whether you’re in Australia, the UK, Canada, the USA, or India, you can support The Australia Today by taking a paid subscription via Patreon or donating via PayPal — and help keep honest, fearless journalism alive.

The post When every protest becomes a proxy war in Modi’s India first appeared on The Australia Today.

It’s not news that young Australians are less religious than their parents and grandparents. Census data has shown a steady decline in religious affiliation for decades, particularly among Christians, who remain Australia’s largest faith group.

Yet over the past few years there have been reports that seemed to point in the opposite direction. As I wrote about religious revival in countries as diverse as Japan, Thailand, China, India, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States, a common theme emerged. Some young people appeared to be returning to religion.

More surprising still, in many places the trend seemed increasingly driven by young men rather than young women.

To figure out what was happening in Australia, I crunched the numbers. While Australia is continuing to secularise overall, beneath that trend, Gen Z appears to be the first generation where men are more likely than women to identify with a religion.

That divide is closely tied to political ideology and may reflect wider gendered political polarisation.

The research

Using Australian Election Study (AES) data collected between 1987 and 2025, I examined religious affiliation across six generations:

• the war generation (born during the 1920s)
• builders (born 1930–1945)
• baby boomers (1946–1960)
• generation X (1961–1979)
• millennials or Gen Y (1980–1994)
• and Generation Z (born after 1994).

Across these cohorts, I analysed responses from 27,478 Australians.

In this analysis, I focus primarily on religious affiliation: whether respondents identify with a religion at all.

While church attendance tells us about participation in organised religion, affiliation captures something broader about identity, belonging and self-understanding.

Religious affiliation is linked to age

The overall pattern was exactly as expected: religious affiliation declines sharply across generations. Older Australians remain significantly more likely than younger Australians to identify with a religion.

The gender pattern showed for every generation from the war generation through to millennials, women are more likely than men to report a religious affiliation.

I then zoomed in on the two youngest generations to see how the gender gap in religious affiliation has evolved over time.

Millennials (gen Y) largely follow the familiar pattern seen in older generations. Both men and women have become less religious over time, but women consistently remain ahead. In the 2025 Australian Election Study, 46.2% of gen Y women reported a religious affiliation compared with 40.3% of gen Y men.

Gen Z tells a different story.

In the 2025 survey, 55.7% of gen Z men reported a religious affiliation, compared with 43.2% of gen Z women.

And this is more than just a one-off quirk. While religious affiliation among gen Y men remained relatively stable between 2019 and 2025 (41.0% to 40.3%), affiliation among gen Z men rose from 35.3% in 2019 to 49.1% in 2022 and 55.7% in 2025.

The pattern survives after accounting for other influences. It’s also still present when political ideology, parental birthplace, marital status and place of residence are controlled for.

The gen Z sample is smaller than those for older generations, meaning the estimates are less precise. Even so, the result remains statistically significant and points to a markedly different religious landscape among the youngest cohort of Australian voters.

Gender, politics, or both?

The obvious next question is: why? I wanted to know whether the emerging gender gap was really about gender, or whether it reflected deeper political differences between young men and women.

To explore this, I estimated a second model that incorporated gender, generation and political ideology together. Here, the reference group was right-leaning gen Z men, allowing me to compare every other gender-generation-ideology combination against arguably the most religious segment of the youngest generation.

The results suggest political identity plays an important role in shaping the new religious divide. Religious affiliation was highest among older Australians on the political right, particularly women from the war and builder generations.

At the other end of the spectrum, the least religious groups were found among younger Australians on the political left. Left-identifying gen Z women were the least likely to be religious. Left-identifying gen Y men and women also displayed comparatively low levels of religiosity.

This finding echoes a pattern scholars have increasingly documented across many democracies. Young women are becoming more progressive while young men are drifting in a more conservative direction. The growing gender gap in religion may be part of the same broader realignment.

One other finding that was particularly striking was that women remained more religious among older generations regardless of political beliefs.

Yet among gen Z, the gap appears to be concentrated among those on the political left.

In other words, the story is not simply that gen Z women are less religious than gen Z men. It is that left-leaning gen Z women appear especially likely to reject religious affiliation, while right-leaning gen Z men remain comparatively attached to it.

Why might this be happening?

I suspect the answer has less to do with church attendance and more to do with identity.

Religion may increasingly function as a source of belonging, meaning and community, particularly for young men. In a world characterised by economic insecurity, social isolation and uncertainty about traditional masculine roles, religion can offer purpose, structure and a sense of place.

Research suggests religion may even help buffer the psychological stress associated with feeling disconnected from conventional expectations of masculinity. Religion offers not only beliefs, but a framework for understanding oneself.

The online world may be amplifying this trend. Social media has made religion more visible, accessible and culturally relevant in ways that do not necessarily require institutional participation.

Influencers, podcasts, self-help figures and online communities increasingly blend spirituality, personal development and cultural commentary. For some young men, religion may therefore serve as a social identity before it becomes a religious practice.

For many young women, however, the trend appears to move in the opposite direction. Gen Z women are more progressive and more likely to embrace feminist values than previous generations.

So while Australia is not experiencing a religious revival in the conventional sense, religion appears to be becoming increasingly tied to the same gendered political divide reshaping many other aspects of social life.

Intifar Chowdhury, Lecturer in Government, Jeff Bleich Centre for Democracy and Disruptive Technologies, Flinders University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Support our Journalism

No-nonsense journalism. No paywalls. Whether you’re in Australia, the UK, Canada, the USA, or India, you can support The Australia Today by taking a paid subscription via Patreon or donating via PayPal — and help keep honest, fearless journalism alive.

The post Gen Z is the first generation in history in which men are more religious than women. Why? first appeared on The Australia Today.

2026 has been an unsettling year in terms of Australian security. It opened with the nation still reeling from its worst terrorist attack on home soil. This sense of insecurity has since been compounded by regional and global events, including the conflict in Iran and, more recently, the Chinese ballistic missile test in the Pacific Ocean.

Surveys by the Australian National University and the Lowy Institute have demonstrated a growing sense of insecurity among Australians. But what does this mean in terms of wider attitudes towards defence issues, and why do these attitudes matter?

Last year, the War Studies Research Group surveyed Australians to get a sense of their attitudes towards the Australian Defence Force (ADF). We fielded a second iteration of this survey in January 2026 to see if anything had changed in the past year.

The survey involved 1,529 Australians aged 18 or older. They were asked many of the same questions from the 2025 iteration, as well as some new ones. Our survey found Australians are increasingly worried about security, but the issues that are at the front of the public mind are not necessarily those that dominate the political debate.

Terrorism and cyberattacks the most significant threat

Both Defence Minister Richard Marles and his Coalition counterpart James Paterson discuss national security issues in the context of the threat of great power competition and conflict.

Yet our survey found that Australians rank terrorism (33.7%) and cyberattacks (29.8%) as more significant threats than either high- or low-intensity conflicts. They also believe the ADF is far more likely to be engaged in peacekeeping missions or the delivery of humanitarian assistance and disaster relief than it is to be involved in a major conflict.

In contrast to armed conflict, terrorism and cyberattacks have affected many Australians, both directly and indirectly. The survey was conducted in the weeks following the December 2025 Bondi attack, which meant terrorism was front-of-mind for our respondents.

Meanwhile, 47% of Australians were found to have experienced a form of cybercrime in 2025. It is unsurprising these two threats ranked so highly.

Navy not the priority, despite AUKUS

This focus on non-traditional security threats fed into limited public support for additional funding for the ADF. In line with our findings from last year, roughly one third of respondents believed more money should be spent on defence. Just over half felt current spending levels were appropriate. Support for funding cuts was slightly higher at 15% compared with 11% in 2025.

Since the 2023 Defence Strategic Review there has been a significant shift of emphasis within defence. This has seen a renewed focus on Australia’s immediate region, and a prioritisation of maritime capabilities needed to fight in the oceans and coastlines that comprise it. Yet our survey suggests this shift is not reflected in public attitudes to defence.

42% of respondents felt the army was the most important service in providing defence for Australia. Around one quarter favoured the air force (24%) or the navy (23%). Similarly, 37% felt the army should be the priority for funding, slightly ahead of the air force (33%) and navy (30%). Navy’s lower priority in the public mind is particularly relevant in the context of AUKUS, and the need for both the Department of Defence and the government to justify its huge price tag.

2 in 5 Australians support introduction of conscription

Recently, several countries have again adopted some form of national service. This has led some commentators to advocate for similar programs in Australia amid the perceived deterioration in the strategic environment.

According to the results of our survey, 43% of Australians support introducing a form of compulsory national service, with 33% opposed and 24% expressing neutral views.

Yet this overall picture disguises considerable variation across demographics. Perhaps unsurprisingly, given they would be most directly affected, young Australians aged 18–24 were least supportive of conscription. More than one third (36%) were opposed, though slightly less than one-third supported national service. By contrast, 71% of those aged 75 and over supported conscription, with only 17% opposed.

There were also significant differences by political affiliation. Half of Liberal party supporters in our survey backed conscription and only 21% opposed. In contrast, only 26% of Greens voters thought it was a good idea, with half (51%) opposed.

Australians show greater support for self-reliance

Some of the largest shifts in public attitude when compared to our 2025 survey related to the roles of the ADF, and Australia’s approach to security.

Overall support for a collaborative and regional approach to security fell, with respondents increasingly favouring a narrower focus on self-reliance and the defence of Australia as the best way forward. Respondents were also more likely to believe that Australian security would be best served by prioritising the development of a strong military over diplomacy and foreign aid.

When it came to the ADF working closely with allies and partners, especially the United States, public support dropped sharply from 75% in 2025 to 54% in 2026. Public backing for the deployment of the ADF in support of allies and partners such as the United States was even lower, coming it at 50%, down from 64% last year.

While support for working with allies and partners continues to outweigh opposition, the substantial growth in opposition in these areas represents one of the most significant year-on-year shifts within the survey.

Again, this is in line with other surveys, which have highlighted downward trends in public opinion regarding the US.

Australians’ growing sense of insecurity

Overall Australians are feeling increasingly insecure, and global events including the actions of the US are clearly affecting how they view security.

However, the way the public frames security does not align with the narrative coming out of the politicians and commentators in Canberra.

Our survey indicates there remains very limited interest in the ADF as an organisation, and little support for a major change in defence policy settings. For those who believe Australia faces its most uncertain strategic situation since the second world war, shifting this perception is arguably the most profound challenge.

Richard Dunley, Senior Lecturer in History and Maritime Strategy, UNSW and Nicole Townsend, Lecturer in War Studies, UNSW

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Support our Journalism

No-nonsense journalism. No paywalls. Whether you’re in Australia, the UK, Canada, the USA, or India, you can support The Australia Today by taking a paid subscription via Patreon or donating via PayPal — and help keep honest, fearless journalism alive.

The post Australians are more concerned about terrorism and cyberattacks than war: new research first appeared on The Australia Today.

Globalisation is often imagined as the triumph of economics over geography. Capital moves instantly, information ignores borders and markets connect societies separated by oceans. Yet the physical foundations of this system remain surprisingly fragile. Much of the world’s energy still passes through a handful of narrow waterways, where a relatively weak state can impose costs upon countries far more powerful than itself.

The Strait of Hormuz now illustrates this contradiction. On 16 July, only three commodity vessels crossed it, while no LNG carrier or very large crude tanker completed the passage for the second consecutive day. Iran did not need to build an impenetrable naval blockade. It merely created enough danger for shipowners, insurers and crews to withdraw voluntarily. Fear accomplished what the Iranian navy could not.

For decades, economic sanctions have reflected the hierarchy of international power. The strongest states could exclude weaker ones from financial networks, restrict their access to technology and determine which goods they were permitted to sell. Iran has lived under precisely such a system. Hormuz, however, gives Tehran an opportunity to reverse this relationship.

It cannot remove the United States from the global financial order, but it can threaten the ships, energy supplies and trading interests of countries aligned with it. The sanctioned state is attempting to become the sanctioning power. By turning passage through an international waterway into something conditional, Iran is not merely retaliating against military pressure. It is constructing an informal sanctions regime of its own, enforced not through banks and institutions, but through fear.

This emerging regime is already visible in the diplomacy surrounding the strait. The arrangement reached in June between US and Iran connected the restoration of safe commercial passage with limited sanctions relief for Iran. When it began to unravel, Tehran again restricted passage for vessels it considered unauthorised, turning a legal right of transit into a negotiable privilege. The distinction is important.

A complete and permanent closure would damage Iran and its partners as well as its adversaries. Selective access offers far greater leverage. Friendly traffic can be tolerated, hostile commercial interests threatened and neutral states encouraged to seek separate assurances. Iran may therefore be attempting something more ambitious than closing Hormuz. It may be claiming the authority to decide who is allowed to pass through it.

The crisis has already created a market for precisely this kind of permission. In April, shipping companies received fraudulent messages offering Iranian “clearance” through Hormuz in exchange for payments in Bitcoin or Tether. The messages did not come from Tehran, but they revealed what its strategy had made possible. Once captains could no longer know whether international law, nationality or private payment determined their safety, even criminals could begin selling passage through one of the world’s most important waterways.

The fraud worked because the underlying uncertainty was real. A route that should have remained open to commercial traffic had begun to resemble territory controlled by an armed group, where travellers seek private assurances before crossing. Iran had not formally imposed a toll. It had created the conditions in which protection itself could be sold.

The most revealing response came from Washington itself. In July, President Donald Trump proposed a 20 per cent charge on cargo passing through Hormuz to recover the cost of American maritime protection. The proposal was abandoned a day later after opposition from the International Maritime Organization and shipping companies, but its implications were considerable. Iran’s coercion had begun to alter how even the power defending freedom of navigation understood the strait. An international waterway was being discussed as a service that could be controlled, secured and monetised.

The countries paying this price are not necessarily those fighting the war. Nearly 80 per cent of the oil and petroleum products passing through Hormuz in 2025 were destined for Asia. The strait also carried more than 110 billion cubic metres of liquefied natural gas, including approximately 93 per cent of Qatar’s and 96 per cent of the UAE’s LNG exports. These volumes cannot simply be redirected through another waterway. Iran’s confrontation may be primarily with the United States and Israel, but much of its economic punishment travels eastward. India, Japan, South Korea and poorer Asian economies can remain militarily neutral and still suffer higher energy prices, transport costs and inflation. In an interdependent world, neutrality may keep a country outside the battlefield. It cannot keep the battlefield outside its economy.

Not every country can absorb this shock equally. Wealthy states have strategic oil reserves, multiple suppliers and enough money to protect consumers temporarily. During the Hormuz crisis, the International Energy Agency coordinated the release of up to 400 million barrels to contain the rise in prices. Poorer importers have far fewer options. They must buy expensive energy, reduce consumption or divert public money from welfare and development. The result is deeply unequal. Iran claims to be resisting Western power. Yet the cost of that resistance is increasingly borne by societies far poorer than the West.

The damage also travels far beyond the fuel pump. Natural gas is a major input in the production of nitrogenous fertilisers, which means disruption at Hormuz can eventually affect the price and availability of food. Sudan receives 54 per cent of its seaborne fertiliser imports through the strait, while Sri Lanka receives 36 per cent. For such countries, a delayed shipment can collide with planting seasons that cannot simply be postponed. Oil reserves may buy governments a few weeks, but agriculture follows a calendar that diplomacy cannot reset. A missile fired near a tanker can therefore reappear months later as a smaller harvest or a more expensive bag of grain. Maritime coercion becomes most effective precisely where its victims are least visible and least capable of responding.

Behind these figures are the people who physically carry globalisation across the sea. By late April, the International Maritime Organization had verified 29 attacks on vessels around Hormuz and the Persian Gulf, killing at least 10 seafarers. Nearly 20,000 others remained aboard some 1,600 vessels in the region. Yet merchant crews rarely appear in discussions dominated by oil prices and naval strategy. A ship may be owned in one country, registered in another, insured in a third and staffed by Indians, Filipinos or Bangladeshis carrying cargo to a fourth. This fragmentation makes responsibility easy to evade. No government feels complete ownership of their safety. They become combatants without citizenship in the conflict, placed in danger by political decisions over which they have no influence.

The attack on the tanker MT Settebello in June made this human cost impossible to reduce to an economic statistic. Three seafarers were killed near the Strait of Hormuz while performing civilian work aboard a commercial vessel. They were not soldiers enforcing a blockade or officials designing sanctions against Iran. Their vulnerability was precisely what gave the attack its wider power. Violence against one ship communicates danger to every crew approaching the region, every company considering a shipment and every government dependent upon its cargo. This is where Iran’s maritime strategy begins to acquire the logic of terrorism. The immediate victims are civilians, but the intended audience is global. The physical attack remains local. The fear is designed to travel.

Iran, long subjected to economic exclusion, is now attempting to build an exclusionary system of its own at sea. If this coercion earns political concessions, the world will not merely have reopened a waterway. It will have legitimised an authoritarian to decide which countries may trade, which economies must suffer and which sailors may pass safely. Hormuz cannot become Iran’s private checkpoint. No state can be allowed to turn geography into immunity and globalisation into a human shield.

Contributing Author: Omer Ghazi is a proponent of religious reform and extensively writes on geo-politics, history and culture.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this article are the author’s personal opinions. The Australia Today is not responsible for the accuracy, completeness, suitability, or validity of any information in this article. The information, facts, or opinions appearing in the article do not reflect the views of The Australia Today, and The Australia Today News does not assume any responsibility or liability for the same.

Support our Journalism

No-nonsense journalism. No paywalls. Whether you’re in Australia, the UK, Canada, the USA, or India, you can support The Australia Today by taking a paid subscription via Patreon or donating via PayPal — and help keep honest, fearless journalism alive.

The post Terror beyond borders: Iran’s maritime war on the global economy first appeared on The Australia Today.

Last week, the US software company Turnitin revealed 53.6% of Australian tertiary education submissions run through its system used some form of AI in the period from October 2025-April 2026. The company, whose plagiarism-detection technology is widely used in universities, also reported 10% of these submissions contained more than 80% AI-written content.

Meanwhile, separate data from AI safety company Anthropic showed Australia now leads in per capita use of its Claude chatbot. Coursework makes up a significant share of that use.

Our 2026 analysis found while most Australian universities have introduced generative AI policies, significant gaps remain in translating these into practice.

So what can unis do to keep up?

How AI is used matters

The headline figure is striking, but it should be interpreted with care. AI detection tools estimate the likelihood that assisted writing is present, not whether a student breached university rules. A high AI score could reflect disclosed use rather than academic misconduct.

The real concern is not whether AI is present in students’ work, but how it is being used and assessed.

Generative AI can be used in many ways to assist in learning, such as brainstorming ideas, refining structure, improving grammar, generating practice questions, or receiving formative feedback. These activities are increasingly recognised by universities as appropriate when used transparently and within institutional guidelines.

Experts say AI can become problematic when it replaces, rather than supports students’ thinking.

Rethinking how units are taught

A big challenge for universities is distinguishing whether students are using AI to help or as a substitute for learning. Unis need to ask whether their current approach to AI is effective in providing students with the knowledge, judgement and skills required for their degree.

One way unis can approach this is by modifying units to focus on the learning process rather than the final assessment.

For example, instead of asking students to submit a single essay at the end of the semester, an educator might ask them to document how they used AI throughout the unit. They might be asked to evaluate the accuracy of AI responses and reflect on why they accepted or rejected particular suggestions. The final grade would therefore recognise not only the finished product, but also the student’s reasoning, judgement and learning process.

But changing assessment alone is unlikely to improve learning outcomes. Students need repeated opportunities to practise the kinds of thinking, judgement and AI-supported decision-making in adapted assessments. This is why highlighting the learning process as part of a unit restructure is important.

Still, this sort of curriculum change takes time. Teaching activities, assessments, learning outcomes and staff development all need to be reviewed and tested before being introduced at scale.

Tools designed for education

The Turnitin report also found educators are increasingly demanding education-specific AI tools to help them navigate AI use in tertiary education.

Generic AI assistants, such as ChatGPT, are designed to answer almost any question. Universities, however, need AI systems designed around learning, assessment and institutional policies.

Used well, education-specific AI tools can support students through structured brainstorming, provide them with tailored feedback, and guide them to relevant course resources. For teachers, education-specific AI tools can allow them to set limits in how AI can be used by students, and to see how students have used AI in assessments.

Many universities now provide institutionally supported AI tools. Other unis are piloting the technology.

The goal is not to replace educators or automate assessment. It is to create AI that supports learning, transparency and academic integrity. If AI becomes an accepted, routine part of university study, these education-specific systems may become as important to learning as the technologies and software platforms universities currently rely on.

We also need to remember, there is not one simple fix around AI. It’s not something that can be solved by a one-off solution. Unis therefore need to treat AI as an ongoing educational and governance challenge. Effective responses require continuous evaluation, adaptation and investment in teaching, assessment and policy as the technology changes.

Meena Jha, Associate Professor, College of Information & Communication Technology, CQUniversity Australia and Amara Atif, Senior Lecturer, School of Computer Science, Faculty of Engineering and IT, University of Technology Sydney

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Support our Journalism

No-nonsense journalism. No paywalls. Whether you’re in Australia, the UK, Canada, the USA, or India, you can support The Australia Today by taking a paid subscription via Patreon or donating via PayPal — and help keep honest, fearless journalism alive.

The post More than 50% of Australian university assignments used AI. How should unis respond? first appeared on The Australia Today.

In January 2025, Fiji’s Minister for Health Dr Ratu Atonio Lalabalavu declared a national HIV outbreak. New case notifications rose twelvefold in seven years, from 131 in 2018 to 1,583 in 2024. Modelled estimates put the real number of people living with HIV at about 6,100, meaning more than 40% of those infected do not know it. Of patients who started antiretroviral therapy in 2024 and for whom exposure data was recorded, 48% named injecting drug use as their primary route of infection. Fiji’s HIV epidemic is not primarily sexual; it is a syringe epidemic.

A rapid assessment commissioned by the World Health Organization and the United Nations Development Programme and conducted by the Kirby Institute at the University of NSW Sydney, published in December 2025, gives the clearest account yet of how HIV is spreading among people who inject drugs in Suva. Every person interviewed had shared a needle or syringe at least once. About half injected crystal methamphetamine the first time they used it, often with a syringe already used by someone else. Most injected daily. Pharmacies, the only realistic source of sterile equipment, frequently refuse to sell syringes without a prescription. The practice has no basis in Fijian law but persists.

The rapid assessment documents a practice called koda: blood is drawn from a vein into the barrel of a syringe, mixed with the drug crystals and reinjected. It is commonly used because it is said to produce a more intense effect. It is also an efficient mechanism for HIV transmission. The drug is mixed in potentially infected blood, in a syringe that will often be passed on.

Bluetoothing, the practice of drawing blood from one person’s injection site and injecting it into another, has dominated public commentary but was reported by only two of 56 participants. The driver of transmission is shared syringes, forced by the near-total absence of sterile equipment.

None of this is surprising to public health researchers. What is surprising is that the solution has been available for decades and is not in use in Fiji. A needle and syringe program (NSP) provides free sterile equipment to people who inject drugs, without prescription, registration or any requirement to return used kit. NSPs cut HIV transmission, do not increase drug use and are highly cost-effective. Australia has run them since 1987. New Zealand, Portugal, Switzerland, Canada and dozens of other countries have built them into standard public health infrastructure. The countries that moved early avoided or contained epidemics that, elsewhere, became catastrophic. In Indonesia and the Philippines, where authorities did not implement such schemes, HIV epidemics among people who inject drugs grew quickly and proved very hard to reverse.

Fiji’s legal framework, comprising mainly the HIV/AIDS Decree 2011, the National HIV Surge Strategy 2024-2027 and the National Counter Narcotics Strategy 2023-2028, provides the policy foundation for action. In addition, Fiji is a signatory to the 2021 UN Political Declaration on HIV and AIDS. In December 2025, in response to the publication of the assessment, the Health Ministry confirmed that a NSP would be implemented.

The latest update from Lalabalavu during the June 2026 budget indicated that preparations for the NSP’s implementation were “nearing completion”. Meanwhile, in the extended period of time between announcement and delivery, people are contracting HIV and hepatitis C, developing infective endocarditis and dying in emergency departments. One healthcare worker quoted in the assessment described a steady flow of young people arriving in septic shock, many of whom do not survive.

The barriers are not legal or technical. They are cultural and political. Some health officials, police and religious leaders told Talanoa discussions (community consultations) that providing sterile equipment amounts to endorsing drug use. The assessment’s reply, paraphrased: Fijian society is defined by dignity, compassion, care and reciprocity, and those are the values a NSP enacts. The Medically Supervised Injecting Centre in Sydney, Australia, is run by the Uniting Church. In Tonga, religious leaders have worked alongside health agencies on HIV prevention. The moral question is whether to withhold help and watch the epidemic grow.

The recommended model is practical, low-cost and immediately implementable. Free sterile needles and syringes should be available through sexual and reproductive health (SRH) hubs already serving key populations in Suva, through community pharmacies without prescription, through peer distribution networks and through community-based organisations. Services should be low threshold: no registration, no requirement to return used equipment and no HIV test as a condition of access. The research found that the main barriers to access are fear of exposure and stigma, not lack of interest. Participants described entering pharmacies and inventing stories about diabetic grandmothers to explain why they needed syringes. They described leaving empty-handed when the pharmacist looked suspicious or deciding to share rather than face the counter.

Implementation should proceed in stages. First, pharmacies should be encouraged, through engagement between the Ministry of Health and the pharmacy sector to sell single-use syringes over the counter without prescription. This requires no new infrastructure and no budget. It removes the most commonly reported barrier overnight. Second, within months: SRH hubs in the Central and Western Divisions should be resourced to distribute sterile needles and syringes alongside HIV testing, condoms and referral. Medical Services Pacific’s (MSP) Moonlight Programme, which already reaches sex workers, men who have sex with men, transgender individuals and people who inject drugs through night-time outreach in Suva, is a natural delivery platform. Third, within a year: a peer distribution model, drawing on people with lived experience, should be established and funded. The rapid assessment notes that there is no drug user organisation in Fiji and that building one is critical.

Australia and New Zealand’s aid investment in Fiji’s HIV response, channelled partly through the International Planned Parenthood Federation and civil society organisations, has so far focused on testing, counselling and condom distribution among key populations. The moonlight testing program has achieved reactive case rates of nearly 9%, strong evidence that it is reaching the right people. An 8.9% positive rate also means one in every 11 people tested in the Suva night-time economy is newly diagnosed. Testing identifies cases but does not prevent transmission. The next phase of aid investment should include direct support for NSP establishment: commodity procurement, peer workforce development and integration of harm reduction into existing SRH service delivery.

Modelling estimates in the Kirby Institute report project total HIV cases in Fiji reaching 25,000 by 2029 without intervention. The trajectory is already visible in the data. Cases among 15–19-year-olds jumped from six in 2022 to 165 in 2024. Deaths recorded among people newly diagnosed in 2024 include eight children under 15 years. No version of this epidemic gets better on its own, and no harm reduction program is sophisticated enough to reverse a concentrated epidemic once it becomes generalised. Hence, the window for prevention is now.

The people interviewed described wanting to access services and described positive experiences at MSP’s clinic: welcoming, discreet and non-judgemental. They said they would go to an NSP if one existed. One participant put it plainly: “Either protect them or lose them.” Fiji has the values, the legal framework, the civil society infrastructure and the international support to act. What is missing is the willingness to make the first move — to supply free needles, without prescription or registration.

This article appeared first on Devpolicy Blog (devpolicy.org), from the Development Policy Centre at The Australian National University.

Disclosure: The author leads Voices of Resilience, a Pacific-wide HIV program, implemented by the International Planned Parenthood Federation and funded by the Australian and the New Zealand Governments. The views expressed are those of the author only.

Contributing Author: Uate Tamanikaiyaroi is Architect of Cooperation — Pacific SRHR and Humanitarian Hub at International Planned Parenthood Federation’s Sub-Regional Office for the Pacific, based in Suva, Fiji.

Support our Journalism

No-nonsense journalism. No paywalls. Whether you’re in Australia, the UK, Canada, the USA, or India, you can support The Australia Today by taking a paid subscription via Patreon or donating via PayPal — and help keep honest, fearless journalism alive.

The post Fiji’s HIV crisis is a syringe crisis and the fix is sitting on a pharmacy shelf first appeared on The Australia Today.

In the months since the Bondi terror attack in December 2025, One Nation’s popularity has surged. Opinion poll after opinion poll has support for the right-wing populist party surging, mostly at the expense of the Coalition, which has been unable to find its footing since its drubbing at the 2025 federal election.

There was always going to be a point at which that surge would abate, and recent opinion polls show we might have reached it. In the latest Resolve poll, for example, One Nation’s primary vote dropped three percentage points to 26%. At the same time, leader Pauline Hanson, who has been shown to be the most popular pick for prime minister in some recent polls, dropped 8 points to 25%.

Other polls have also shown One Nation’s momentum stalling, with its primary dropping back below Labor’s – but remaining well ahead of the Coalition.

Does this mean it will head back to being, and polling like, a minor party?

It’s not that simple.

Other pollsters such as YouGov paint a more mixed picture, showing some growth in One Nation support – but an improvement for the Labor government after the distribution of preferences.

Taken together, these polls tend to suggest that One Nation is struggling to move its primary beyond the 30% barrier. However, it is maintaining a solid second place in the electorate – ahead of the Coalition.

There are two factors that might explain the recent tapering of its support: Hanson’s controversial appearance at the National Press Club, and the government’s recovery from its immediate post budget slump.

The press club address – a mask-off moment?

Pauline Hanson’s press club address announced no new policies. However, it offered Hanson a first-time platform to reiterate her core messages. It also afforded some of One Nation’s less conspicuous policy positions greater visibility.

Particularly blunt was Hanson’s advocacy for a “monocultural” Australia. As noted by eminent historian Frank Bongiorno, this is not a new for position for Hanson. But it was a clear expression of anti-immigrant and anti-diversity sentiment. https://www.youtube.com/embed/rcZXVcFqV9A?wmode=transparent&start=0

Hanson also attacked young workers for being lazy – with calls for stronger employers’ rights to hire and fire. This was combined with strong criticisms of maternity leave and working-from-home arrangements, and scepticism of the gender pay gap. Economically, Hanson outlined orthodox neo-liberal policies at odds with much of her populist positioning.

The speech can be seen as something of a “greatest hits”: she attacked “transgender ideology”, “radical Islam” and Indigenous reconciliation.

However, while hitting traditional One Nation issues – Hanson’s wider industrial relations positions may be cause for pause for working class supporters in outer suburban areas, which have helped fuel One Nation’s polling surge amid housing and cost-of-living crises.

Can One Nation’s support hold up?

Essential research polling suggests low support for some of One Nation’s key positions.

Only 20% of respondents supported ending Australia’s support of multiculturalism and an even lower 18% favoured strengthening industrial laws in favour of employers at the expense of workers. Only 15% supported Hanson’s call to defund the ABC and just 11% supported her plan to abolish SBS.

These attitudes in the electorate have perhaps helped Labor to staunch its slow bleed of support to One Nation.

After initially being panned by the electorate, Labor’s changes to negative gearing and capital gains tax signalled a break from the status quo.

Being perceived as part of politics as usual and promising orthodox economic policy is one of One Nation’s greatest electoral dangers. Many voters see it as a wrecking ball against the existing political establishment, and are willing to support the party as a disruptive influence. This is despite not endorsing key planks of its policy platform.

Without this outsider appeal – One Nation’s path to gaining support becomes more difficult.

Despite the challenges, One Nation’s support will endure

One Nation is likely to retain the support of around a quarter of the electorate, unless the Coalition can recover some of its core voters.

The Coalition is in a catastrophic position, losing support to both the left and right. Opposition Leader Angus Taylor recently outlined an immigration policy based on values discrimination to try to recapture support from One Nation. So far, polls have not shown any gain for this position.

Comparative research suggests that mainstream centre-right parties struggle to win back support from far-right challengers if they simply parrot the policy positions of far-right parties.

Lessons from across the globe suggest the Coalition’s path to winning back support from One Nation is by simultaneously establishing One Nation as illegitimate and dangerous, while appealing to the policy preferences of their supports.

Hanson’s engagement with far-right extremists such as Tommy Robinson might help the Coalition make this case.

Contrasting with Hanson’s embrace of Robinson, Reform Party leader Nigel Farage left his previous Brexit Party following Robinson joining its membership, arguing Robinson was “entirely unsuitable to be involved in any political party”.

Despite this recent polling stagnation federally, Redbridge polling has One Nation in first place in a tight three-way context in Victoria in advance of the November state election. The party also faces a key contest in the Secret Harbour state by-election in Western Australia. This is an outer-suburban Labor fortress – but one that also fits within Andrew Hastie’s federal seat of Canning.

Both these contests will offer insights into whether economically insecure voters who are feeling cost of living pressures are backing One Nation’s anti-establishment challenge, or whether concerns over policies might cause them to stick with the major parties.

Josh Sunman, Associate Lecturer in Public Policy, Flinders University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Support our Journalism

No-nonsense journalism. No paywalls. Whether you’re in Australia, the UK, Canada, the USA, or India, you can support The Australia Today by taking a paid subscription via Patreon or donating via PayPal — and help keep honest, fearless journalism alive.

The post Another poll shows One Nation’s surge has turned around. Has the party peaked? first appeared on The Australia Today.

Australia’s Bharatiya diaspora witnessed a truly historic and memorable occasion on 9 July as the leaders of two of the world’s great democracies shared the same stage to articulate their shared vision, mutual respect and commitment to a stronger Australia-India partnership.

The much-anticipated visit of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi concluded with a spectacular community celebration at Melbourne’s Marvel Stadium. More than 25,000 members of the Australian Indian community, together with dignitaries, elected representatives and distinguished guests, gathered to celebrate the deepening friendship between the two nations.

The atmosphere was one of pride, excitement and unity. Cultural performances showcased India’s rich heritage, while official meetings, media interactions and community engagements highlighted the growing strategic, economic and people-to-people ties between Australia and India.

The audience enthusiastically welcomed both Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, whose speeches reflected a shared commitment to peace, prosperity, innovation and collaboration. Premier Jacinta Allan also addressed the gathering, emphasising that multiculturalism remains one of Australia’s greatest strengths. She acknowledged the invaluable contribution made by multicultural communities, including the Australian Indian community, in shaping Victoria’s economic, social and cultural success.

While the entire event was memorable, one moment stood out as particularly meaningful. As both Prime Ministers made their way towards the stage, they were welcomed by an inspiring line-up of accomplished women from the Australian Indian community. This powerful tribute to Naari Shakti (Women Power) was much more than a ceremonial welcome. It symbolised the respect, dignity and reverence accorded to women in Hindu culture and reflected the important role women continue to play in strengthening both Australian and Indian society. The women chosen for this honour represented a remarkable cross-section of the community.

They included successful entrepreneurs, journalists, academics, researchers, professionals and dedicated community volunteers who have made significant contributions across business, education, media, healthcare, social services and community leadership.

Among them were Dr. Anjali Bhagwat, Clinical Research Professional.; Rutuja Bhonde, Chartered Accountant and Co-Founder of Sohum Yog Music Division; Krishna Sevak Bhatt, Entrepreneur and high-altitude Trekker; Bina Shah, Senior Executive and Chairperson of JITO Australia; Dr. Richa Shukla Potdar, Operations Manager for a leading organisation; Raji Aiyer, Digital Entrepreneur; Rajashree Datta, Senior Executive and Founder of the Australia Bengali Cultural Association; Smitha Shine, Clinical Nurse Specialist; Aparna Menon, Supply Chain Professional; Heta Nanawala, Senior IT engineer at FinTech company; Kavitha Satheesh, Nurse Consultant; Arathi Upadhyaya, Product Integration lead at a leading WHS software company; Sunyana Mewundi Gadgoli, Technology professional and Vice President Melbourne Kannada Sangha; and Pallavi Jain, Co-Founder and Editor of The Australia Today, reflecting the diverse leadership, professional excellence, and community contributions represented at the event.

Their presence acknowledged not only their individual achievements but also the countless women whose efforts continue to strengthen families, communities and the nation. Standing before the leaders of Australia and India, these women represented the shared values of two democracies that increasingly recognise women’s leadership as central to national progress.

They were not simply welcoming two Prime Ministers. They embodied resilience, service, excellence and leadership. For many Australian Hindus and Australians of Indian origin, the moment also carried deeper emotional significance. It reflected gratitude for India’s continued commitment towards the safety, dignity and empowerment of women, including the decisive actions taken during Operation Sindoor.

The recognition of women’s strength and leadership resonated strongly with many in attendance and reinforced the values of courage, protection and respect. The message conveyed throughout the evening was unmistakable. Australia and India are nations where women are not viewed as secondary participants in society, but as leaders, innovators and nation-builders.

They are mothers, wives, sisters and daughters within their families, while also serving as educators, professionals, entrepreneurs, policymakers, volunteers and changemakers who help shape the future of both countries.

The celebration at Marvel Stadium was therefore far more than a community gathering. It was a powerful expression of friendship between two nations, a reaffirmation of democratic values, and a recognition that inclusive leadership and the empowerment of women will continue to define the future of the Australia-India relationship. As the stadium echoed with applause and pride, the event left behind a lasting message: when two vibrant democracies come together with shared values, mutual respect and a commitment to equality, the possibilities for future generations are limitless.

Contributing Author: Aditi Kirtane is a business owner and Victoria Co-ordinator for Optics Australia. She was the driving force behind the Naari Shakti tribute at the Melbourne Meets Modi event.

Support our Journalism

No-nonsense journalism. No paywalls. Whether you’re in Australia, the UK, Canada, the USA, or India, you can support The Australia Today by taking a paid subscription via Patreon or donating via PayPal — and help keep honest, fearless journalism alive.

The post A night that celebrated Democracy, Diversity and Naari Shakti first appeared on The Australia Today.

For the best part of a century, Australian property investors have enjoyed a generous tax arrangement found in few other countries: the infamous “negative gearing”.

Now, sweeping reforms to limit negative gearing to new builds and also change the way capital gains are taxed have become law.

The federal government hopes to give first-home buyers a better shot at buying existing homes and at the same time redirect investor cash towards increasing housing supply.

However, some of the practical implications of these changes haven’t received much attention. Here are three possible side effects which could now distort the property market in unexpected ways – including favouring investors.

What is negative gearing?

Most people associate negative gearing with real estate. But it can apply to any kind of investment.

Here, gearing simply means borrowing money to invest. And if an investment is negatively geared, it means the expenses related to owning it (such as the interest payments on a mortgage) are greater than the income it generates (rental payments).

For property investors, these expenses could also include other costs, such as real estate agent fees, council and water rates, and so on.

Under the old rules, high income earners were able to use a rental loss immediately to reduce their tax bill on other income, such as a salary.

Coupled with the way capital gains were taxed at a 50% exemption, the arrangement allowed many property investors to tolerate – perhaps even welcome – a rental property running at an apparent loss for tax purposes, while the property’s value continued to climb.

What’s changed?

Importantly, negative gearing hasn’t been abolished altogether. It has just been heavily restricted in the context of residential property.

Under the old rules, any rental expenses exceeding rental income could be deducted against an investor’s salary, business or other income. For purchases made after the cut-off time of 7:30pm on budget night on May 12, this arrangement is reserved for new builds only.

For existing properties, unused excessive expenses are now “quarantined”. This means they can only be used to offset future rental profits or the profit an investor makes when they eventually sell the property – not against other forms of income.

At the same time, the 50% capital gains exemption has been replaced by an “indexation system” that adjusts the cost of a property to take inflation into account.

Importantly, anyone who purchased a property before the cutoff time has had their arrangements “grandfathered”, meaning they can continue to deduct excess rental expenses from other income.

However, some workarounds and other distortions still exist.

Converting home into an investment

First, for people who currently own just one property to live in, a unique door remains open.

Under the legislation, to be eligible for the old negative gearing arrangements, a property only needed to be owned (or under binding contract) at the cutoff time. It did not need to be an investment property at this time.

By buying another property in the future and moving into it, some people may be able to technically give an existing build (their former home) the traditional negative gearing treatment once it becomes a rental property.

While this “loophole” may not have huge impacts on the housing market, some economists have speculated it could disincentivise some homeowners from selling property, to retain the option to negatively gear later.

A big advantage for ‘grandfathered’ landlords

Under the new laws, “grandfathered” landlords (who owned properties before budget night) get a massive structural advantage. And this isn’t just because they can continue to negatively gear their existing properties.

If those older properties become profitable (positively geared) as the mortgage is paid off and rents rise over time, these investors would normally start paying tax on their rental profits.

However, the new tax law allows these investors to use the excess profit from their old portfolio to immediately absorb and offset the quarantined losses of newly acquired properties.

Basically, they keep some of the tax advantages of negative gearing – even though their properties aren’t making a loss for tax purposes.

Rental losses could get ‘trapped’ in property

As a result of the new “quarantine” rule, some investors will end up with rental property expenses they have not been able to deduct, leading to a pool of undeducted rental property expenses.

Those expenses are not completely lost − they can potentially be used to reduce the tax on any capital gain realised when the property is sold.

However, because these losses can’t be used to offset any other types of income (only those related to property), landlords have an incentive to hold onto property until they are sure of a capital gain large enough to make use of these undeducted rental property expenses, which are otherwise “trapped”.

If investors delay selling for tax reasons, the reforms may reduce the supply of established homes available for sale, placing upward pressure on housing prices.

Making housing more affordable?

Supporters of these changes argue that this is a great chance to make houses more affordable and create opportunities for new entrants to get into the property market more easily.

The theory is straightforward. If you strip away the tax benefits of buying existing houses, wealthy investors will stop outbidding everyday people just trying to buy a home, cooling down property prices.

The are early signs Australia’s housing market is beginning to cool. However, it remains to be seen if the end of negative gearing will have a more long-term impact on housing affordability in Australia.

Disclaimer: This article is not tax advice, it is for educational purposes only. Taxpayers should seek advice from a registered tax agent or suitably qualified professional.

Fei Gao, Lecturer in Taxation, Discipline of Accounting, Governance & Regulation, The University of Sydney, University of Sydney and Richard Krever, Professor of Tax Law, The University of Western Australia

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Support our Journalism

No-nonsense journalism. No paywalls. Whether you’re in Australia, the UK, Canada, the USA, or India, you can support The Australia Today by taking a paid subscription via Patreon or donating via PayPal — and help keep honest, fearless journalism alive.

The post How Australia’s new negative gearing rules might accidentally favour some property investors first appeared on The Australia Today.

Aamir Khan recently teamed up with the cast and crew of Lagaan to celebrate the 25th anniversary of the epic drama that left an enduring legacy in Indian cinema. Lagaan set the bar incredibly high for Bollywood. It was not only the plot, but also the acting, the dialogues and, of course, the unforgettable songs by musical genius A. R. Rahman.

Watching it as a 10-year-old boy in Fiji inspired me in countless ways. The music of Lagaan gave me the feeling that nothing is impossible and that I could achieve whatever I wanted. It was four hours of my life spent doing something truly worthwhile. As a curious child, I wondered why Aamir Khan was speaking in our language, Fiji Hindi.

In Lagaan, the characters spoke in Awadhi, which is strikingly similar to Fiji Hindi. I thought perhaps someone from Fiji had made the film and had Aamir Khan speak in my mother tongue. That alone made me and many other Indo-Fijians relate deeply to the film, especially given that, like the villagers in Lagaan, we share a history shaped by British colonisation.

While romance, comedy and family dramas were dominating the box office, Lagaan proved to be a game-changer for Indian cinema, giving the biggest studios a run for their money. Although it featured a love triangle—a common Bollywood trope since the late 1990s—its truly unique premise centred on a young farmer who challenged the British to a game of cricket, with three years of lagaan (land tax) at stake. If the villagers won, the tax would be forgiven.

Ashutosh Gowariker conceived the idea of a period sports drama at a time when producers heavily relied on love stories and comedies. Despite repeated rejections and pressure to compromise on his vision, he refused to give up. The concept impressed Aamir Khan so much that he decided to produce the film, taking his career in a bold new direction.

While Gowariker displayed his brilliance as a director, it was equally inspiring to see him collaborate with the legendary A. R. Rahman, arguably India’s greatest musical gift to the world. “Ghanan Ghanan”, capturing the villagers’ desperate longing for rain, remains deeply moving. The melody of “Mitwa” inspired not only the village cricket team but audiences for years after the film’s release, reminding us that even the greatest underdogs can defeat giants.

The cast deserves equal credit for the film’s success. Aamir Khan’s performance in Lagaan surpasses that of almost every film released during the past quarter-century. Based on his work in Lagaan alone, he truly earned the title of “Mr Perfectionist”. Gracy Singh also delivered a marvellous performance as Gauri, Bhuvan’s devoted love interest.

British actors Rachel Shelley and Paul Blackthorne brought authenticity to the story through their portrayals of the Russell siblings. Paul Blackthorne’s Captain Russell was a villain audiences loved to hate. His ability to speak the language of the people he colonised made the character even more menacing. Gowariker ensured that Captain Russell tormented audiences throughout the four-hour film, just as he tormented the people of Champaner.

Lagaan became a unifying force for a nation of more than a billion people. It conveyed a timeless message: people from diverse backgrounds can come together to overcome their greatest challenges. Just as rugby is almost a religion in Fiji, cricket occupies a similar place in India’s cultural identity. The film also became a source of pride for the Indian diaspora. Just as people would tell a Brazilian, “You’re from Brazil? I love Ronaldo—he’s a great footballer,” many Indians abroad likely heard, “You’re from India? I loved Lagaan.”

Then came the most heartbreaking moment—the film’s defeat at the 74th Academy Awards. In my opinion, it remains one of the greatest disappointments in Oscar history. Nevertheless, the loss did nothing to diminish the extraordinary work of its cast and crew.

Three years later, Gowariker released Swades, another remarkable film celebrating pride, patriotism and progress. While it has since become a cult classic, it could not replicate the phenomenal success of Lagaan.

On one side, we have Lagaan; on the other, we have high-budget, formulaic films inspired by Hollywood, packed with ensemble casts and remixed Hindi songs. Bollywood needs more films like Lagaan and fewer disposable blockbusters.

As the old man says during the film’s climax, “Ummid nahi thi ki yeh din dekhna padega” (“I never thought I would live to see this day”). I hope one day Bollywood produces a film that surpasses Lagaan, so that I too can say those words.

Support our Journalism

No-nonsense journalism. No paywalls. Whether you’re in Australia, the UK, Canada, the USA, or India, you can support The Australia Today by taking a paid subscription via Patreon or donating via PayPal — and help keep honest, fearless journalism alive.

The post When Aamir Khan’s historical Bollywood epic ‘Lagaan’ spoke the language of the Girmitiyas first appeared on The Australia Today.

Australians woke up this morning to a major outage affecting Telstra, the largest telecommunications network in the country. But mobile phones weren’t the only thing knocked out of action.

Some EFTPOS payment services, taxi payment systems, electric vehicle charging platform Chargefox, and public transport ticketing in Canberra were all affected. There have been conflicting reports over whether Triple Zero calls were impacted, as they were in a recent Optus outage.

Most notably, train services were affected in Victoria and New South Wales. Victoria’s regional train system, V/Line, suspended services across all lines due to the national Telstra outage.

As of Wednesday mid-morning, there has been no estimated time for when trains will start running again, and limited coach replacements are available. With the outage having started about 4.30am, this threw the morning commute into chaos for many.

But how does a mobile network crash affect trains? Let’s look at the underlying tech connections.

How do trains use a mobile network?

Trains have roof-mounted antennae that connect them with control centres. Voice and data communication between trains and control centres takes place on frequency channels that are used in mobile networks.

Trains can use these channels to either “talk” to the control centre as required, or share real-time information such as the train’s location, speed, arrival times and so on. This ensures safe and reliable travel across the rail network.

Roof-mounted antennae on trains can also provide mobile phone services to on-board passengers. Train service providers can use this connectivity for specific purposes like retrieving and managing ticketing information, and also for providing passengers with access to the Internet.

Why can trains not go if the Telstra network is down?

If the mobile network is down, trains lose their connection and can’t send or receive traffic-related information. This includes any time-critical traffic alerts, such as delays, cancellations or other changes to the route.

Trains also often send diagnostic data through mobile networks – these are factors such as engine and braking performance.

All this means that while trains can technically still run (they used to before mobile networks were invented), this lack of mobile connectivity wouldn’t allow for a safe and secure journey.

The government-owned Australian Rail Track Corporation (ARTC), which manages more than 9,600km of rail tracks in New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia, Victoria and Western Australia, upgraded their train-to-network communications to 4G on the Telstra network in 2024. VicTrack, which runs V/Rail, also uses the Telstra network, and ARTC is one of its transport partners.

Therefore, any glitches in the Telstra network will make it extremely difficult to control train traffic on railways that rely on it. Most train networks would fall back on satellite systems, but they don’t provide the same service level as terrestrial mobile networks – notably, they have a slower speed.

Could there have been back-ups to prevent such an outage?

Because trains travel at fast speeds, using multiple networks would ensure continuous connectivity along the entire route.

Some areas on a route may only be served by one mobile service provider, in which case if that service provider is not available, that entire area will suffer from a loss of connectivity.

Financial feasibility concerns often affect decisions that ensure continuous mobile coverage, particularly in regional and rural areas. Satellite communication is often used as backup where mobile coverage is not present.

Train operators should be mindful of putting all their eggs in one basket when it comes to mobile network coverage.

Why did the Telstra network go down?

As the company still investigates the cause of the outage, Telstra’s acting chief executive Michael Ackland said at a press conference there was a timing issue with several nodes in the network. He said:

The time synchronisation in those nodes wasn’t working as it should. We don’t know why yet.

All the bits and pieces of a telecommunications network have to maintain time synchronisation – which means all devices across the network have the same accurate time.

Time synchronisation allows multiple devices to share information on wireless channels without affecting each others’ transmissions. Loss of time synchronisation may result in devices talking over each other, not being able to maintain mobile connectivity, and failure of authentication sequences (verifying users).

Ackland assured the media there was no sign of “malicious activity” and has apologised for the disruption:

Our teams are working, right now, as quickly as possible to get things back online. We will share updates with you as we have them.

Faraz Hasan, Director of Research, University of Canberra

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Support our Journalism

No-nonsense journalism. No paywalls. Whether you’re in Australia, the UK, Canada, the USA, or India, you can support The Australia Today by taking a paid subscription via Patreon or donating via PayPal — and help keep honest, fearless journalism alive.

The post How does a Telstra outage bring down trains? A telco expert explains first appeared on The Australia Today.

After years of rapid growth, Australia’s housing market is beginning to cool. Auction clearance rates have softened, prices in Sydney and Melbourne are easing, and economists expect further modest declines over coming months.

And whenever housing slows, the same question quickly follows: will the broader economy slow with it? The answer is probably yes – but not by much.

What does a slowdown mean for the economy?

Housing touches almost every part of Australia’s economy.

Building homes supports construction, manufacturing and professional services. Buying and selling homes generates spending on furniture, appliances, renovations and removals. Rising house prices can also encourage households to spend more, while weaker prices can dampen confidence.

But today’s market looks very different from previous housing downturns.

Australia is not experiencing one housing market but many.

Sydney’s house prices have risen strongly since 2022, until recently, after a couple of dips over the past decade. We’ve also seen rapid house price growth in Perth, Adelaide and Brisbane over the past three years, reflecting strong population growth, tight housing supply and robust labour markets.

But Melbourne, Hobart and the two territory capitals of Canberra and Darwin have softened over the same period.

So if there is a link between house price changes and economic activity, we’d expect it to be spread unevenly across different states and territories.

Watching the jobs market

Nor are we seeing evidence of widespread financial distress. Households have undoubtedly felt the effects of higher interest rates and rising living costs, but the Reserve Bank’s loan-level data show that mortgage arrears remain low. Fewer than 1% of housing loans are more than 90 days behind in repayments.

At the same time, most borrowers have built up substantial equity over recent years, and many remain ahead on their scheduled mortgage repayments. This provides important financial buffers against both higher borrowing costs and moderate falls in house prices.

The greatest risk is if falling house prices coincided with rising unemployment. So far, that has not happened. This would be the worst case scenario for new buyers, particularly those with very small deposits.

Housing slowdowns can also affect the economy indirectly.

Fewer home sales generally mean less spending on furniture, white goods and home improvements. Apartment developments, already under pressure from elevated construction costs, become less financially viable if sale prices weaken. This could constrain future housing supply.

The wealth effect

There is also the so-called “wealth effect”. When households see the value of their homes rise, they often feel more financially secure and become more willing to spend. Research by the Reserve Bank suggests changes in household wealth have a positive and persistent effect on consumption, particularly discretionary spending.

Our analysis of Australian Bureau of Statistics household spending data similarly suggests discretionary spending tends to strengthen during periods of strong house price growth and weaken as housing markets cool. But history also suggests this effect is most pronounced during major housing downturns, rather than modest market corrections.

Taken together, these channels suggest a softer housing market is likely to weigh on economic activity at the margin. But a modest correction after several years of exceptional price growth is unlikely, by itself, to trigger a broader economic slowdown.

What about housing affordability?

And in any event, perhaps this is not the most interesting question.

Australians increasingly agree that housing affordability has become one of the country’s biggest economic and social challenges. Yet we also tend to react negatively to any prospect of falling house prices.

Behavioural economists have long recognised that people are more sensitive to losses than gains. If people judge current house prices as the benchmark for success, then even modest declines can be perceived as losses, even though values remain historically high.

This creates what might be called the “tyranny of the status quo”. The gains of recent years quickly become accepted as the new normal, while even relatively modest price corrections are portrayed as economic failure.

Housing has become less affordable because prices have persistently grown faster than incomes. So improving affordability is unlikely to occur without slower house price growth or price declines.

That does not mean housing crashes should be welcomed. Large, disorderly falls in house prices would damage households, lenders and the broader economy.

But neither should every modest decline in prices be treated as a problem that must immediately be reversed. And this time, perhaps, price falls may not be politically damaging due to the widespread impact of the housing crisis.

Perhaps the deeper issue is that we have come to judge the success of Australia’s housing system by the wrong metric.

Economists recognise that no single statistic can capture economic progress. Gross domestic product (GDP) remains an important measure of economic activity, but it should sit alongside broader measures of productivity, wellbeing, inclusion and sustainability.

Housing deserves the same broader perspective.

House price appreciation is an outcome of the housing market. It is not the purpose of the market – and nor should be wealth generation.

The real objective must be a housing system that provides secure and affordable homes, supports sustainable construction, and remains accessible to future generations. Rising asset values matter, but they should not crowd out every other measure of success.

Alan Duncan, Director, Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre (BCEC) and John Curtin Distinguished Professor at Curtin University, Curtin University and Steven Rowley, John Curtin Distinguished Professor, Curtin Business School, Curtin University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Support our Journalism

No-nonsense journalism. No paywalls. Whether you’re in Australia, the UK, Canada, the USA, or India, you can support The Australia Today by taking a paid subscription via Patreon or donating via PayPal — and help keep honest, fearless journalism alive.

The post Australia’s housing market is cooling. Perhaps our expectations should too first appeared on The Australia Today.

A real and pressing security concern is emerging in the Pacific. There has been an increase in online scamming, a complex and evolving threat that is relatively new to the region.

This shift seems to be part of the expansion of transnational crimes into vulnerable small island states.

Online scam centres are large-scale and highly organised criminal operations that often rely on forced labour to carry out global cyber fraud. Victims of human trafficking are forced to conduct “pig butchering” — where scammers build trust through fake relationships before tricking victims into investing in fraudulent schemes, often cryptocurrency schemes — and romance scams while being held inside heavily guarded compounds. Individuals are often lured with fake job offers, made to surrender their passports upon arrival, and subjected to threats, violence and other forms of coercion.

These operations are commonly found in Southeast Asia, in countries such as Cambodia, Myanmar and Laos. Operators behind these scam centres typically use social media platforms, dating applications and messaging services to target and manipulate victims around the world.

One of the most notorious cyber scam hubs, KK Park in Myanmar, was raided in 2025. The compound was associated with online fraud, money laundering and human trafficking. During the raid, more than 2,000 workers were released and 30 Starlink satellite terminals were confiscated. Reports indicate that thousands of people had been lured to the compound with promises of well-paid employment but were instead forced to run elaborate scams, stealing billions of dollars from victims.

Operations that were previously concentrated in Southeast Asian countries are now attempting to establish themselves in Pacific Island countries. Palau, Tonga, Fiji, Vanuatu, Timor-Leste and Papua New Guinea have encountered elements of this evolving threat. According to the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP), a scam centre uncovered in Palau had connections to Chinese criminal syndicates. Individuals involved operated from abandoned or enclosed buildings, having entered Palau as tourists before applying for work permits.

Palau faces significant challenges in responding to online scams. With no cybercrime laws or regulations in place and limited technical resources and investigative capacity, it is difficult for law enforcement to effectively detect, prosecute and dismantle these networks. Many people working within these operations are believed to be victims of human trafficking, further complicating enforcement efforts.

In a report on the Pacific’s evolving threat landscape, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime highlights the growing risks posed by transnational organised crime in the region. Drug trafficking, money laundering and the proliferation of cyber-enabled fraud — including large-scale scam centres where workers are trafficked and abused — are emerging and interconnected threats.

In 2025, a raid was carried out in the Oecusse region of Timor-Leste, where a “digital centre” was discovered. The centre was making use of Starlink satellite devices and multiple SIM cards to operate large-scale online scams. The fact that this kind of activity was uncovered in Timor-Leste suggests that scammers are spreading out across the region. Such operations are no longer isolated incidents, but part of a broader shift.

With limited expertise, legislative gaps and constrained enforcement capacity, Pacific Island states face significant obstacles in addressing this threat. As transnational criminal networks recognise the vulnerabilities of small developing island states, the Pacific is increasingly becoming an attractive target for exploitation.

Regional initiatives such as Cyber Safety Pasifika have played a significant role in strengthening cyber awareness and investigation capabilities across the Pacific. But these programs appear to focus mainly on cyber awareness and general investigative training rather than specifically addressing the emerging threat of organised online scam centres.

Amid growing evidence that such scam centres are beginning to relocate to the Pacific, a more targeted regional response is needed. Some recommendations we can consider include:

Strengthening national legislation: Pacific Island countries should review and strengthen their existing cybercrime legislation to specifically address cyber-enabled fraud operations. Countries that do not yet have the necessary legal frameworks in place should seek assistance from others in the region that already have such legislation and learn from their experiences and best practices.

Integrating a scam centre focus into regional cyber programs: Regional initiatives such as Cyber Safety Pasifika could include a dedicated focus on the detection, prevention and disruption of organised scam centres. This could include specialised training on identifying scam centre indicators, cryptocurrency tracing, digital financial investigations and intelligence-led policing approaches.

Enhancing regional intelligence sharing: Through mechanisms such as the Pacific Islands Chiefs of Police network, Pacific countries should strengthen intelligence sharing and joint investigations related to transnational cyber fraud syndicates. Establishing early warning systems and coordinated regional responses will help prevent these criminal networks from exploiting vulnerabilities within smaller jurisdictions.

Given the vulnerabilities of small island states, a collective and proactive regional response is essential.

Note: This is a lightly edited version of an article first published on the Pacific Wayfinder blog, a platform of the Pacific Security College at the Australian National University.

This article appeared first on Devpolicy Blog (devpolicy.org), from the Development Policy Centre at The Australian National University.

Contributing Author: Ayanna Ramarui is a policy analyst within Palau’s National Security Coordination Office, where she supports national initiatives related to security and foreign affairs.

Support our Journalism

No-nonsense journalism. No paywalls. Whether you’re in Australia, the UK, Canada, the USA, or India, you can support The Australia Today by taking a paid subscription via Patreon or donating via PayPal — and help keep honest, fearless journalism alive.

The post Scam centres in the Blue Pacific: a security threat we cannot ignore first appeared on The Australia Today.

Fears the Iran conflict would trigger a surge in power prices have been unfounded. Why? One factor is the very rapid rollout of home and grid-scale batteries.

As a result, Australia’s reliance on expensive gas has fallen and power prices have stayed steady or even fallen.

Now it’s time for policymakers and households to look beyond batteries to hot water systems. For the average Australian home, water heating is still the biggest contributor to greenhouse gas emissions (25%). Reliance on gas is a key reason.

Our research has shown efficient electric hot water systems could provide energy storage equivalent to 2 million home batteries while saving billions in energy bills.

Focusing on hot water makes sense. Helping households switch to new systems with much cheaper running costs would act as a powerful lever for energy affordability and equity, while reducing our dependence on fossil fuels.

From batteries to hot water

In the 18 months to June, more than 450,000 home batteries and several grid-scale batteries were installed across Australia.

These removed the need for the equivalent of two large gas-fired power stations during the evening peak, when power prices are highest.

As a result, Australia’s reliance on expensive gas has fallen and power prices have stayed steady or even fallen.

Hot water systems account for a surprisingly high portion of home energy use – about 25%. But this energy use is flexible, as many water heaters can be set to charge when power is cheap.

Each Australian uses about 50 litres of hot water a day. For a family of four, heating this water with a conventional electric storage system uses about 13 kilowatt-hours per day – about the same amount of energy stored in some home batteries.

Costs vary wildly. That same household of four with electric hot water and rooftop solar could pay nothing for hot water. But 40% of Australian homes still rely on gas to heat water, which can cost A$1,000 or more a year.

Newer technologies such as heat pumps have radically reduced how much energy it takes to heat water, cutting running costs up to 72%. Heat pumps draw heat from the air and work even in very low temperatures.

When connected to timers, smart meters or other controls, heat pumps and other electric hot water systems can be set to run during the day. These smart hot water systems provide a simple and cheap way to store large amounts of solar energy.

Pairing smart hot water with the Solar Sharer scheme, which began on July 1 in some states, will mean renters and apartment dwellers without solar could heat water during the hours of free power, substantially cutting their energy bills.

Building on Australia’s strengths

Australia is particularly well placed to make the transition.

Decades of experience have made Australia one of the cheapest places to install rooftop solar.

And when the government announced home battery subsidies and consumer demand soared, the home energy industry was able to quickly pivot.

A national hot water push could build on this momentum.

What would an incentive program look like?

Successive Australian governments used subsidies to accelerate the rooftop solar rollout. The current government has used the same approach for home batteries. These programs are typically designed to offer subsidies which decline over time before ending as the industry matures.

Policymakers could do the same for smart electric water heaters. Households are already shifting away from gas, but the pace has been slow.

Replacing gas appliances is often cheaper than developing new gas supply, while cutting emissions immediately.

To accelerate the shift, policymakers could introduce four changes:

1. extend existing modest subsidies for heat pump water heaters in New South Wales and Victoria to cover other states and other smart electric water heaters, coupled with a strong public information campaign
2. create a scheme to retrofit existing electric water heaters with timers or rewire them to smart meters. This would turn older models into smart water heaters able to run when electricity is cheapest and respond automatically to price signals or grid needs
3. improve standards to ensure all new systems have to include timers or smart controls. Raising minimum energy performance standards would also allow smaller units to be flexible and more efficient
4. focus on renters and apartment residents. Too often, clean energy programs benefit standalone owner-occupied homes. It will be essential to support owners’ corporations, social housing providers and local governments to replace shared gas infrastructure

Councils and community organisations could help engage hard-to-reach households. Existing local initiatives are good starting points, but scaling efforts nationally will require coordination and funding.

Targeted support for industry could accelerate development of compact and lower-cost heat pump designs so homes with limited outdoor space can also benefit.

Hiding in plain sight

Australia’s extremely rapid uptake of home batteries shows how quickly households can move when the economics stack up and supply chains are ready.

Hot water systems could be the next wave – cheaper than batteries or solar, more inclusive, and hiding in plain sight.

David Roche, Research Director – Strategic Energy Collaborations, University of Technology Sydney; Chris Briggs, Research Director, Institute for Sustainable Futures, University of Technology Sydney, and Ed Langham, Research Director, Institute for Sustainable Futures, University of Technology Sydney

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Support our Journalism

No-nonsense journalism. No paywalls. Whether you’re in Australia, the UK, Canada, the USA, or India, you can support The Australia Today by taking a paid subscription via Patreon or donating via PayPal — and help keep honest, fearless journalism alive.

The post After home batteries, could the humble water heater be the next big step forward? first appeared on The Australia Today.

Around 7,000 languages are spoken across the world today. Nearly 4,000 of them are found in regions that also host the planet’s richest biodiversity—tropical forests and biodiversity hotspots of the Amazon, Central Africa, India, Southeast Asia, and Oceania. The diversity of these largely unwritten languages mirrors global biodiversity hotspots which, sustained through speech, storytelling, ritual, and everyday practice within indigenous and local communities.

The global maps of linguistic diversity and biological diversity overlap strikingly. Yet, both are under growing threat. Deforestation, pollution, climate change, and rapid land-use change are eroding biodiversity hotspots, while the communities that speak these languages in these areas face displacement and cultural loss.

Wildlife populations worldwide have declined by nearly 73 percent over the last fifty years. The outlook for minority languages is similarly grim: estimates suggest that between 50 and 90 per cent of the world’s languages may disappear by the end of this century. These figures reflect widely cited global assessments of linguistic diversity loss and long-term biodiversity decline. There is an urgent need to prioritise the rapid arrest of further biocultural loss encoded in native languages.

The grim loss of these native languages is reflected in the findings of a recent study that, on average, one language dies every three months. The vanishing population base and aging native speakers mean that endangered languages may disappear within a couple of generations, often in communities simultaneously facing ecological disruption and migration in the shadow of the encroaching dominant language. The scale and speed of loss far exceed what conventional pen-paper-recording-based linguistic conservation methods can handle. There is a need to deploy emerging technologies like Artificial Intelligence (AI), which can process, transcribe, and structure thousands of hours of language data (recordings) and automated recognitions of terms, process in a fraction of the time, turning fragile, scattered speech into durable, searchable corpora that capture both language and embedded ecological knowledge. 

With each lost language, humanity loses an entire system of knowledge about landscapes, species, seasons, and survival. The degradation of ecosystems and the erosion of languages are not parallel crises but deeply intertwined ones. Protecting one often strengthens the chances of the other.

Knowledge Encoded in Language

Local ecological knowledge is embedded in language—often with a precision that reflects generations of close interaction with specific environments. As with biological species, human languages and cultures take time to change and co-evolve organically so their futures remain closely linked.

Traditional ecological wisdom has already contributed to modern conservation thinking. A well-known example may be cited from the Māori relationship with harakeke (Phormium tenax, known as flax in English) in Aotearoa, New Zealand. In Māori worldview, a fan-shaped harakeke plant represents a whānau (family).

The rito (central shoot) is seen as the child, while the surrounding awhi rito leaves represent the parents. Strict harvesting protocols forbid cutting the rito and awhi rito; only the outer leaves—the tūpuna (grandparents)—are taken. This practice ensures that the plant remains healthy and continues to regenerate.

Beyond the plant itself, the careful management of flowering stems (kōrari) ensures sufficient nectar for native birds such as the tūī, bellbird (korimako), and nectar-feeding parrots. These birds act as pollinators, supporting a wider ecosystem that ultimately sustains both biodiversity and agricultural productivity. Māori vocabulary here functions as an ecological instruction manual, embedding sustainable practice directly into language.

Such examples show how biological, cultural, and linguistic diversity can operate together, reinforcing long-term ecological balance. Researchers have also found that in biodiverse regions, over 75 percent of medicinal plants are known only through indigenous vocabulary. Given that nearly half of modern medicines are derived from plants, the extinction of a language may mean the permanent loss of knowledge about a future life-saving drug.

While such knowledge systems persist in some Indigenous contexts, comparable language–ecology linkages are rapidly eroding elsewhere.

Oversimplification and the Loss of Biocultural Knowledge

When a language vanishes, traditional practices often linked with socio-ecological systems and practices become fragmented, vocabulary becomes oversimplified. All this happens when communities shift or are forced to choose a dominant language having no roots in the region and culture– mostly with alien vocabulary and terminology. Hence, the relationships between society and nature are stripped of context.

This is a case like ‘linguistic flattening’, causing the homogenization of terminology and narrowing the expressive range. As the vocabulary narrows, the ability to express complex or nuanced thoughts diminishes, potentially making certain concepts “literally unthinkable” that were otherwise traditionally expressed in the native language.

This is how biocultural data of rich tidal forests are vanishing along the Indian coast. Across diverse linguistic coasts, the forest that buffers land and ocean were once described through locally evolved vocabularies, in ways that folded ecology into everyday speech. Today, many of these distinctions are collapsing into the single English term “mangroves.”

In Bangla, Sundarban—literally “beautiful forest”—captures both the dominance of the sundari tree and the idea of a protective, life-giving tidal woodland.

Along the Godavari–Krishna delta, Andhra Pradesh, Telgu term mada vanalu refers not merely to ‘swamp’ but to brackish backwaters that function as fish nurseries and storm buffers.

In Tamil and Malayalam, words built around kandal describe entire classes of salt-tolerant coastal trees, with local variants marking differences in salinity, depth, or wood use.

Marathi, Konkani, Kannada, Gujarati and Kutchchi coastal communities similarly employ terms related to kandal or kandala, distinguishing creek-edge thickets from sacred groves, boat-landing forests, or honey-collecting zones.

Each term is encoding ecological function, risk, and livelihood.

As English expands, this intricate mosaic of Bengali, Odia, Telugu, Tamil, Malayalam, Kannada, Konkani, Marathi, Kutchi, Gujarati, and Lakshadweepi, expressions is increasingly flattened into a single label “Mangroves”. This erases distinctions between, a fishing ground, a storm‑buffering belt, a crocodile nesting patch or a honey‑collecting forest that native words kept sharply apart. This is the collapse of a dense web of distinctions and with it a fine‑grained coastal vocabulary that encoded how people read tides, soils, species and risks in their own seascapes.

This shift does not merely rename the forest; it strips away locally evolved functionality and associations that once guided how people fished, farmed, worshipped, or flourished through these coastal ecosystems.

Can AI Bridge the Gap?

The fast pace at which indigenous and local languages are dying out directly jeopardizes the survival of multigenerational discourse. At this juncture the intervention of AI-driven technology becomes integral that has revolutionized language and ecology, which is already transforming how rapidly endangered languages and their ecological knowledge can be recorded and made accessible. Modern speech-to-text pipelines like Natural Language Processing (NLP) and low-resource language models accelerate the transcription of localized knowledge corpus, including oral histories, songs, practices and ritual instructions, previously requiring months of manual work. 

Platforms such as the Endangered Languages Project (ELP), Endangered Languages Archive (ELAR) and India’s Bhashini provide speech datasets, open model repositories, and community-facing tools that reduce barriers to entry: a thousand hours of recordings can be indexed for lexical items, plant names, weather terms, farming rules, seasonal calendars, and species names in days rather than years. AI can extract and link biocultural knowledge to concrete conservation data, enabling targeted action. Beyond capture, Natural language processing can tag plant and animal names, harvesting practices, and weather indicators from multilingual recordings. These datasets can then be synchronised to taxonomic databases and IUCN conservation status. 

Computer vision and satellite-based remote sensing complement this work by mapping habitat change, detecting deforestation, and monitoring phenology, allowing researchers to correlate linguistic loss with ecological decline in specific locales. These combined datasets let conservationists and communities prioritise a biocultural knowledge-based revival plan where protecting speech directly supports ecosystem resilience.

AI-processed frameworks, language revitalisation initiatives like the ELP, and Bhashini are allowing local communities to build their own language- preservation tools. Similarly, AI-powered Woolaroo on Cloud encourages users to explore endangered languages such as Yiddish, Rapa Nui, Louisiana Creole, Mayan, and Tepehua. It enables users to capture a picture of an object, be it a plant, a tree, a river or something else in real-time, and the application returns the word in its native tongue, along with its pronunciation; a dynamic, usable dictionary.

By deploying NLP to digitise endangered native varieties and using computer vision to monitor wildlife ecosystems, AI bridges human limitations, enabling scalable preservation across vast, diverse landscapes. AI offers out‑of‑the‑box scalability—turning rapid documentation into a living revival and making it possible to protect both language and nature before they are gone.

Revival and Hope 

Reviving languages does more than preserve words; it can revitalise ecological relationships. Language revival often encourages communities to rediscover ancestral practices and re-engage with sustainable ways of living rooted in place. For this reason, many researchers argue that large-scale conservation cannot succeed without integrating local languages and cultures into its strategies.

Humans and nature are not inherently incompatible. Sustaining connections between people and their landscapes through their languages and traditional practices can benefit both ecosystem and society. Strengthening intergenerational transmission of language and knowledge and fostering reciprocal relationships between human and non-human life, are essential for maintaining this balance.

Without recognising the evolution of indigenous languages with an ecosystem that banks ecological knowledge, conservation risks becoming technically efficient yet culturally blind. The preservation of language and nature is therefore not a symbolic concern but an urgent collective task. Let technology function as an instrumental saviour in the preservation of linguistic and ecological domains, contingent upon sustained human agency and community stewardship. Technology must be positioned as a salvific instrument for the conservation of linguistic and ecological zones, while its efficacy depends on deliberate human intervention and participatory effort. The pressure is immense, but the imperative is clear: safeguarding the intertwined futures of language and nature is central to securing a sustainable tomorrow and the multitude of human expressions and Artificial Intelligence is the new hope.

Contributing Author(s): Dr Devina Krishna is an Indian linguist, corpus specialist with a doctorate from Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. Her research focuses on language, ecology, and culture, with extensive work on endangered languages, phonology, phonetics, and their applied dimensions, including ecolinguistics. Dr Kushagra Rajendra holds a doctorate from Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, and is an academician specializing in environment and sustainability. Through his research, writings, and training programs, he works as a sustainability communicator, focusing on traditional knowledge and ecological wisdom for contemporary challenges.

Support our Journalism

No-nonsense journalism. No paywalls. Whether you’re in Australia, the UK, Canada, the USA, or India, you can support The Australia Today by taking a paid subscription via Patreon or donating via PayPal — and help keep honest, fearless journalism alive.

The post Vanishing linguistic and biological diversity: Can AI bridge the gap? first appeared on The Australia Today.

The World Cup has captured the imagination of many Australian kids.

Over the last three weeks, they have watched the Socceroos with family and friends, talked about the games at school, worn green and gold, and held high hopes for Australian victory.

Now the Socceroos’ campaign has ended some children will be very disappointed. It’s not just about the score, but also the end of the excitement, shared family rituals, conversations with friends, and hope Australia might do something special.

Some children may also feel sad seeing their favourite players disappointed and upset.

These reactions are normal and OK. They show just how much kids cared about the tournament.

No parent likes seeing their child upset. But moments like these can also be opportunities to help children strengthen their emotional regulation skills.

Acknowledge their feelings

Research in developmental psychology shows children learn to understand and manage difficult emotions through supportive interactions with trusted adults.

This ability is known as emotional regulation.

When children are upset, our first instinct is often to make them feel better. Comments such as, “It’s only soccer,” or, “Don’t worry about it,” are usually well intentioned, but can dismiss how a child is feeling.

One evidence-based approach is called emotion coaching. Rather than trying to make the emotion disappear, the goal is to help children recognise, understand and gradually learn to manage it.

Start by acknowledging how they feel. You might say, “I know you were really hoping Australia would win. I’m disappointed too.” or, “It’s OK to feel upset. You were really excited about the tournament.”

Once children feel heard, help them make sense of what they’re feeling. You might ask, “What do you think has made you the most upset?”

It might be that Australia lost, or it could be that there are no more matches to look forward to.

Put the disappointment into perspective

Once children have had a chance to talk about how they feel, it can help to reflect on the whole tournament.

You might ask about their favourite moment, which goal they’ll remember most, or which player they enjoyed watching the most.

These conversations remind children that, while the result was disappointing, it doesn’t erase all the excitement and enjoyment that came before it.

Parents can also help children look beyond the result. You might say, “It wasn’t the ending we were hoping for, but wasn’t it exciting watching the Socceroos get this far?” or, “We’ll always remember that amazing goal,” or, “I loved watching the games with you.”

The goal isn’t to make the disappointment disappear. It’s to help children recognise the disappointment is only one part of a much bigger experience.

Understanding the broader picture can support healthy emotional regulation.

Remember children are watching you

How parents and adults respond to disappointment can shape how children learn to respond when things don’t go the way they want.

It’s perfectly OK to let your child know you’re disappointed. It can be reassuring for them to see adults have difficult emotions too. The important thing is to show the disappointment can be handled in a healthy way.

For example, instead of becoming angry, blaming the referee, or criticising players, you might say, “This is so sad, but I’m really proud of how the Socceroos played.”

When children see adults acknowledge difficult emotions while responding calmly and constructively, they learn disappointment is a normal part of life, and that it can be managed.

Helping children grow through disappointment

Disappointment is an unavoidable part of growing up.

Children will receive lower marks than they hoped for, not make a team they wanted to play in or miss something fun due to illness.

The role of parents isn’t to prevent these experiences. It’s to help children learn difficult emotions are a normal part of life, and that they can be understood, managed and eventually pass.

So with the support of caring adults, even a disappointing World Cup result can become an opportunity for children to build emotional skills that will serve them throughout their lives.

Shane Rogers, Senior Lecturer in Psychology, Edith Cowan University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Support our Journalism

No-nonsense journalism. No paywalls. Whether you’re in Australia, the UK, Canada, the USA, or India, you can support The Australia Today by taking a paid subscription via Patreon or donating via PayPal — and help keep honest, fearless journalism alive.

The post Is your child devastated the Socceroos lost? Here’s how to help first appeared on The Australia Today.

For more than 3,000 years, the Pharaohs ruled one of history’s greatest civilisations. In Dallas, Egypt’s modern-day Pharaohs ruled once more, bringing the Socceroos’ World Cup campaign to an end with a disciplined performance and an emphatic penalty shoot-out victory.

Australia coach Tony Popovic kept faith with the side that had performed so effectively in the third group-stage match against Paraguay. This was the first time in the tournament Popovic’s team selection had done something orthodox.

Popovic’s great mentor, former Socceroos coach Eddie Thomson, always claimed, “Never change a winning team”. Perhaps Thomson’s words still echoed in Popovic’s mind. This time, he resisted the temptation to tinker.

The big news for Egypt was that charismatic captain Mohamed Salah, who had been under an injury cloud, started the match. The Pharaohs also had two forced changes; but on paper had a formidable frontline.

Before the match, Australia’s Jackson Irvine pledged to “give the best version of ourselves”, while Popovic thanked the Australian public, declaring, “thank you whole heartedly […] They (the Socceroos) feel the support and they want to do everyone proud.”

The first half

Australia had the first chance in the fourth minute when Cristian Volpato struck the crossbar with a shot from 30 metres out. But disaster struck when there was a lapse in concentration by the Socceroos defence, and Emam Ashour surged into the box to get on the end of a cross from Karim Hafez as they went up 1–0 in the 13th minute.

Australia looked dangerous from set pieces, but Egypt had the majority of possession.

Australia had a lucky run late in the first half but lacked the quality up front. The Uruguayan referee did Australia no favours, the Egyptians guilty of time-wasting and some clear “roughing”, which wasn’t penalised.

At the stroke of half-time, Australian left-back Jordan Bos was carried off after a shocking tackle which wasn’t penalised. At the half-time break assistant coach Paul Okon was seething about the challenge on Bos and lamented a “cheap goal from a set piece”.

The second half

For the second half Kai Trewin came on for Bos, and within seconds of the second half start, Omar Marmoush produced the miss of the tournament by missing the target one-on-one with the keeper metres out. It should have been 2–0 to the Pharaohs and perhaps game over.

Immediately after this miss, the Socceroos moved into a high press, where the team not in possession defends high up the pitch, and this seemed to rattle the Egyptians. In the 54th minute, Australia received a free kick. The ball was whipped in, and Egyptian player Mohamed Hany scored, heading the ball into his own net. It was 1–1 and Australia was level and back in the game.

Up until the second-half hydration break, it was all Australia. After the break, Egypt started building again, so Socceroos Ajdin Hrustić and Mohamed Toure came on and replaced Volpato and Irankunda in the 73rd minute. By bringing on these attackers, Popovic saw an opportunity to take the game.

It was end-to-end play, with both teams threatening, but in the final two minutes of added time the Egyptians created a number of chances after a couple of amazing crosses by Salah.

If Marmoush gave us the miss of the tournament, Patrick Beach gave us the save of the tournament after Rami Rabia’s rocket header. The Socceroos were lucky to survive the Egyptian onslaught in these final few minutes of normal time.

Extra time

The match moved into extra time, and Popovic made further changes, bringing on fresh legs with Paul Okon-Engstler for Aiden O’Neill and Awer Mabil for Connor Metcalfe.

Immediately after the break, Salah missed the kind of chance we have seen him score dozens of times for Liverpool.

The first half of extra time was an open game with desperate tackles. It was even, and both sets of players were finding space in midfield although the defences were stacked.

The second half of extra time produced much of the same, but with fewer opportunities. Although clearly Egypt had the ascendancy with some poorly executed corners by Salah.

In the final minute of extra time Socceroos goalkeeper Beach was replaced by Mathew Ryan, whom Popovic had decided would be the one to face the Egyptian penalty-takers.

Penalty shoot-out

The Socceroos got off to a terrible start when Harry Souttar sent one into the grandstands. Later, Australia’s youngest player Lucas Herrington did the same, sending his shot against the crossbar.

Ryan didn’t save a penalty.

Much of the narrative this World Cup revolved around Popovic’s selections. It worked well for two matches, and poorly for the other two. The big question will be whether Beach should have been given the chance to face the shoot-out penalties.

World Cup hopes dashed – this time

Popovic entered this World Cup campaign with the focus on the block defence, and it worked well (against Turkey and Paraguay). This approach is based on results and not flamboyant football.

Popovic was a different coach to previous coaches Graham Arnold and Ange Postecoglou. By playing this style he was critiqued both inside and outside the Australian soccer tent. When they conceded early goals (as against the United States and Egypt), the plan went out the window. Once the team went down, they found it hard to pull one back.

Even in this match, the equalising goal came from an Egyptian player who seemed to have been concussed ten minutes earlier. The Socceroos needed to show more in attack.

While this is a crushing loss for Australian players and fans, we should be reminded that among Asian nations, Australia was one of only two to make it to the knockout stage, alongside Japan.

And here too, it’s important to note several of our up-and-coming young players announced themselves on the world stage, including Herrington, Beach, and Nestory Irankunda.

This is a reminder this squad will likely peak in four years’ time. So we look forward to the next tournament with great anticipation.

Steve Georgakis, Senior Lecturer of Pedagogy and Sports Studies, University of Sydney

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Support our Journalism

No-nonsense journalism. No paywalls. Whether you’re in Australia, the UK, Canada, the USA, or India, you can support The Australia Today by taking a paid subscription via Patreon or donating via PayPal — and help keep honest, fearless journalism alive.

The post The Pharaohs rule in Dallas as the Socceroos are knocked out first appeared on The Australia Today.

Scholars, policymakers, technology experts and development practitioners have called for the responsible use of Artificial Intelligence to advance sustainable development, ethical governance and organisational transformation across Africa and the Global South.

The call was made at the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Organizational Agility in Africa and the Global South, held from 25–26 June 2026 at the Peter Mbah Auditorium, Enugu State University of Science and Technology, Nigeria.

Organised by the ACE Intercontinental Research Institute, in collaboration with the Open and Distance Learning Centre, Enugu State University of Science and Technology, and Learn to Live Business School, United Kingdom, the conference examined how AI can support innovation, governance and sustainable development.

Participants noted that AI is already transforming public administration, healthcare, education, agriculture, cybersecurity, business and workforce management. However, they stressed that its adoption must be guided by transparency, fairness, accountability, privacy protection and human-centred governance.

Presenters highlighted AI’s potential to improve public health surveillance, strengthen cybersecurity, enhance educational outcomes, support transparent governance and promote organisational resilience. They also warned that weak digital infrastructure, limited technical expertise, high implementation costs and ethical risks could limit Africa’s ability to benefit fully from AI.

Delegates urged African governments and institutions to invest in digital infrastructure, research capacity, workforce training and locally relevant AI policies. They also called for stronger collaboration among universities, governments, industry and civil society to ensure AI contributes meaningfully to the Sustainable Development Goals.

The conference concluded with a commitment to promote responsible AI research, international partnerships and practical innovation capable of improving governance, service delivery and inclusive economic growth across Africa and the Global South.

Contributing Author: Thomas Alama Etalong is Director of Research at ACE Intercontinental Research Institute, Enugu, Nigeria.

Support our Journalism

No-nonsense journalism. No paywalls. Whether you’re in Australia, the UK, Canada, the USA, or India, you can support The Australia Today by taking a paid subscription via Patreon or donating via PayPal — and help keep honest, fearless journalism alive.

The post Global South scholars call for responsible AI at Enugu Conference first appeared on The Australia Today.

Only rarely in the 250 years since the signing of the US Declaration of Independence has an 18-month period commanded as much global attention as the opening years of the second Trump administration.

Since taking office for the second time, US President Donald Trump has reshaped the federal bureaucracy, launched sweeping tariffs and military strikes, and is even physically rebuilding some of the very foundations of the nation’s capital.

The immediate aftermath of Trump’s inauguration in January 2025 saw some of the largest swings in Australian views of the United States on record. Our new poll results suggest Australians have now largely made up their minds on Trump’s America.

But they are questioning why Australia needs its alliance with the US at all.

What we found

In May 2026, the United States Studies Centre at the University of Sydney, in collaboration with YouGov, polled more than 1,000 Australians on their views of the US.

Our results paint a picture of an Australian public wrestling with a rapidly shifting strategic landscape — and Australia’s place within it.

In 2025, perceptions of the US tumbled to new lows. And in 2026, these views appear to have solidified.

Most Australians (58%) continue to say the second Trump administration has been bad for Australia. This includes a ten percentage-point increase since last year in those who describe the administration as “very bad”.

Australians are far more likely to say the US is harmful rather than helpful in Asia. It’s a sharp reversal from sentiment just four years ago.

They continue to express concern about US institutions: from the future of US democracy (71%) to potential political violence in the country (83%). And less than half think the US alliance makes Australia more secure.

Perhaps most strikingly, less than a third of Australians (31%) think the Australian government has properly explained why Australia even needs the alliance at all.

Uncomfortable bedfellows

But what do Australians think their government should actually do about the alliance?

Despite their pessimism, just 15% of Australians want Australia to abandon it. Around half (49%) of those surveyed even say Australia needs the US alliance “more than ever” — more than twice the number who disagree.

The 2026 Lowy Poll similarly shows record low levels of trust in Washington but robust support for the alliance.

In January this year, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney delivered a headline-grabbing Davos address which called for middle powers to “act together” in an era of “rupture” for the international order.

This vision appears to be popular with the Australian public. When asked to consider alternatives to the alliance, 75% of respondents supported forming stronger relationships with other middle powers around the world. Only a handful disagreed with doing so.

A public divided

Our poll indicates a bottoming out in views of Trump among Australians.

Opinions have trended more negative this year compared with last. But the bulk of the dramatic change in Australian opinions on the US occurred immediately in the months following Trump’s inauguration, rather than as a result of more recent developments.

In other words, Australians long ago made up their mind on the US president.

This mirrors Trump’s generally steady favourability ratings among Americans over most of the past decade.

Demographic breakdowns also reveal a country divided on political and social lines when it comes to many of these key questions.

Australian men are twice as likely as women to describe the US as mostly helpful in Asia. Labor voters are twice as likely as Coalition voters to describe it as mostly harmful.

Labor voters are also significantly more open to Australia becoming closer to China or having a policy of neutrality compared with Coalition voters.

Younger Australians under 35 years old are half as likely as those over 65 to support a higher defence budget or to agree that the alliance is more needed “than ever”.

A challenging future

The Australian government faces a difficult foreign policy landscape, balancing between an unpredictable security ally and a volatile Indo-Pacific region.

While our results suggest Australian views of Trump have stabilised, broader questions about the alliance — what it means for Australia’s security and the region, and the government’s rationale for it — may still be up for debate.

As the US barrels towards midterm elections in November — and the contours of the 2028 presidential election begin to take shape — navigating this tension is likely to be a central challenge for Australian foreign policy in the years to come.

Samuel Garrett, Senior Research Associate, United States Studies Centre, University of Sydney and Ava Kalinauskas, Senior Research Associate, United States Studies Centre, University of Sydney

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Support our Journalism

No-nonsense journalism. No paywalls. Whether you’re in Australia, the UK, Canada, the USA, or India, you can support The Australia Today by taking a paid subscription via Patreon or donating via PayPal — and help keep honest, fearless journalism alive.

The post After 250 years of American independence, what do Australians think about the US? first appeared on The Australia Today.

Australia’s migration system is complicated. It’s heavily influenced by politics and global pressures, which can make it difficult to understand. This often results in lively debates across the dinner table.

But given migration is dominating public discussion at the moment, it’s worth explaining how the system operates so we all have a better understanding of what’s true and what isn’t.

Let’s unpack five common myths about migration in Australia.

Migration is the most debated public policy issue of the current moment, both in Australia and overseas. In this five-part series, we unpack how Australia’s migration system works, both practically and politically, and what its future might look like.

Myth 1: it’s easy to get a visa to Australia

The Australian migration system can be grouped into the following pathways:

• visitor visas
• student visas
• family visas
• skilled visas (both skilled independent and employer sponsored)
• refugee visas
• and visa compliance.

The migration program has planning levels per financial year based on each pathway.

Each visa category has very specific and strict requirements. There are very few “loopholes” in the Australian migration system and there is not a lot of flexibility.

The migration framework is a two-stage process where the migrant must meet certain requirements when they apply for the visa and also when the visa is granted.

Each migration pathway has different formal legal requirements. For example, for certain skilled visas, a migrant is required to lodge an “expression of interest” which then ranks their qualification, work experience, English language abilities and other factors and allocates them points. The higher the points, the more likely they are to receive an invitation.

For partner visas, they need to show extensive evidence of their relationship. This could include bank statements, friend testimony, social media history and even gym memberships.

While Australia has visas to reunite families, the assumption that any migrant can bring in their family is not true. There are only a handful of visas which accommodate family sponsorship, and even then, it’s only for immediate family members – who also need to meet health and character requirements.

Myth 2: Australia lets in too many refugees

There is a misconception with refugee visas that Australia “lets anyone in”.

The reality is, when you enter Australia (whether it be from a student visa or visitor visa), you do have the fundamental right to apply for a protection visa.

Does this mean it will be granted? Absolutely not.

In fact, in the 2024–25 financial year, there were 23,576 applications lodged onshore and only 4,036 granted in that period. In April 2026, there was a visa grant rate of only about 16%.

Myth 3: We are not “tough” on migrants

When migrants apply for visas (inside or outside of) Australia, they need to meet certain character requirements. This is not new and the Department of Home Affairs has dedicated teams to deal with this.

To satisfy this, migrants are required to provide police clearance from any country they have lived in for 12 months or more. If the migrant has any type of criminal record, it is usually referred for further assessment to a team within the department. It’s an extensive and lengthy process.

If a migrant offends while here, Australia has extensive processes relating to visa cancellation and detention centre practices.

Firstly, the department has a lot of discretionary visa cancellation powers at its disposal, which it uses regularly. In the 2024–25 financial year, the department cancelled 37,033 visas.

Importantly, a migrant can have their visa cancelled in Australia purely because they have been charged with an offence and are then liable for immigration detention. There doesn’t need to be a finding of guilt for a visa to be cancelled.

Australia also has automatic visa cancellation powers which means a migrant will have their visa mandatorily cancelled if they have a criminal sentence of more than 12 months and are currently in prison.

As well as being cancelled for criminal activity, visas can be cancelled for non-compliance and a range of other circumstances.

This comes at a huge cost to the government. In Australia, detention centres are run by private companies and the cost to house someone in immigration detention averages $505,176 annually. This is extraordinary, given the cost of housing a prisoner in prison is approximately $160,600 annually.

Myth 4: Migrants are a financial burden on the economy

Of late, there has been considerable discussion around migration in Australia with a narrative that migration should be dramatically reduced and an assumption that Australia pays for migrants to come to Australia.

There are significant labour market and population growth advantages to migration that can’t be overlooked.

In 2021, Treasury released a study which confirmed that migrants as a cohort make a positive fiscal contribution.

Migrants also contribute a lot of money to federal revenue. For example, in the 2025 financial year, the department received $4.15 billion in revenue just from visa application charges to migrants.

Comparatively, the government raised approximately $1.4 billion on the new Petroleum Resource Rent Tax initiative in 2023–24.

Myth 5: Migrants are given a ‘free-ride’ to Australian benefits

Generally, a migrant who has applied for permanent residency (and some temporary visas) becomes eligible for Medicare.

Many migrants (excluding refugees) are not eligible for Centrelink benefits because most of the payment schemes, such as JobSeeker and the aged pension, require the migrant to be a resident, plus additional waiting periods (four years in some circumstances).

Importantly, this four year waiting period comes after a long period as a temporary resident in Australia. Some migrants on temporary visas are here for more than ten years before they secure permanent residency.

In addition, depending on the state or territory and visa status, there are also restrictions on schooling, in which temporary migrants are required to pay for public schooling.

In terms of health care, Australia has special arrangements with other countries which allow for their citizens to access Medicare and enable Australians to access healthcare when visiting those countries (for example, the United Kingdom).

While residency definitions differ between the systems, many migrants also pay tax.

Many temporary migrants would be classified as “temporary residents” by the Australian Tax Office and are taxed on income earned in Australia. In 2019–2022, temporary migrants accounted for $230 billion in personal taxable income.

Although there are many more migration myths that could be discussed, the above should assist you in the next spirited dinner debate over migration.

Louisa Jones, Lecturer and Discipline Lead (Migration), Thomas More Law School, Australian Catholic University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Support our Journalism

No-nonsense journalism. No paywalls. Whether you’re in Australia, the UK, Canada, the USA, or India, you can support The Australia Today by taking a paid subscription via Patreon or donating via PayPal — and help keep honest, fearless journalism alive.

The post How does Australia’s migration system actually work? 5 common myths busted first appeared on The Australia Today.

Honiara, Solomon Islands: The relocation of the A’ama tribe due to the impact of climate change reflects the perils of losing one’s treasured homes.

In April 2014, after over two weeks of slow moving tropical depression, that later became Cyclone Ita, Solomon Islands experienced flash flooding across the country and particularly in the capital city Honiara, leaving at least 23 people killed and around 50,000 people affected.

Known to locals as Koa Hill, the A’ama tribe resided along the Mataniko River bank and into the sloped hill just a few kilometres from China Town, one of Honiara’s central business districts. Their settlement lacks basic services such as road access or proper drainage system which makes them ill equipped for severe weather conditions.

The community was forced to flee their homes along the river bank during the devastating flash floods in 2014, leaving behind permanent homes and belongings as they escaped to safety to higher grounds. It claimed four lives and destroyed the home of 100 families along river bank that was prone to floods and landslides. They were later relocated to April Valley in 2015.

Their plight is replicative of many communities across the South Pacific island nation that are prone to climate change, making adaptation inevitable in the communities.

In an effort to rehabilitate the victims, the government then led by Gordon Darcy allocated April Valley in East Honiara as the relocation site. The land was surveyed and subdivided into individual plots to be transferred to the affected families.

After 11 years, the 300 people of the A’ama tribe are now settling well into their new homes at April Valley, according to the government, but, this process is not executed as planned says local community members.

Anglican priest, Father Seth Oirii who is one of the victims and the very first settlers in April Valley shared his experience on the challenges they faced when moving in, after living in two different evacuation centres.

“Our first challenge here at April Valley is dealing with the surrounding communities who used the land to do their gardening,” he told Wansolwara.

Despite the arguments with the surrounding communities, Fr Oirii and others started building tents as their temporary homes. Water, road access, education, health and sanitation are the major problems. “We are from different ethnic backgrounds so we are settling according to where we come from,” he said.

Joy Mauriota, who is among the very first women settlers, reflected on how water was so hard to find compared to living under a tent. “I looked around and saw a creek nearby, it gave us a bad smell so I started digging the ground to find water”, she said.

The well is used for cooking, washing and swimming while they continue to dig other wells that can be suitable for drinking as there was no other options left for them.

As a mother looking after her children and being a house wife, Blandina Alice explained how she struggled with the access to health services. A hundred dollars is not enough to get to the health clinic at that time and babies and pregnant mothers are the most affected ones.

“Road access is so difficult without a proper road infrastructure and it takes about two hours to get to the main road, building materials and other heavy items had to be carried a long distance,” she said.

A case study on April Valley Relocation Initiative, emphasised that almost a third of the 10.72 hectares of the identified land is sloping. The area has a lower flooding risk than the Mataniko riverside, but lacks any pre-existing infrastructure such as electricity, water and roads, resulting in serious limitations to long term adaptation.

As mentioned in the study, community members confirmed that the land is fertile; however, the lack of urban development will make it vulnerable to disasters such as flooding, soil erosion and waterlogging in rainy seasons.

Chief Michael Fa’abona said “the lower grounds may be suitable for farming, but given the lack of a drainage system during the rainy season it collects a pool of water which is not favourable for cropping.”

There is also no financial assistance from the Ministry of Commerce and the Ministry of Agriculture to support them in their relocation process. While 277 plots of land are allocated to the settlers in April Valley, the Ministry of Lands, Housing and Survey is yet to transfer the lands title. This remains a major concern to the residents.

After the devastating flood 11 years ago, the regional news network Pacific Media Voices (PMV) put a face to loss and damage in the Solomon Islands and visited April Valley recently. PMV was initiated at the 7th Pacific Media Summit in Niue in 2024, to provide news with a Pacific peoples’ perspective to the region and beyond.

The program was part of a media training program by the Media Association of Solomon Islands (MASI) facilitated by the Secretariat of the Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) to train the media to understand the climate induced ‘Loss and Damage Reporting’.

Fr Oirii pointed out to visiting journalists that the flash floods not only claimed four lives, destroyed 100 permanent homes, it also swept away belongings worth millions of dollars.

“For two to three years, our children did not attend school because they were traumatised,” he told local newspaper Solomon Star. “After three years, parents slowly started sending their children to Juniper Tree School, which was closer to them.”

He says that families have gradually rebuilt their lives, with many semi-permanent houses now standing in the settlement, and the villagers now have access to Solomon Water Services, unlike in the past when they depended on boreholes.

However, Fr Oiril says one of their major concerns is securing land titles from the Ministry of Lands, Housing and Survey for the plots they currently occupy. 277 plots at April Valley were allocated by the Ministry of Lands to victims displaced by the 2014 flash floods.

Solomon Island’s Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Environment, Climate Change, Disaster Management and Meteorology, David Hirisia argues, “this is a national development challenge, a growing economic burden and a human crisis: not just an environmental concern. These stories can transform the statistics into human narratives so that the world understands the dimensions of climate change.”

A Board member of MASI, Ednal Palmer told Wansolwara that there is a need to “amplify and advocate the needs of the re-settlers with clarity and determination moving forward”.

Contributing Author: Cheryl Bera is a journalism student at the University of the South Pacific (USP) in Fiji. 

Support our Journalism

No-nonsense journalism. No paywalls. Whether you’re in Australia, the UK, Canada, the USA, or India, you can support The Australia Today by taking a paid subscription via Patreon or donating via PayPal — and help keep honest, fearless journalism alive.

The post Eleven years after disaster, Solomon Islands families are still waiting for a place to truly call home first appeared on The Australia Today.

My eldest daughter works several nights a week while studying full-time at university.

Like many young Australians, she doesn’t spend every dollar she earns. She saves. She invests. She thinks about her future.

Every fortnight, she puts some of her pay into exchange-traded funds (ETFs) and shares. She’s trying to build the financial foundation that previous generations could build through home ownership.

Her story is familiar to many Indian Australian families.

Across your communities, parents make enormous sacrifices to give their children opportunities. Education, building a future, saving, and investing are encouraged from an early age.

Whether it is a university student investing their first pay cheque or a young professional building wealth through ETFs and shares, the goal is the same: create security, independence, and eventually a home of your own.

But for many young Australians today, the property market feels increasingly out of reach.

That is why so many have turned to investing to build a future deposit. They are not looking for shortcuts. They are doing exactly what we have always encouraged: work hard, save consistently, and invest responsibly.

The problem is that government policy should support that behaviour, not punish it.

When taxes on investment returns increase, it does not just affect wealthy investors. It affects students, young professionals, and first-home hopefuls who are trying to grow modest savings into something meaningful.

For a generation facing some of the highest housing costs in Australian history, every dollar matters.

Many Indian Australian families understand this better than most. We have seen what disciplined saving and long-term investing can achieve over time. We know that wealth is rarely built overnight but built through years of sacrifice and hard work.

The question this Labor government policymakers should ask is simple: are we making it easier or harder for young Australians who are trying to get ahead?

If we genuinely care about intergenerational fairness, we should reward aspiration, encourage investment, and help young people build assets—not place additional obstacles in their path.

Australia’s success has always depended on people who believe that hard work and smart decisions should be rewarded. Young Indian Australians still believe that.

Government policy should too.

Contributing Author: Dave Sharma is Shadow Assistant Minister for Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs, Shadow Assistant Minister for International Development and the Indo-Pacific, and Senator for New South Wales

Support our Journalism

No-nonsense journalism. No paywalls. Whether you’re in Australia, the UK, Canada, the USA, or India, you can support The Australia Today by taking a paid subscription via Patreon or donating via PayPal — and help keep honest, fearless journalism alive.

The post Young Australians are doing everything right. Why make it harder for them to get ahead? first appeared on The Australia Today.