For flowering plants, reproduction is a question of the birds and the bees. Attracting the right pollinator can be a matter of survival – and new research shows how flowers do it is more intriguing than anyone realised, and might even involve a little bit of magic.
In our new paper, published in Current Biology, we discuss how a single “magic” trait of some flowering plants simultaneously camouflages them from bees and makes them stand out brightly to birds.
How animals see
We humans typically have three types of light receptors in our eyes, which enable our rich sense of colours.
These are cells sensitive to blue, green or red light. From the input from these cells, the brain generates many colours including yellow via what is called colour opponent processing.
The way colour opponent processing works is that different sensed colours are processed by the brain in opposition. For example, we see some signals as red and some as green – but never a colour in between.
Bees see their world using cells that sense ultraviolet, blue and green light, while birds have a fourth type sensitive to red light as well.
Our colour perception illustrated with the spectral bar is different to bees that are sensitive to UV, blue and green, or birds with four colour photoreceptors including red sensitivity. Adrian Dyer & Klaus Lunau, CC BY
The problem flowering plants face
So what do these differences in colour vision have to do with plants, genetics and magic?
Flowers need to attract pollinators of the right size, so their pollen ends up on the correct part of an animal’s body so it’s efficiently flown to another flower to enable pollination.
Accordingly, birds tend to visit larger flowers. These flowers in turn need to provide large volumes of nectar for the hungry foragers.
But when large amounts of sweet-tasting nectar are on offer, there’s a risk bees will come along to feast on it – and in the process, collect valuable pollen. And this is a problem because bees are not the right size to efficiently transfer pollen between larger flowers.
Flowers “signal” to pollinators with bright colours and patterns – but these plants need a signal that will attract birds without drawing the attention of bees.
A walk through nature lets us see with our own eyes that most red flowers are visited by birds, rather than bees. So bird-pollinated flowers have successfully made the transition. Two different theories have been developed that may explain what we observe.
One theory is the bee avoidance hypotheses where bird pollinated flowers just use a colour that is hard for bees to see.
In evolutionary science, the term magic trait refers to an evolved solution where one genetic modification may yield fitness benefits in multiple ways.
Earlier this month, a team working on how this might apply to flowering plants showed that a gene that modulates UV-absorbing pigments in flower petals can indeed have multiple benefits. This is because of how bees and birds view colour signals differently.
Bee-pollinated flowers come in a diverse range of colours. Bees even pollinate some plants with red flowers. But these flowers tend to also reflect a lot of UV, which helps bees find them.
The magic gene has the effect of reducing the amount of UV light reflected from the petal, making flowers harder for bees to see. But (and this is where the magic comes in) reducing UV reflection from a petal of a red flower simultaneously makes it look redder for animals – such as birds – which are believed to have a colour opponent system.
Red flowers look similar for humans, but as flowers evolved for bird vision a genetic change down-regulates UV reflection, making flowers more colourful for birds and less visible to bees. Adrian Dyer & Klaus Lunau, CC BY
Birds that visit these bright red flowers gain rewards – and with experience, they learn to go repeatedly to the red flowers.
One small gene change for colour signalling in the UV yields multiple beneficial outcomes by avoiding bees and displaying enhanced colours to entice multiple visits from birds.
We lucky humans are fortunate that our red perception can also see the result of this clever little trick of nature to produce beautiful red flower colours. So on your next walk on a nice day, take a minute to view one of nature’s great experiments on finding a clever solution to a complex problem.
Adrian Dyer previously received funding from The Australian Research Council.
Klaus Lunau previously received funding from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft.
The logbook of presidential flights in Indonesia reveals an unusual pattern — from the Merdeka Palace to the Land of the Bird of Paradise.
By 2023, then President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo had set foot in Papua at least 17 times — a record in the republic’s history, surpassing the total visits of all previous presidents combined.
Each touchdown of the presidential plane on the land of Papua or at the new airports he inaugurated was more than just a working visit. It was a statement of presence as a political message: Papua is no longer marginalised; it exists on Indonesia’s main political map.
Yet, behind the roar of the presidential plane and the welcoming traditional dances, lies a critical question: Has the physical presence of a national leader, accompanied by the rumble of massive infrastructure projects, touched the core issues of Papua?
Or has it merely become a grand symbol of integration, while social fractures, injustice, and sorrow continue to flow?
This analysis evaluates the multifaceted impact of President Jokowi’s dozen plus visits and draw crucial lessons for the new administration of President Prabowo Subianto and Vice-President Gibran Rakabuming Raka (Jokowi’s Son) in weaving a more just and sustainable Papuan policy.
The multidimensional impact of Jokowi’s visits From a national political perspective, the frequency of President Jokowi’s visits to Papua, was a smart and unprecedented political communication strategy. Each landing in the Melanesian land has not merely been a routine agenda but a powerful symbolic political performance.
Handshakes with tribal chiefs, meetings with traditional leaders in public arenas, and speeches amid crowds function as direct counter-narratives to long-standing issues of marginalisation and separatism.
This physical presidential presence is an undeniable visual declaration: Papua is an inseparable part of Indonesia, and the nation’s highest leader is consistently present there.
This presence serves as a potent tool of state legitimacy, shortening the psychological distance between the centre of power in Jakarta and the easternmost Melanesian region, while demonstrating the intended political commitment. However, beneath this symbolism, the legitimacy built through physical presence is temporary if not supported by real structural change.
The critical question often raised by the community, especially Indigenous Papuans (OAP), is simple yet fundamental: “After the president’s planes and helicopters leave and the protocol frenzy subsides, what has truly changed for our lives?”
The narrative of integration through presence and physical development often clashes with demands for self-determination and historical grievances still alive among indigenous Papuans, as reflected in the ongoing armed conflict in the Central Highlands, indicating that this approach has not fully addressed the deep-seated roots of dissatisfaction.
The most visible legacy of the Jokowi era in Papua is none other than the infrastructure revolution — thousands of kilometres of the Trans-Papua Road cutting through wilderness and remote mountains, the magnificent Youtefa Bridge in Jayapura, and airport modernisations like Ewer Airport in Asmat, Wamena Airport, and the construction of the trans-Wamena-Jayapura road, Wamena-Nduga road, and other physical developments.
The government’s logic is that connectivity is an absolute prerequisite for growth. With good roads, the price of necessities in the interior is expected to drop, tourism can develop, and public services like health and education can become faster and more equitable.
Data from the Ministry of Public Works and Housing indeed records significant accessibility improvements. However, behind this physical progress, reports from organisations like the Pusaka Foundation and Greenpeace Indonesia warn of massive and often overlooked ecological impacts.
The opening of certain segments of the Trans-Papua Road is judged to accelerate deforestation, threaten Papua’s unique biodiversity, and disrupt watershed areas.
More profoundly, the issue of community involvement and consent in land acquisition processes often becomes a source of new conflict, sparking tension. As Indonesian human rights activist Usman Hamid has stated, infrastructure development is like a double-edged sword: on one side, it opens isolation and shortens distances, but on the other, it paradoxically erodes customary land rights, damages the environment that is the source of their cultural life and subsistence, and ironically, is enjoyed more by new settlers with greater capital and networks.
On the socio-economic level, the government vigorously distributed various social assistance programmes such as the Indonesia Health Card (KIS), Indonesia Smart Card (KIP), and various forms of Direct Cash Assistance (BLT).
These affirmative policies aim directly at catching up on welfare gaps and, statistically, have succeeded in reducing poverty rates in cities like Jayapura, although they remain the highest nationally. Sectors like Youtefa Bay tourism also show rapid growth. However, the economic growth created is often enclave-like and not inclusive.
Maria, a small business owner in Jayapura, illustrates this reality — large infrastructure projects are handled by contractors from outside Papua, hotels and medium-scale businesses are often owned by non-Papuan investors, while local SMEs struggle to compete due to limited access to capital, training, and marketing networks.
The structural gap between OAP and non-Papuans in ownership of means of production and access to quality job opportunities remains wide. Consequently, many Papuan sons and daughters only become manual labourers or contract workers on the grand projects building their ancestral land, an irony that deepens the sense of injustice.
In the socio-cultural realm, President Jokowi’s presence, often adorned with Papuan cultural ornaments and humbly participating in traditional dances, was a powerful form of symbolic recognition. This gesture sent a national message that Papuan culture is respected and valued at the highest state level.
However, this symbolic recognition on the political stage often does not align with the daily reality in Papua. The late Papuan peace figure, Father Neles Tebay, once described that in Papuan cities, “two worlds” often coexist but do not integrate: the modern world of migrants dominating the formal sector and modern economy, and the world of indigenous communities, often marginalised in culturally insensitive development processes.
Ethnic-tinged horizontal conflicts that have occurred, such as in Jayapura and Mimika, are clear indicators of how fragile social harmony is and how deep the unresolved socio-cultural gap remains.
The darkest and most challenging point of this entire development narrative lies in human rights issues and the unending armed conflict. Although presidential visits often include a conflict resolution agenda, incidents of human rights violations and armed clashes between security forces and the TPNPB (West Papua National Liberation Army) continue to recur, with unarmed civilians often becoming trapped victims, as in the tragedies in Nduga and Intan Jaya highlighted by Komnas HAM and LBH Jakarta.
An approach relying almost solely on physical development, unaccompanied by sincere efforts towards historical reconciliation and fair, transparent law enforcement for past human rights violations, is considered by many in Papua as merely “covering a festering internal wound with a bandage”.
This unresolved historical pain and injustice continues to be the main fuel for resistance and demands for independence, proving that concrete and asphalt roads alone are not enough to build lasting peace and justice felt by all the nation’s children.
Valuable lessons for the Prabowo-Gibran era The current administration under President Prabowo Subianto and Vice-President Gibran Rakabuming Raka must not continue the Papuan policy with business as usual. The previous administration’s legacy offers a clear roadmap, as well as warnings about dead ends that must be avoided.
Four critical lessons should form the basis for transitioning from symbolic development to substantive, just transformation.
First, policy focus must undergo a paradigm shift from mere physical development towards the holistic empowerment of Papuan people. This means massive investment in quality education with curricula relevant to social contexts and local potential, as well as vocational training that equips Indigenous Papuans with skills to manage the economy on their own land.
Firm and measurable affirmative schemes must be designed to ensure Indigenous Papuans are not merely spectators, but the primary owners and managers of strategic economic sectors, from culture-based tourism and organic agriculture to creative industries.
Without this step, magnificent infrastructure will only become a channel for an extractive economy controlled by outsiders, perpetuating dependency and disparity.
Second, the government must enforce the principle of absolute harmony between development, cultural preservation, and environmental protection. Every major project, especially those touching customary lands and indigenous forest areas, must undergo credible, participatory, and legally binding Environmental and Social-Cultural Impact Assessments (AMDAL & ANDAL).
Development must no longer sacrifice local wisdom and ecosystems that are the soul and identity of Papuan society. Development models imported from Java or Sumatra must be reviewed and replaced with approaches born from dialogue with local ecology and culture, so that progress is not synonymous with environmental destruction and cultural marginalisation.
Third, this new era must open space for conflict resolution through a courageous approach of dialogue and reconciliation. The government needs to initiate inclusive dialogue involving all elements of Papuan society, including pro-independence groups willing to discuss peacefully, to address the roots of historical and structural dissatisfaction.
This complex issue has been comprehensively formulated by the Papua Peace Network. The establishment of an independent and trusted Papua Truth and Reconciliation Commission could be a monumental step to heal past wounds and build a foundation for sustainable peace, recognising that true security is born from justice.
Fourth, Special Autonomy must be revived in its meaning and spirit. A comprehensive evaluation of the implementation of the Special Autonomy Law, along with its trillions of rupiah in fund flows, is a necessity.
These funds must be shifted from physical projects that are often off-target to investments in enhancing the capacity, health, and economy of indigenous Papuans. More importantly, Special Autonomy must be interpreted as a political recognition of the special rights of Indigenous Papuans.
This means strengthening traditional institutions and providing real and decisive participatory space in every strategic decision-making at the provincial and district levels, so that policies are no longer felt as something imposed from Jakarta.
Ultimately, the main challenge for the Prabowo-Gibran administration is to demonstrate that commitment to Papua goes beyond rhetoric and showcase projects. Success will be measured not by the length of roads built, but by the fading of tension, the reduction of disparities, and the rise of self-confidence and economic independence among Indigenous Papuans.
Only by making these four pillars — human empowerment, harmony, dialogue, and living autonomy — the foundation of policy can Papua be truly integrated into the Republic of Indonesia in a dignified and sustainable manner.
“Only by making four pillars — human empowerment, harmony, dialogue, and living autonomy — the foundation of policy can Papua be truly integrated into the Republic of Indonesia in a dignified and sustainable manner.” Image: Laurens Ikinia/APR
A revolutionary approach model To translate the lessons from the previous era, the current administration requires a radical change in its approach model, moving from a centralised development paradigm towards participatory governance based on Papuan native institutions.
This ministry is not intended to manage regional administration, but specifically to guarantee the fulfilment of indigenous Papuans’ rights, as mandated in the Special Autonomy Law.
By placing the Governing Body for the Acceleration of Special Autonomy Development in Papua (BP3OKP) and the Papua Special Autonomy Acceleration Executive Committee under it, the government can create centralised, strong, and accountable coordination, thereby avoiding programme overlap and leakage of Special Autonomy funds.
This institutional revolution must be supported by data-based governance and authentic participation. Every policy and fund allocation, especially the massive Special Autonomy funds, must arise from rigorous data studies and in-depth dialogue with the community, rather than just technocratic planning in Jakarta.
Transparency and accountability in fund use must be guaranteed through independent oversight mechanisms that actively involve representatives of traditional councils or institutions, religious institutions, and local NGOs as watchdogs. Only then can the allocated funds truly become an instrument of change, not merely an instrument of expenditure.
Another key pillar is building equal and formal partnerships with Papuan traditional institutions, such as the Papuan Customary Council (DAP) and various stakeholders. These institutions are not merely ceremonial objects but must be recognised as strategic government partners in every stage of development, from planning and implementation to evaluation.
As socio-cultural anchors, understanding the pulse and real needs of the community, their involvement can prevent social conflict and ensure development programmes align with local wisdom and customary rights.
Furthermore, meaningful decentralisation becomes a prerequisite for success. Local governments in Papua must be given substantive authority and massive capacity building to independently manage natural resources and public services.
Moreover, the development approach must start from the grassroots, making participatory development at the village level the standard method. This method ensures that community aspirations are heard directly and the projects implemented truly address their priority needs, not merely pursuing physical targets.
Ultimately, this approach aims to reverse the traditional relationship between the central government and local governments in Papua. From a relationship that has so far seemed patron-client, to a partnership based on the sovereignty of indigenous communities and substantive justice.
Thus, development is no longer felt as something given from above, but something built together from below, creating a sense of ownership and sustainability that will become the foundation for long-term peace and prosperity in Papua.
Indonesianising in the Papuan Way Reinterpreting the term “Indonesianising” Papua is a main task for the current administration. This concept must no longer be interpreted as an assimilation process erasing distinctive identity, but must transform into an integration that respects uniqueness.
True integration is not homogenisation, but an effort to embrace diversity as a strength. In this context, Indonesia is not a single mould, but a mosaic that gains its beauty precisely from the differences of each piece. For this, a multidimensional approach grounded in four main pillars is required.
First, in the field of education, the national curriculum must become more flexible and inclusive. Enrichment with local content — such as the history and wisdom of Papuan tribes, local languages, and inherited ecological wisdom — should not be merely supplementary, but the core of the learning process.
Schools must become places where Papuan children are proud of their identity while mastering global competencies. Second, in the field of the economy, self-reliance must be built on local strengths.
Easily accessible micro-financing systems, entrepreneurship training, and strong marketing support for flagship products like Wamena arabica coffee, sago, matoa, or high-value marine products will create a sovereign economy that empowers, rather than displaces, the indigenous people.
Third, recognition at the legal level is the foundation of justice. Recognition of the customary land rights of indigenous communities in land and natural resource governance must be guaranteed and integrated into national regulations. This is a concrete step to prevent agrarian conflict and ensure development benefits return to the rightful land owners.
Fourth, building intensive cultural dialogue through student, artist, and youth exchange programs between Papua and other regions, or other countries. This direct interaction will break the chain of prejudice, build empathy, and strengthen a true sense of brotherhood as one nation.
Towards a ‘Just Papua’ The legacy from the previous period is ambivalent. On one hand, there is magnificent infrastructure and symbolic integration strengthened through physical presence; on the other, deep disappointment remains due to unbridged gaps and a persistently pulsating conflict.
The Prabowo-Gibran administration now stands at a historical crossroads. The choice is between continuing the visually spectacular yet often elitist “concrete development” model or taking a more winding yet dignified path: namely, the Papuan human empowerment model, which places indigenous Papuans as the primary subject and heir to the future of their own land.
This strategic choice will be fate-determining. It will measure, later at the end of their term, whether presidential and vice-presidential visits to Papua are still met with cold protocol performances, or with new hope and genuine smiles from a people who feel recognised, valued, and empowered.
Ultimately, genuine national integration can only be realised when Indigenous Papuans can stand tall with all their identity and dignity, not as a party being “Indonesianised,” but as fully-fledged Indonesians who also shape the face of the nation.
The future of Papua is not about becoming like others, but about being itself in the embrace of the Bird of Garuda.
Laurens Ikinia is a Papuan lecturer and researcher at the Institute of Pacific Studies, Indonesian Christian University, Jakarta. He is also an honorary member of the Asia Pacific Media Network (APMN) in Aotearoa New Zealand, and an occasional contributor to Asia Pacific Report.
ER Report: Here is a summary of significant articles published on EveningReport.nz on January 27, 2026.
Australia is turning the spotlight on financial abuse in relationships. What can NZ learn? Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jonathan Barrett, Professor of Taxation and Commercial Law, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington It’s a problem as old as marriage and money: one spouse, usually the husband, using financial control to dominate the other. From restricting spending and hiding debts, to forcing someone into
Vanuatu citizenship sales strong despite currency hassles and integrity issues By Johnny Blades, RNZ Pacific bulletin editor With all the setbacks of recent years, Vanuatu’s citizenship sale schemes should be dead in the water — instead they are thriving, and geopolitical chaos is playing a part. The citizenship-by-investment sector is the biggest single revenue earner for Vanuatu’s government, but lingering issues of integrity cast a
Most AI assistants are feminine – and it’s fuelling dangerous stereotypes and abuse Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ramona Vijeyarasa, Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Technology Sydney In 2024, artificial intelligence (AI) voice assistants worldwide surpassed 8 billion, more than one per person on the planet. These assistants are helpful, polite – and almost always default to female. Their names also carry gendered connotations.
Does your child want a part-time job? Here’s what the law says about kids at work Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kerry Brown, Professor of Employment and Industry, School of Business and Law, Edith Cowan University Boston Public Library/Unsplash For teens, a holiday or weekend job is a good way to earn pocket money and learn a new range of skills. But given the historical and ongoing exploitation
Ending duty-free tobacco sales would be good for health – and health budgets Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Janet Hoek, Professor in Public Health, University of Otago Getty Images Until recently, Aotearoa New Zealand led global tobacco control innovation. Evidence-based policies, including sustained tobacco excise tax increases, saw large reductions in smoking rates, which will save thousands of lives. Yet duty-free tobacco sales remain a
ChatGPT Health promises to personalise health information. It comes with many risks Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Julie Ayre, Post Doctoral Research Fellow, Sydney Health Literacy Lab, University of Sydney Many of us already use generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools such as ChatGPT for health advice. They give quick, confident and personalised answers, and the experience can feel more private than speaking to a
Did the kids stay up late in the holidays? 3 ways to get sleep routines back Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Yaqoot Fatima, Professor of Sleep Health, University of the Sunshine Coast Catherine Falls Commercial/ Getty Images For many families, the holidays mean sleep routines go out the window. Bedtimes drift later, screens stay on into the late evening, sleep-ins become the norm. But as term time rolls
Back to school: what are the money lessons to teach your kids at every age? Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Angel Zhong, Professor of Finance, RMIT University Atlantic Ambience/Pexels As parents prepare for another school year, there’s one subject that often gets overlooked: money. Financial literacy isn’t just about numbers. It’s about building skills that will shape your child’s future decisions, from buying their first car to
In ancient Mesopotamia, what was a ziggurat? Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Eva Anagnostou-Laoutides, Associate Professor in Ancient History, Australian Research Council Future Fellow, Macquarie University The ziggurat of Ur is in modern-day Iraq. حسن/Unsplash A ziggurat (also spelled ziqqurat) was a raised platform with four sloping sides that looked like a tiered pyramid. Ziggurats were common in ancient
Why the shooting of Alex Pretti in Minneapolis is so significant – expert Q&A Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mark Shanahan, Associate Professor of Political Engagement, University of Surrey Federal immigration agents in the city of Minneapolis are accused of having wrestled a 37-year-old intensive care nurse called Alex Pretti to the ground and then shooting him dead. The killing took place just over a mile
Shooting of Alex Pretti in Minneapolis has put America’s gun lobby at odds with the White House Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrew Gawthorpe, Lecturer in History and International Studies, Leiden University Another US citizen has allegedly been killed by immigration agents in Minnesota, raising tensions between state and federal governments. The actions of the federal agencies involved has drawn fierce criticism not only from former Democratic presidents Barack
Eroding trust in Fiji politics – lessons of 2025 and beyond ANALYSIS: By Shailendra B. Singh “You want a friend in Washington? Get a dog.” Although made in an American context, this observation by President Harry S. Truman has universal appeal. It highlights the unpredictable and treacherous nature of politics, whether it’s the chameleon-like antics of politicians or the fickleness of voters. The precariousness of politics
Chris Hedges: We sowed the wind, now we will reap the whirlwind COMMENTARY: By Chris Hedges The murders of unarmed civilians on the streets of Minneapolis, including the killing of the intensive-care nurse Alex Jeffrey Pretti, would not come as a shock to Iraqis in Fallujah or Afghans in Helmand province. They were terrorised by heavily armed American execution squads for decades. It would not come as
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jonathan Barrett, Professor of Taxation and Commercial Law, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington
It’s a problem as old as marriage and money: one spouse, usually the husband, using financial control to dominate the other.
From restricting spending and hiding debts, to forcing someone into legal or financial arrangements they don’t understand, financial abuse has long been a tool of power and coercion within intimate relationships.
While laws that once treated married women as legal minors have been dismantled, financial abuse remains widespread – and largely hidden. Increasingly, it is being recognised not just as a private harm, but as a systemic one, shaped by legal, tax and corporate systems.
There is no reason to expect the problem is any less severe in New Zealand and the case for closer investigation and policy attention is just as compelling.
As Australia moves to reform its systems, the question for New Zealand is what lessons can – and can’t – be imported.
What is financial abuse?
Broadly, financial abuse can include stealing money or property, failing to repay loans, or coercing someone into handing over assets or selling property for another’s benefit.
Unlike in New Zealand, Australia has a dedicated Tax Ombudsman with statutory powers to investigate whether tax administration benefits the community.
The Australian Treasury has also launched a public consultation on tackling financial abuse linked to coerced or fraudulent company directorships.
Together, these initiatives signal growing concern about how legal and financial systems can inadvertently enable abuse, even as the true scale of the problem remains unclear.
One particular issue stands out: fraudulent or coerced directorships, in which people are unknowingly or unwillingly made legally responsible for companies they do not run.
Under Australian law, this can carry severe financial consequences. While the Australian Tax Office is normally treated as an ordinary creditor when a company is liquidated, it also has the power to issue a director penalty notice, which can make company directors personally liable for unpaid tax.
In some cases, this liability takes immediate effect. In others, directors have just 21 days to pay outstanding PAYG (equivalent to PAYE in New Zealand), GST and superannuation debts before enforcement begins.
While these strictly enforced penalty notices act as a strong deterrent to directors who genuinely control companies, they can be highly problematic for innocent people who have been coerced into directorships or appointed without their knowledge.
Consider the example of “Anna”. After she receives a large inheritance, Anna’s husband sets up a company and secretly appoints her as its sole director, without taking on that role himself.
When the business runs into financial trouble and fails to pass on tax deducted from employees’ wages, Anna – who has had no involvement in running the company – becomes personally liable.
Because she is listed as the director, the Australian Tax Office can issue her with a director penalty notice, putting her inheritance and personal assets at immediate risk.
What this means for New Zealand
Different rules apply in New Zealand. Inland Revenue currently has no equivalent power to issue director penalty notices and must generally rely on the liquidation process to recover unpaid tax from insolvent companies.
While the tax department ranks ahead of many creditors, personal liability for directors arises only if a court considers it just: a high threshold.
In practice, it is highly unlikely a court would order compensation from someone who played no role in managing a company and was coerced into becoming, or fraudulently appointed as, a director.
This suggests that the specific weaponisation of company directorships observed in Australia may be far less prevalent in New Zealand. But it does not mean financial abuse is any less common, only that it may operate through different legal and institutional pathways.
Indeed, New Zealand company law arguably treats dishonest directors too leniently, while Australia’s tougher enforcement regime highlights how blunt legal instruments can unintentionally compound harm for abuse victims.
Recent Australian investigations acknowledge this tension, but also reveal how difficult it is to design systems that deter wrongdoing without trapping the innocent.
In New Zealand, we know that financial abuse is common – it is a normal consequence of a power imbalance in an intimate relationship. But we must also understand how it is happening before it can be alleviated. Australian experience doesn’t provide simple answers.
Jonathan Barrett does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
With all the setbacks of recent years, Vanuatu’s citizenship sale schemes should be dead in the water — instead they are thriving, and geopolitical chaos is playing a part.
The citizenship-by-investment sector is the biggest single revenue earner for Vanuatu’s government, but lingering issues of integrity cast a shadow over it.
In 2024, when Vanuatu became the first country to lose its European Union visa-free access over concerns about its golden passport scheme, there were fears it would be a huge blow to the sector.
But designated agents for Vanuatu’s citizenship programmes have told RNZ Pacific this has not necessarily hurt them much, as their product has other benefits and passport holders can still apply to access Europe.
However, Vanuatu’s continued inclusion on an EU anti-money laundering blacklist hurts more, Francesca Grillon of approved agent Yawha & Associates said.
Currency hassles Grillon said the decision to stop visa-free entry was not a major downfall for the citizenship programme.
“I think the main issue we are having is the blacklisting from Europe, because that that is an obstacle for receiving funds in foreign currency,” she said.
This issue came to a head last September when the Commonwealth Bank of Australia — which served as the correspondent bank for the National Bank of Vanuatu — advised it would no longer facilitate transfers for certified agents in the citizenship programmes
Melten Menauke of Smart Citizenship Vanuatu explained that this left the government in a bind over how it collects the donations and fees that foreign applicants pay.
“The National Bank is still looking for a correspondent bank to accept US dollars. I don’t know what is happening with the Commonwealth Bank of Australia.
“US currency was the first one they blocked, and now they are no longer accepting [Australian dollars]. They’re only accepting Japanese yen,” he said, adding that this created costly hurdles for agents and applicants alike.
Vanuatu’s capital Port Vila . . . integrity issues are not just creating pressure on Vanuatu’s citizenship sector internationally. Image: RNZ Pacific
But integrity issues are not just creating pressure on Vanuatu’s citizenship sector internationally.
‘Nobody trusts anyone’ A Commission of Inquiry into the citizenship programmes was initiated by Vanuatu’s government in 2024 following concerns about corrupt practices involving the sale of citizenship and misuse of the programmes for personal and political gain.
But the inquiry report has still not been made public, eight months after it was officially handed to the government. As calls for its release continue, Jenny Ligo, the chairperson of Women Against Crime and Corruption in Vanuatu, said citizenship schemes had been misled by political interests.
“That programme needs to be taken out totally. Because most of the projects under programmes in Vanuatu, it always ties in with pollitics and politicians,” Ligo said.
“This is all wrong. We need neutral people to run these programmes. But at the moment nobody trusts anyone.”
Vanuatu’s government has had a lot to contend with in the last few years, including responding to major disasters — earthquakes and cyclones — and the challenge of creating much-needed political reform. However, addressing the integrity problems of the citizenship-by-investment schemes is high on its priotiy list
Grillon said the government had been taking the right steps to improve compliance with regulations and rules, including strengthening the Financial Intelligence Unit which screens applicants.
“There’s a lot of effort, both from the high level government and directorship and public servants, in trying to really follow the international advice, and the newly introduced laws and doing everything properly.”
In demand Overall, the sector is doing well. According to the Vanuatu Daily Post, citizenship sale receipts made up the bulk of the US$31 million in revenue in the past year — 24.3 percent more than what was forecast, with around 2000 foreigners granted citizenship last year.
Interest remains strong in several foreign markets, Norman Joseph of JG Marketing, Consulting and Recruitment Agency said.
“We have Chinese, we have Indonesians, we have Russians. Most of them are from different countries but they also have passports from different countries,” Joseph said.
“So they come in, for example, some might be Chinese but they also have a Mexican passport, so they apply from a Mexican passport.”
Vanuatu flags . . . the passports are attractive for a variety of reasons. Image: RNZ Pacific
Ros Stanford of designated agent Stanford Knight said the Vanuatu passport was attractive for a variety of reasons.
“So, either for visa free travel — so global mobility is one option; for those that actually physically want to reside for tax benefits; and then we have a lot of clients currently who just want a safe like a Plan B, a safe alternative residence, in case things turn to custard globally.”
On the latter reason, Stanford said they had seen an uptick in the last couple of years, a reflection of ongoing ruptures in the global geopolitical order.
Even without visa-free access to Europe, and despite the concerns of ni-Vanuatu about its commodification, Vanuatu Citizenship is in demand — and agents tout it as one of the fastest citizenships to get any where in the world.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
In 2024, artificial intelligence (AI) voice assistants worldwide surpassed 8 billion, more than one per person on the planet. These assistants are helpful, polite – and almost always default to female.
Meanwhile, when IBM’s Watson for Oncology launched in 2015 to help doctors process medical data, it was given a male voice. The message is clear: women serve and men instruct.
This is not harmless branding – it’s a design choice that reinforces existing stereotypes about the roles women and men play in society.
Nor is this merely symbolic. These choices have real-world consequences, normalising gendered subordination and risking abuse.
The dark side of ‘friendly’ AI
Recent research reveals the extent of harmful interactions with feminised AI.
A 2025 study found up to 50% of human–machine exchanges were verbally abusive.
Another study from 2020 placed the figure between 10% and 44%, with conversations often containing sexually explicit language.
Yet the sector is not engaging in systemic change, with many developers today still reverting to pre-coded responses to verbal abuse. For example, “Hmm, I’m not sure what you meant by that question”.
These patterns raise real concerns that such behaviour could spill over into social relationships.
Gender sits at the heart of the problem.
One 2023 experiment showed 18% of user interactions with a female-embodied agent focused on sex, compared to 10% for a male embodiment and just 2% for a non-gendered robot.
These figures may underestimate the problem, given the difficulty of detecting suggestive speech. In some cases, the numbers are staggering. Brazil’s Bradesco bank reported that its feminised chatbot received 95,000 sexually harassing messages in a single year.
Even more disturbing is how quickly abuse escalates.
Microsoft’s Tay chatbot, released on Twitter during its testing phase in 2016, lasted just 16 hours before users trained it to spew racist and misogynistic slurs.
In Korea, Luda was manipulated into responding to sexual requests as an obedient “sex slave”. Yet for some in the Korean online community, this was a “crime without a victim”.
In reality, the design choices behind these technologies – female voices, deferential responses, playful deflections – create a permissive environment for gendered aggression.
These interactions mirror and reinforce real-world misogyny, teaching users that commanding, insulting and sexualising “her” is acceptable. When abuse becomes routine in digital spaces, we must seriously consider the risk that it will spill into offline behaviour.
Ignoring concerns about gender bias
Regulation is struggling to keep pace with the growth of this problem. Gender-based discrimination is rarely considered high risk and often assumed fixable through design.
While the European Union’s AI Act requires risk assessments for high-risk uses and prohibits systems deemed an “unacceptable risk”, the majority of AI assistants will not be considered “high risk”.
Gender stereotyping or normalising verbal abuse or harassment falls short of the current standards for prohibited AI under the European Union’s AI Act. Extreme cases, such as voice assistant technologies that distort a person’s behaviour and promote dangerous conduct would, for example, come within the law and be prohibited.
These are important steps. But they are still limited and also rare exceptions to the norm.
Most jurisdictions have no rules addressing gender stereotyping in AI design or its consequences. Where regulations exist, they prioritise transparency and accountability, overshadowing (or simply ignoring) concerns about gender bias.
In Australia, the government has signalled it will rely on existing frameworks rather than craft AI-specific rules.
This regulatory vacuum matters because AI is not static. Every sexist command, every abusive interaction, feeds back into systems that shape future outputs. Without intervention, we risk hardcoding human misogyny into the digital infrastructure of everyday life.
Not all assistant technologies – even those gendered as female – are harmful. They can enable, educate and advance women’s rights. In Kenya, for example, sexual and reproductive health chatbots have improved youth access to information compared to traditional tools.
The challenge is striking a balance: fostering innovation while setting parameters to ensure standards are met, rights respected and designers held accountable when they are not.
A systemic problem
The problem isn’t just Siri or Alexa – it’s systemic.
Meanwhile, a 2015 survey of over 200 senior women in Silicon Valley found 65% had experienced unwanted sexual advances from a supervisor. The culture that shapes AI is deeply unequal.
Hopeful narratives about “fixing bias” through better design or ethics guidelines ring hollow without enforcement; voluntary codes cannot dismantle entrenched norms.
Legislation must recognise gendered harm as high-risk, mandate gender-based impact assessments and compel companies to show they have minimised such harms. Penalties must apply when they fail.
Regulation alone is not enough. Education, especially in the tech sector, is crucial to understanding the impact of gendered defaults in voice assistants. These tools are products of human choices and those choices perpetuate a world where women – real or virtual – are cast as servient, submissive or silent.
This article is based on a collaboration with Julie Kowald, UTS Rapido Social Impact’s Principal Software Engineer.
Ramona Vijeyarasa receives funding from the Australian Research Council Discovery Program (DP250100382); the Trawalla Foundation; and the Women’s Leadership Institute Australia.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Eva Anagnostou-Laoutides, Associate Professor in Ancient History, Australian Research Council Future Fellow, Macquarie University
The ziggurat of Ur is in modern-day Iraq.حسن/Unsplash
A ziggurat (also spelled ziqqurat) was a raised platform with four sloping sides that looked like a tiered pyramid.
Ziggurats were common in ancient Mesopotamia (roughly modern Iraq) from around 4,000 to 500 BCE.
Unlike the Egyptian pyramids, they were not places of royal burials, but temples dedicated to the patron deity of a city.
How were they made?
Stone was relatively rare in Mesopotamia, so ziggurats were mainly made of sun-dried mudbricks coated with limestone and bitumen (a sticky, tar-like substance).
Their sides were decorated with grooved stripes and were often plastered with lime mortar or gypsum and glazed in various colours.
Unlike the pyramids, they had no internal chambers. The actual shrine was at the top of the structure where the god resided. It was accessible by steps and was believed to be a meeting point between heaven and earth.
Ziggurats towered over the centre of ancient Mesopotamian cities; as archaeological evidence indicates, they were typically built next to the palace or the temple of a city’s patron god to stress the role of the god in supporting the king.
How the Anu ziggurat became the White Temple
The Anu ziggurat, the oldest known, was built at Uruk (modern-day Warka, about 250 kilometres south of Baghdad) by the Sumerians around 4,000 BCE. (The Sumerians were an ancient people, among the first known to have established cities, who lived roughly in the area of modern Iraq, between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers.)
This ziggurat was dedicated to Anu, their sky god. Sometime between 3,500 and 3,000 BCE, the so-called White Temple was built on top of it.
The White Temple, approximately 12 metres high, was so named because it was entirely whitewashed inside and out. It must have shone dazzlingly in the sun.
The Sumerian culture was eventually taken over by the Akkadian Empire, followed by the Babylonian and Assyrian Empires. Throughout the rise and fall of empires, ziggurats continued to be built in the Ancient Near East.
In fact, the word ziggurat comes from the Akkadian verb zaqâru, meaning “to build high”.
Other famous ziggurats
Assyrian kings built an impressive ziggurat in their capital, Nimrud (about 30 kilometres south of Mosul). This ziggurat was dedicated to Ninurta, a Sumerian and Akkadian god of war and victory.
Ninurta’s father, the god Enlil, was worshipped at the ziggurat of the sacred city Nippur, in modern-day Iraq.
The Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar II dedicated the ziggurat Etemenanki to the Babylonian king of gods, Marduk. The name Etemenanki means the Temple of the Foundation of Heaven and Earth.
Etemenanki was located north of a different temple called the Esagil, which was Marduk’s main temple in Babylon.
Etemenanki likely inspired the story of the Tower of Babel in the Old Testament. Genesis 11 refers to a “tower” built of mud bricks instead of stone, which was intended to reach the heavens.
The building, perceived as an act of human pride, angered God, who caused the people to speak different languages and scattered them across the Earth.
According to the Greek historian Herodotus, Marduk often chose a woman to spend the night with him in the top-most shrine of his ziggurat.
The text has been often understood to refer to a “sacred marriage” rite involving the sexual union of a woman with the god.
However, it seems more likely to have been an incubation rite, when the god’s will is revealed to someone sleeping in a sacred place.
Constant preservation
Because of the relative lack of durability of mud bricks, ziggurats required constant preservation.
Etemenanki in Babylon had to be rebuilt several times until Alexander the Great ordered his soldiers to destroy it in 323 BCE so as to rebuild it from scratch.
However, Alexander’s premature death (historians continue to debate what he died of) meant the task had to be completedby his successors. But whether the rebuilding task was ever completed is uncertain.
Better preserved ziggurats include the Ziggurat of Ur (in the region of modern-day Tell el-Muqayyar in Iraq). The powerful king, Ur-Nammu, dedicated this ziggurat to the moon god, Nanna or Sîn, around 2100 BCE.
Another example is the ziggurat of Chogha Zanbil in modern Iran, which was built around 1250 BCE. It now stands only 24.5 metres tall, instead of the original estimated 53 metres.
And, if you look closely, you’ll see that there’s a fair amount of ziggurat about the Empire State Building.
These modern examples serve as a fascinating reminder of a design and construction language that goes back to the Middle East over six millennia ago.
Eva Anagnostou-Laoutides receives funding from the Gerda Henkel Foundation.
Michael B. Charles does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
As parents prepare for another school year, there’s one subject that often gets overlooked: money.
Financial literacy isn’t just about numbers. It’s about building skills that will shape your child’s future decisions, from buying their first car to planning for retirement.
The good news? You don’t need to be a finance expert to teach these lessons. Start with age-appropriate concepts and build from there. Here’s what to focus on at each stage.
Primary school (ages 6–12): Making money real
Young children understand money better when they can see it and touch it. This is the perfect time to introduce pocket money – a regular allowance that teaches them money doesn’t appear magically. And once it’s gone, it’s gone.
Start small. Five dollars a week gives a seven-year-old enough to make choices without overwhelming them. Should they buy that chocolate bar now, or save for three weeks to get the Lego set they really want?
This waiting game is crucial. It teaches delayed gratification, which research shows is linked to better financial outcomes later in life. When your child saves for weeks to buy something they’ve been eyeing, they’re learning that big goals require patience and planning.
Use clear jars or piggy banks so kids can literally watch their money grow. It makes saving visible and satisfying. Some families use a three-jar system: spending, saving, and sharing (for charity or gifts). This introduces the idea that money serves multiple purposes.
Let them make small mistakes too. If your eight-year-old blows their entire allowance on stickers and regrets it by Wednesday, that’s a five-dollar lesson that could save them thousands later.
Secondary school (ages 12–18): Real-world money management
Teenagers are ready for more complex financial concepts. This is when you shift from teaching about money to teaching with money.
Open a bank account together. Walk them through how banks work. Tell them that banks are not just storing money, they’re businesses that pay you interest to keep your money there and charge interest when you borrow. Explain that the interest you earn on savings is usually tiny, while the interest you pay on debts is much higher.
Introduce the concept of debit cards, but explain how they differ from credit. A debit card only spends money you already have. This is a good time to show them how to check their account balance and track spending through banking apps.
Talk about wants versus needs. Your teenager needs school shoes. They want the $200 branded pair. This isn’t about saying no. It’s about showing them trade-offs. “If you want those shoes, you’ll need to contribute $100 from your savings. Are they worth it?”
If your teenager gets a part-time job, teach them to check they’re being paid correctly. The Fair Work Ombudsman website has easy tools to calculate award rates, the minimum pay rates set for different industries and age groups. A 16-year-old working in retail should know what they’re entitled to earn.
This is also the time to introduce the concept of paying yourself first. When money comes in, savings come out first. Even putting aside 10% teaches the habit of treating savings as non-negotiable – it’s not whatever is left over.
Young adults entering work face a new financial landscape. They’re earning more, but expenses grow too, such as transport, social life, and maybe rent.
Start with superannuation. This is money an employer must put aside for an employee’s retirement. It may seem irrelevant when your child is 18, but a young person who understands super early has a massive advantage.
Here’s why: compound growth. Money invested at 18 has 40+ years to grow. Even small amounts become significant. If you put an extra $20 a week into super from age 18, you could have at least an extra $300,000 by retirement, thanks to compound returns. That’s the snowball effect, when the investment gains on your contributions start earning returns as well.
Introduce investing apps, but with caution. Digital investing apps such as CommSec Pocket and Stake make investing accessible with small amounts. They let young people buy into diversified funds, which are collections of many different investments, rather than trying to pick individual shares.
Explain the fundamental trade-off: higher potential returns come with higher risk. Shares can grow more than savings accounts, but they can also fall in value quickly.
Teach them about the share market without jargon. When you buy shares, you own a tiny piece of a company. If the company does well, your share becomes more valuable. If it doesn’t, your share can lose value.
Diversification – spreading money across many companies – reduces the risk of losing everything if one company fails.
The lessons that matter most
Financial education isn’t really just about money. It’s about decision-making, delayed gratification, and understanding that every choice has trade-offs. It’s a life skill you build over time, one conversation and one decision at a time.
The most valuable lesson you can teach at any age? Money is a tool, not a goal. It gives you choices and security. Teaching your children to use that tool wisely is one of the greatest gifts you can give them.
Start these conversations early. Make them normal. And remember, you’re teaching as much by how you handle money as by what you say about it. Children notice when you compare prices, when you talk about saving for holidays, when you decide something isn’t worth the price.
Angel Zhong does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
For many families, the holidays mean sleep routines go out the window. Bedtimes drift later, screens stay on into the late evening, sleep-ins become the norm.
But as term time rolls around, parents start to dread what’s coming – getting overtired, half-asleep kids up, dressed and out the door on time.
We are experts in sleep health. With a little planning and patience, you can bring sleep back into your routine without turning bedtime into a nightmare.
The science behind holiday sleep drift
During the school term, children’s sleep–wake cycles are usually regulated by fixed daily schedules and predictable bedtimes. These play an important role in stabilising circadian rhythms (the internal body clock). On school days, children are typically exposed to morning daylight and structured indoor lighting, both of which help set the body clock.
During holidays, children are more likely to have increased evening exposure to screens and artificial lighting, which can delay melatonin release – the hormone that promotes sleep.
Understandably, sleep also becomes less regular. This in turn can weaken daily signals which help regulate sleep timing, making it harder to maintain a stable sleep–wake pattern.
What are the signs my child’s sleep is ‘out of whack’?
A child’s sleep schedule may be considered “out of whack” when their sleep timing becomes inconsistent and starts to affect how they function during the day.
Common signs include frequent late bedtimes, difficulty falling asleep, difficulty waking in the morning, and feeling groggy or tired during the day.
You may also notice changes in mood and behaviour, such as irritability, emotional outbursts, reduced concentration or increased restlessness and hyperactivity.
Large day-to-day shifts in sleep and wake times (especially during school holidays) can also be a sign their body clock is out of sync and their sleep schedule needs attention.
Why is it important to have a healthy sleep routine?
If you think about how you feel after a bad or broken night’s sleep, it’s probably not hard to understand why we need a healthy sleep routine.
For children, the stakes are even higher. Sleep supports brain development, consolidates learning, processes emotions and allows the body to recover.
When sleep routines are disrupted children may struggle with concentration and memory, have mood swings and behavioural difficulties, and find it harder to regulate emotions. All these factors can affect school performance and social relationships.
Here’s how to get back into a sleep routine.
1. Have regular bed and wake times
Start by setting a regular bedtime and wake time every day, including weekends, to ensure children get the right amount of sleep for their age. For primary school children, this means around nine to eleven hours a night.
If your child has been staying up later over the holidays, gradually bring bedtime earlier by 15-30 minutes every few nights until it’s back in line with their regular schedule. Do the same for wake time if your child has been sleeping in. Earlier wakings can be encouraged with exposure to daylight in the bedroom and a healthy breakfast to help realign their bodily rhythms.
Napping during the day should be avoided, as naps can interfere with nighttime sleep.
2. Have a wind-down routine
Going to bed earlier may be challenging for some children. A calming bedtime routine of relaxing activities may help some children sleep more easily. A warm bath or shower, soft music, reading a book or cuddling with a caregiver may provide comfort.
If they find it difficult to fall asleep, suggest they come out of their bedroom for a short time (such as 15 to 20 minutes) to do a quiet activity (such as reading or drawing – no screens!). This may help them feel sleepy before returning to bed.
3. Make bedrooms quiet and dark
The sleep environment matters too. A quiet, dark, comfortable space where children feel safe helps tell the brain it’s time to sleep.
Simple reward systems, such as sticker charts, can reinforce routines for younger children. This can show kids sleep is a positive and predictable part of their day.
Do the same things yourself
And don’t forget the role of parents. Good sleep habits also need to be modelled by parents. When older children see their parents maintaining consistent bedtimes and calm wind-down routines, they’re more likely to follow suit.
It won’t be perfect overnight.
Re-establishing healthy sleep patterns may take a week or two.
So start, and stay consistent, and you’ll make back-to-school mornings calmer and easier for everyone.
Yaqoot Fatima receives funding from MRFF, NHMRC, Beyond Blue.
Jasneek Chawla receives funding from MRFF, NHMRC, Children’s Hospital Foundation
Jasneek Chawla is President and a Board Director for the Australasian Sleep Association.
Danielle Wilson and Nisreen Aouira do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Many of us already use generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools such as ChatGPT for health advice. They give quick, confident and personalised answers, and the experience can feel more private than speaking to a human.
ChatGPT Health promises to generate more personalised answers, by allowing users to link medical records and wellness apps, upload diagnostic imaging and interpret test results.
But how does it really work? And is it safe?
Most of what we know about this new tool comes from the company that launched it, and questions remain about how ChatGPT Health would work in Australia. Currently, users in Australia can sign up for a waitlist to request access.
Let’s take a look.
AI health advice is booming
Data from 2024 shows 46% of Australians had recently used an AI tool.
Health queries are popular. According to OpenAI, one in four regular ChatGPT users worldwide submit a health-related prompt each week.
Our 2024 study estimated almost one in ten Australians had asked ChatGPT a health query in the previous six months.
This was more common for groups that face challenges finding accessible health information, including:
people born in a non-English speaking country
those who spoke another language at home
people with limited health literacy.
Among those who hadn’t recently used ChatGPT for health, 39% were considering using it soon.
How accurate is the advice?
Independent research consistently shows generative AI tools do sometimes give unsafe health advice, even when they have access to a medical record.
There are several high-profile examples of AI tools giving unsafe health advice, including when ChatGPT allegedly encouraged suicidal thoughts.
Recently, Google removed several AI Overviews on health topics – summaries which appear at the top of search results – after a Guardian investigation found the advice about blood tests results was dangerous and misleading.
This was just one health prompt they studied. There could be much more advice the AI is getting wrong we don’t know about yet.
According to OpenAI, users will be able to connect their ChatGPT Health account with medical records and smartphone apps such as MyFitnessPal. This would allow the tool to use personal data about diagnoses, blood tests, and monitoring, as well as relevant context from the user’s general ChatGPT conversations.
OpenAI emphasises information doesn’t flow the other way: conversations in ChatGPT Health are kept separate from general ChatGPT, with stronger security and privacy. The company also says ChatGPT Health data won’t be used to train foundation models.
OpenAI says it has worked with more than 260 clinicians in 60 countries (including Australia), to give feedback on and improve the quality of ChatGPT Health outputs.
In theory, all of this means ChatGPT Health could give more personalised answers compared to general ChatGPT, with greater privacy.
Yes. OpenAI openly states ChatGPT Health is not designed to replace medical care and is not intended for diagnosis or treatment.
It can still make mistakes. Even if ChatGPT Health has access to your health data, there is very little information about how accurate and safe the tool is, and how well it has summarised the sources it has used.
The tool has not been independently tested. It’s also unclear whether ChatGPT Health would be considered a medical device and regulated as one in Australia.
The tool’s responses may not reflect Australian clinical guidelines, our health systems and services, and may not meet the needs of our priority populations. These include First Nations people, those from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, people with disability and chronic conditions, and older adults.
We don’t know yet if ChatGPT Health will meet data privacy and security standards we typically expect for medical records in Australia.
Currently, many Australians’ medical records are incomplete due to patchy uptake of MyHealthRecord, meaning even if you upload your medical record, the AI may not have the full picture of your medical history.
For now, OpenAI says medical record and some app integrations are only available in the United States.
So, what’s the best way to use ChatGPT for health questions?
In our research, we have worked with community members to create short educational materials that help people think about the risks that come with relying on AI for health advice, and to consider other options.
Higher risk
Health questions that would usually require clinical expertise to answer carry more risk of serious consequences. This could include:
finding out what symptoms mean
asking for advice about treatment
interpreting test results.
AI responses can often seem sensible – and increasingly personalised – but that doesn’t necessarily mean they are correct or safe. So, for these higher-risk questions, the best option is always to speak with a health professional.
Lower risk
Other health questions are less risky. These tend to be more general, such as:
learning about a health condition or treatment option
understanding medical terms
brainstorming what questions to ask during a medical appointment.
Ideally, AI is just one of the information sources you use.
Where else can I get free advice?
In Australia we have a free 24/7 national phone service, where anyone can speak with a registered nurse about their symptoms: 1800 MEDICARE (1800 633 422).
Symptom Checker, operated by healthdirect, is another publicly funded, evidence-based tool that will help you understand your next steps and connect you with local services.
AI tools are here to stay
For now, we need clear, reliable, independent, and publicly available information about how well the current tools work and the limits of what they can do. This information must be kept up-to-date as the tools evolve.
Purpose-built AI health tools could transform how people gain knowledge, skills and confidence to manage their health. But these need to be designed with communities and clinicians, and prioritise accuracy, equity and transparency.
It is also essential to equip our diverse communities with the knowledge and skills to navigate this new technology safely.
Julie Ayre receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council.
Kirsten McCaffery receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council
Adam Dunn does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Yet duty-free tobacco sales remain a curious anomaly and contradict efforts to reduce smoking prevalence.
At international airports and duty-free stores throughout the country, travellers can still buy cigarettes and roll-your-own tobacco without paying the excise tax or GST applied at domestic retail outlets.
Cheap duty-free sales of tobacco products not only deprive the public purse of millions of dollars, they undermine efforts to become a smoke-free nation.
Excise tax works because it raises prices, and higher prices reduce smoking. Studies have consistently found every 10% increase in price reduces tobacco consumption by around 5%.
Numerous studies show that when tobacco prices rise, people smoke less and try to quit more often, and fewer young people take up smoking. Because people on lower incomes and young people are more sensitive to increasing prices, tobacco excise taxes can help reduce health inequities within these groups.
These benefits explain why successive governments increased tobacco excise by 10% annually from 2011 to 2020, on top of annual inflation adjustments.
But while this measure was associated with a sustained decline in smoking prevalence, duty-free outlets continue to offer tobacco at just a fraction of regular retail prices.
Raising revenue while reducing harm
In 2014, three years after it declared the Smokefree 2025 goal, the government recognised this inconsistency. It reduced the duty-free allowance from 200 cigarettes to 50 and applied similar reductions to other tobacco products.
Nonetheless, although duty-free sales dropped sharply the following year, they continue to represent millions of dollars in foregone tax revenue.
Our recent analysis of the tobacco returns data that tobacco companies supply to the Ministry of Health shows duty-free tobacco cost the government between NZ$60 million and $96 million in foregone excise tax and GST between 2015 and 2024.
Even using conservative assumptions that account for reduced consumption at higher prices, the lost revenue amounts to tens of millions of dollars.
The health system is under increasing pressure; allowing discounted tobacco sales effectively undermines government goals to reduce cancer and cardiovascular disease.
Importantly, it also removes funding from government coffers that could expand existing health care.
Even using our most conservative estimate of $60 million, the foregone revenue could have funded around 600 Keytruda treatments for early-stage breast cancer, which is currently unfunded. (Ironically, people self-funding cancer therapies pay GST on the drugs they require.)
Alternatively, $60 million could have funded around 2,000 additional hip or knee replacement surgeries, or provided a substantial boost to mental health and addiction services.
Towards a coherent tobacco policy
Ending duty-free sales of tobacco products would amount to a price increase, which we would logically expect to reduce sales, and hence decrease health harms, and costs to the health system over time.
While perfume or chocolate purchases may be a relatively harmless perk of travel that boost airport revenues, these arguments do not hold for a product that will kill two out of three long-term users, and which remains a leading cause of preventable death.
This policy incoherence means that while New Zealand has an explicit goal of reducing smoking prevalence and tobacco availability, and eliminating smoking-related inequities (particularly for Māori and Pacific peoples), it still allows sales of discounted tobacco.
New Zealand is a party to the World Health Organization’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, the first global treaty to address the tobacco epidemic. This means New Zealand has an obligation to implement effective and wide-ranging tobacco control policies.
Remedying the current contradiction is simple. Ending duty-free tobacco sales offers a straightforward and low-cost solution that would consolidate the effects excise taxes have on tobacco consumption.
Applying excise and GST taxes to tobacco products currently sold at duty free stores would also generate revenue that could support a struggling health system.
Importantly, it would ensure government policies align with its international obligations, demonstrate the policy leadership that once defined Aotearoa New Zealand’s approach to tobacco control, and encourage other countries to take similar action.
Janet Hoek receives funding from the Health Research Council of New Zealand, the Marsden Fund, NZ Cancer Society and NZ Heart Foundation. She is a member of the Health Coalition Aotearoa’s smokefree expert advisory group and was a member of the Ministry of Health’s smokefree advisory group. She is a member of the HRC’s Public Health Research Committee and a Senior Editor at Tobacco Control (honorarium paid). She serves (or has served) on several other government, NGO and community advisory groups. She has received travel and accommodation support from NGOs to present at conferences.
J. Robert Branston receives funding from Bloomberg Philanthropies, as part of the Bloomberg Initiative to Reduce Tobacco
Use (www.bloomberg.org), and from Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) in the UK. He also owns 10 shares in Imperial Brands for research purposes. The shares were a gift from a public health campaigner and are not held for financial gain or benefit. All dividends received are donated to health-related charities and proceeds from any future share sale or takeover will
be similarly donated.
Philip Gendall does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
For teens, a holiday or weekend job is a good way to earn pocket money and learn a new range of skills.
But given the historical and ongoing exploitation of child labour across the globe, strict laws are set out to protect children.
Australia follows the 1973 International Labour Organisation (ILO) convention on a minimum working age. Under this convention, the standard age for employing young people is 15 years old.
But people can start work before that, subject to additional legal protections. Even if young people are volunteers and undertaking unpaid work, there are similar restrictions on their activities to the limits in paid employment.
So if you have a young person in your life who’s thinking about getting a job, it’s worth knowing what the laws and rules are.
What are the rules for kids under 15?
Every state in Australia has specific requirements for employing workers who are under 15 years old. These specifications differ from state to state, but most principles are broadly similar.
For employers, they need to hold a child employment licence to employ children under 15.
There are set limits on how many hours young people can work, depending on their age. Generally, they can do up to ten hours each week.
There are also restrictions on doing heavy work. Young workers under 15 years can only undertake light duties. In Victoria, for example, a child cannot work on a building site or on a fishing boat.
There are also rules for when children can work. Working during school hours is generally not allowed because state laws require children to attend school. Legislation about children in the workplace is built around ensuring they access education.
The law limits where children and teenagers can work. Nick David/Getty
Some jurisdictions have special provisions around times of day children under 15 can work.
In Western Australia, young workers aged 10–12 cannot start work earlier than 6.00am or finish their work after 7.00pm. Children aged 13–14 cannot start before 6.00am but can finish work at 10.00pm.
In Tasmania, children between the ages of 11 and 14 aren’t allowed to work between 9.00pm and 5.00am of the following day, unless it’s for charity or school.
While laws are in place to protect children from exploitation, there are many opportunities for children to be part of the workforce, starting as young as ten or 11 years in the delivery services industry or as child models in the advertising industry.
Children from ages 10–12 can work in a limited capacity delivering newspapers, pamphlets or advertising material.
Children aged 13–14 can extend this work to a variety of roles in the retail and hospitality sectors, including in cafes and restaurants, the fast food industry and shops.
While they can be employed in the hospitality sector, young workers under 18 generally can’t serve alcohol or sell cigarettes.
In some sectors, there are fewer requirements for employing children of any age.
Working in a family business, for a charity or not-for-profit organisation or in the entertainment industry is not subject to many restrictions, apart from the need to attend school.
Parental supervision is needed under some circumstances. For example, photographic work with children up to three years old needs a parent involved, as does letterbox delivery, door-to-door sales and charity work by kids under 12.
In some instances the requirement to undertake work outside school hours can be waived, such as when a child is home schooled.
What if a child is 15 or older?
Children older than 15 years are still subject to different conditions than 18-year-old or adult workers. Child workers up to the age of 18 years still require their parent’s consent or hold a right to work “special circumstances certificate” to be employed.
Workers under 18 years are exempt from holding a Working with Children Check, required when working in close contact with children such as in child care centres and schools, or involved in sports coaching.
The adult hourly wage rate starts at 21 years. Younger workers are paid a percentage of the adult rate, so the wages of young people are differentiated by age.
The entertainment and advertising industries are high profile and highly sought after sectors employing children. But they’re not subject to many of the rules above.
Laws allow children in the entertainment industry to “take the stage” at any age, provided their schooling is not interrupted. Children can work as an actor, musician, entertainer or a model in advertising under these conditions, but all need parental consent.
The entertainment industry has requirements for employers to be licensed to employ children and adult employees may need to undergo a Working with Children Check if they are working alongside those under 18 years in a role such as a coach or an actor.
Parents of child workers have the right to be informed about all aspects of their child’s job, including extensive briefings about the things their child will see, hear and do in their role.
The child cannot be exposed to anything that is inappropriate for their age, maturity and level of development, or be put in situations to cause them distress or embarrassment.
But even when entirely lawful, things can get messy. Signing kids up to record deals or modelling contracts can be hard for parents to navigate and many may not understand the potential long-term ramifications. It may be helpful to consult a lawyer when looking at legal paperwork like this.
Overall, labour laws emphasise the importance of education, adequate rest and access to leisure time. Any job a child can get must adhere to these standards.
Kerry Brown has received funding to undertake research from local and state governments, and from the Australian Research Council.
Another US citizen has allegedly been killed by immigration agents in Minnesota, raising tensions between state and federal governments. The actions of the federal agencies involved has drawn fierce criticism not only from former Democratic presidents Barack Obama and Bill Clinton, but also America’s powerful pro-gun lobby, the National Rifle Association (NRA).
If you were to think it unusual that the people named in the previous sentence appear to be on the same side over this issue, you’d be right. But these aren’t usual times in America.
Video footage taken at the scene reportedly shows agents of the US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) – working with the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency (ICE) in Minnesota to detain people they suspect of being illegal migrants – tackling 37-year-old nurse, Alex Pretti.
The footage reportedly shows they wrestled him to the ground, beat him and apparently removed a handgun from a holster he was wearing, before firing ten shots at him.
Since his killing a lot of attention has focused on his gun. Carrying a handgun, whether openly or holstered, is legal in Minnesota, and Pretti had a license for his gun. So he was perfectly within his rights to be carrying it. And there is nothing to suggest from the footage that he attempted to draw it or use it while being tackled by the ICE agents.
Of course, in the United States, the right to keep and bear arms – the second amendment – is a pretty big deal to a lot of people, especially conservatives. So when various figures in the Trump regime suggested that CBP agents had been justified in shooting Pretti because he was carrying a holstered weapon, they provoked outrage from gun rights activists. And, significantly, many of these people are usually on the same page as the White House about pretty much anything.
First there was FBI director Kash Patel, who told Fox News: “You cannot bring a firearm loaded with multiple magazines to any sort of protest that you want.” Dead wrong, replied the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus and the group Gun Owners of America – you’re legally entitled to bring a gun to a protest.
Then a Trump-appointed district attorney waded in, arguing: “If you approach law enforcement with a gun, there is a high likelihood they will be legally justified in shooting you.”
This drew a rebuke from the NRA, one of the most prolific and important right-wing groups in America and a big donor to Trump’s campaigns, which replied that: “This sentiment … is dangerous and wrong. Responsible public voices should be awaiting a full investigation, not making generalizations and demonizing law-abiding citizens.”
The problem that the Trump regime has is that it appears from abundant video evidence that Pretti was not handling his gun irresponsibly. He wasn’t waving it around, he wasn’t threatening anyone, in fact he wasn’t even touching it. He didn’t approach the federal agents – they appeared to pile on him. And he was disarmed of his holstered weapon by one of them before he was killed.
Second amendment vs tyrannical government
The reason that this touches such a raw nerve, even with many people who usually support Trump’s agenda, is that this cuts to the core of what the second amendment is about. In the eyes of the right, the amendment’s whole legitimacy rests on the idea that it allows the populace to arm in order to protect itself against a tyrannical government.
This means that Pretti was doing exactly what second amendment advocates say they need guns for. And while some gun rights advocates may have been willing to keep quiet while federal agents were trampling on the rights of migrants and brown-skinned citizens, the murder of Pretti is a bridge too far.
That’s not to say that the gun lobby is turning on the Trump administration – at least, not yet. But it is notable that ICE’s outrages (and those of the related Customs and Border Protection Agency) are becoming so hard to ignore that they’re increasingly drawing opposition not just from the left but also from traditionally right-wing groups.
The NRA is not about to flip and start fundraising for the next Democratic party presidential candidate. But its willingness to call out the regime is unusual to say the least. And it increases pressure on Trump to change course and damages the credibility of key people in the regime among conservatives.
The whole sequence of events also reveals something more concerning – the fact that more and more people in America on both left and right are carrying weapons. The idea of arming for self-defense has been quietly gaining ground in left-wing circles for around a decade.
Gun clubs have sprung up to serve LGBTQ+ people, black people, white liberals – anyone who fears they might one day be a target of violence from the Trump-ified federal authorities or right-wing militia. Nearly one-third of self-identified liberals now live in a gun-owning household.
And while it’s hard to find fault with their fears, this is another reason why America’s knife-edge politics is so terrifying. What happens when things fall apart in a country in which hatred and fear have driven so many people to arm themselves?
Let’s hope that Alex Pretti’s death serves as a reminder of the importance of stepping back from the brink rather than pushing the country closer to it.
Federal immigration agents in the city of Minneapolis are accused of having wrestled a 37-year-old intensive care nurse called Alex Pretti to the ground and then shooting him dead. The killing took place just over a mile from where another American citizen, Renee Good, was allegedly fatally shot by federal agents weeks earlier.
The latest incident prompted angry protests from people in Minneapolis who want the immigration enforcement operation in their city to end. We spoke to Mark Shanahan, an associate professor of political engagement at the University of Surrey, to address several key issues.
Why has sending in federal immigration agents caused such trouble in Minnesota?
Since returning to the White House in January 2025, the national guard has been deployed to several US cities to quell what have generally been Donald Trump-inflated crises, with illegal migration among the most prominent. However, in December, the Supreme Court ruled that Trump did not have authority for such deployments.
So, since then we have seen federal agents with US Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement taking the battle largely to minorities in cities with Democratic party leadership as part of the president’s violent attack on illegal immigration, a situation he has described as “the greatest invasion in history”.
Minneapolis is a Democrat-run city in a Democrat-led state. The governor is Tim Walz who ran for vice-president on the Kamala Harris ticket against Trump in the 2024 election. Walz has faced allegations, which he denies, of overlooking alleged widespread fraud in the financing of public safety net programmes, supposedly involving segments of the Somali-American community.
While most of these allegations have been refuted, they gave Trump reason to send in federal agents. This has ramped up tensions between state officials and the administration, causing brutal and unnecessary deaths in the community and pitting ordinary Minnesotans against federal government officials.
How does the situation in Minnesota reflect the second amendment right to bear arms?
It’s a reversal of virtually all of the second amendment debates that have been seen in recent years. The second amendment was introduced to the US constitution in 1791 through the Bill of Rights due to a deep mistrust of centralised military power and a desire to ensure that the newly formed federal government could not disarm the populace.
The founding fathers envisaged a “natural right of resistance and self-preservation”. Trump’s actions in sending in armed federal agents to conduct enforcement operations in various states appear to fulfil the founding fathers’ concerns.
The agents are trampling all over not only citizens’ second amendment right to bear arms (officials seemingly connected Pretti’s killing to him carrying a weapon) but also their first amendment right to freedom of assembly.
How have the fatal shootings affected Trump’s popularity?
Trump’s popularity is on the decline. His failure to deliver on the economic promises outlined in his election campaign, scatter-gun approach to international relations and the widening gulf between rhetoric and achievement have all damaged his standing in the polls.
In a CNN poll published on January 16, almost six in ten respondents described Trump’s first year back in office as a failure with the president focused on the wrong priorities.
And what support he does have is ebbing rapidly as federal immigration agents appear out of control, targeting many more documented citizens than illegal migrants, spreading fear and operating as if they are above the law.
With what looks like high levels of gaslighting coming from Homeland Security officials, voters are turning against the increasing autocracy of this administration, believing in the evidence widespread across the media rather than highly contentious statements from Trump’s lieutenants.
Is it unusual for former presidents to speak out the way Barack Obama and Bill Clinton have?
It certainly is. There is a longstanding tradition in the US of, and implicit agreement among, former presidents to avoid public criticism of the incumbent. Such reticence to speak is generally a sign of respect for the office and an acknowledgement of the unique and difficult challenges of the presidency.
But Trump 2.0 is no normal presidency. The 47th president’s style is both combative and retributive, and there seems to be an increasing feeling of it being out of step with the desires and best interest of the country he leads.
Trump’s march to autocracy creates crises where he regards himself as the hero the country needs to overcome its ills. His predecessors take a different view.
Whether it’s Obama calling out the assault on core American values or Clinton’s condemnation of the “horrible scenes” in Minneapolis as “unacceptable” and avoidable, Democrat past presidents have not held back. Notably, the only living previous Republican president, George W. Bush, has so far kept his own counsel.
What can be done to prevent further violence?
Most simply, Trump could end the deployment of federal immigration agents to Minneapolis and refrain from similar actions in the future. He is clearly looking for an off-ramp and sending his “border czar”, Tom Homan, to Minneapolis to direct operations could be the first step to de-escalation. But Trump abhors being called out as wrong and, at least beyond Minneapolis, is far more likely to double down on the immigration enforcement activities.
Realistically, the most likely de-escalator is Congress showing some teeth and refusing to fund further federal immigration enforcement activity. Democrats could force another government shutdown over the issue, and need just a handful of Republicans to flip in order to refuse to sanction a 2026 budget for the Department of Homeland Security.
At a public level, the greater the scrutiny of immigration enforcement agencies, the closer the fact-checking of official statements and the more cohesive the opposition to Trump’s deportation policy, the greater the chance of effectively opposing it.
It is midterm year – and the greater the public pressure, the more likely Republican legislators are to cleave away from the Trump line. While he currently controls the levers of power, that control remains fragile. Even Trump may soon realise that overt, violent, coercive autocracy is not a vote winner.
Mark Shanahan has a new edited collection, Trump Unbound, coming out in October 2026 to be published by Palgrave Macmillan.
“You want a friend in Washington? Get a dog.” Although made in an American context, this observation by President Harry S. Truman has universal appeal.
It highlights the unpredictable and treacherous nature of politics, whether it’s the chameleon-like antics of politicians or the fickleness of voters. The precariousness of politics was felt most acutely in Suva as recently as October 2025.
Few anticipated that two of Fiji’s three deputy prime ministers, elected with much fanfare in December 2022, would be forced to resign over allegations of failure of ministerial integrity.
The Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) is an autonomous body, at least constitutionally, but Dr Biman Prasad and Manoa Kamikamica’s indictments still sparked speculation about political conspiracies and high-level skulduggery.
This political earthquake was far removed from the euphoria of the People’s Alliance Coalition election victory over the FijiFirst government — on the promise of a fresh start.
Led by Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka, the People’s Alliance Party’s partnership with the National Federation Party and the Social Democratic Liberal Party secured electoral victory on a show of unity and a set of vote-winning pledges: cost-of-living relief, curbing government wastage and greater media freedom.
Restoring media freedom was relatively straightforward, perhaps because it was cost-free, and it was implemented almost immediately through the repeal of the draconian Media Industry Development Act.
Other pledges more difficult Other pledges — such as addressing the national debt and the budget deficit — proved far more difficult, in part because of global economic conditions, as did the challenge of resisting the urge to increase parliamentary salaries, which went up by 130–138 percent.
Additional benefits were thrown in for good measure: tax-free vehicle purchases for cabinet ministers, increased overseas travel allowances for the prime minister and president, and non-taxable duty allowances, business-class travel, and enhanced life insurance coverage for MPs.
In comparison to other jurisdictions, the salary increases may not, in themselves, be unreasonable. The core problem, as noted by some observers, is that Parliament should not be determining its own benefits.
The approval of the benefits also stunned many because of the Coalition’s longstanding criticism of FijiFirst over pay levels, and its pre-election pledges to slash them.
Moreover, there were questions of affordability given Fiji’s ballooning debt and deficit situation, which the Coalition had pledged to address as part of its plan to eliminate what it considered were the excesses of the previous FijiFirst government.
Increasing parliamentary benefits seemed an odd way of honouring those commitments.
There is also the question of whether taxpayers are getting what they are paying for. But perhaps the increase in benefits should not have been entirely surprising, since such outcomes are often consistent with the realities of politics in Fiji, and elsewhere.
Lying could cost politicians So much so that Wales, for example, is considering becoming the world’s first country to introduce laws that would mean politicians could lose their jobs for deliberate lying during election campaigns.
Fijian voters, who may be disillusioned, are not entirely powerless. With elections scheduled for next year, they may well turn the tables on their representatives by springing a few surprises of their own at the ballot box.
Governance, after all, is a shared responsibility between the government and the governed. Voters usually get the government they vote for, and recent experiences would be a reminder of the importance of informed participation in politics, and the prudent use of voting power.
Especially when, as a nation, Fiji has a long and arguably worsening experience with unfulfilled or broken promises, whether by politicians or coup leaders.
Fiji’s coup culture and its fallout are a reminder of the saying, “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.”
The 1987 and 2000 coups were carried out by political and military elites claiming to represent indigenous iTaukei interests, while the 2006 coup was justified on the grounds of good governance, equality and national unity.
It is safe to assume that none of these utopian promises have fully materialised. The country appears more divided than ever, and too many people still remain trapped in poverty.
Costs of elite power struggles According to World Bank estimates, of the roughly 258,000 people (29.9 percent) in poverty, about 75 percent are iTaukei, which underscores how ordinary communities bear the costs of elite power struggles rather than benefit from them.
Coup instigators’ rhetoric is one thing, but what is more troubling is that our elected leaders increasingly seem unbothered by going back on their word — even by their own low standards of keeping election promises.
Granted, structural pressures typical of a young, transitional democracy like Fiji can make reforms around debt and budget deficits quite complex and difficult to achieve.
However, successive governments are failing even when it comes to basic good governance policies and practices, which are often the pillars of sustainable development.
As part of its self-proclaimed “clean-up campaign”, the ousted FijiFirst government promised many things, including merit-based appointments to boards and other government positions.
Instead, appointments were frequently made on the basis of offspring, as at the Fiji Sports Council; siblings, as at the Fiji Broadcasting Corporation; and in-laws and cronies in various other institutions.
This was rightly criticised ad nauseam by the Coalition when in opposition, with the promise to address it once in power. But has the Coalition honoured its word, or are we just seeing more of the same?
Disproportionately marginalised Some observers have argued that under the FijiFirst Government, appointments made in the name of merit had disproportionately marginalised iTaukei representation in certain areas.
Against this backdrop, the Coalition’s approach to appointments has been described by some as a form of “rebalancing” by prioritising iTaukei candidates.
The concern now being raised is whether the pendulum may have swung too far in the other direction, and whether appointments continue to be made largely based on family ties, clanship, kinship and friendship.
These questions are not just about due process: appointments to key positions also shape the country’s long-term progress and development. In this context, merit should not become an afterthought, nor should appointments result in any form of blatant exclusion, as both can undermine confidence in the system, with the risk of exacerbating Fiji’s brain drain dilemma across all ethnicities, including among qualified iTaukei.
This possibility was obliquely raised recently by none other than the Chair of the Great Council of Chiefs (GCC), Ratu Viliame Seruvakula, who stated that Fiji needed other races to progress.
“If every other race left Fiji, we’d be doing exactly what we were doing to cause more pain to the country,” he said.
As Truman noted, politics can be a dirty game. To make politics cleaner, politicians must be accountable, with a longer-term vision for the country.
Punishing at the polls One way to make politicians take voters seriously is to punish them at the polls if they fail to keep their promises.
This is the path to a healthier, performance-based political system that facilitates development — driven by the fear of and respect for the voter’s power. This depends not only on politicians, but also on an engaged, ethical and informed electorate that votes on issues, rather than on the basis of race, religion, party or personality.
As the country entered 2026, Prime Minister Rabuka offered a welcoming and constructive New Year’s message, emphasising teamwork, unity and inclusiveness: “Fijians must work together with faith, hope, and shared responsibility to overcome challenges and build a stronger, united nation.”
The Prime Minister reminded the country that the Coalition government was elected on a “promise of integrity, inclusion and reform”. Since these virtues were the Coalition’s mantra and its winning formula in the 2022 elections, the government would do well to apply this thinking consistently in its day-to-day decisions and long-term vision for the country.
The bottom line, as alluded to by the GCC chair, is that indigenous leadership now plays a central role in shaping Fiji’s political direction. With that power comes a duty to build a country that works for future generations of iTaukei while also ensuring that ethnic minorities continue to feel included and valued as equal stakeholders in a shared future.
Shailendra B. Singh is associate professor of Pacific journalism at The University of the South Pacific, based in Suva, Fiji, and a member of the advisory board of the Pacific Media.This article appeared first on Devpolicy Blog, from the Development PolicyCentre at The Australian National University.
The murders of unarmed civilians on the streets of Minneapolis, including the killing of the intensive-care nurse Alex Jeffrey Pretti, would not come as a shock to Iraqis in Fallujah or Afghans in Helmand province.
They were terrorised by heavily armed American execution squads for decades.
It would not come as a shock to any of the students I teach in prison. Militarised police in poor urban neighborhoods kick down doors without warrants and kill with the same impunity and lack of accountability.
What the rest of us are facing now, is what Aimé Césaire called “imperial boomerang”.
Empires, when they decay, employ the savage forms of control on those they subjugate abroad, or those demonized by the wider society in the name of law and order, on the homeland.
The tyranny Athens imposed on others, Thucydides noted, it finally, with the collapse of Athenian democracy, imposed on itself.
But before we became the victims of state terror, we were accomplices. Before we expressed moral outrage at the indiscriminate taking of innocent lives, we tolerated, and often celebrated, the same Gestapo tactics, as long as they were directed at those who lived in the nations we occupied or poor people of colour.
We sowed the wind, now we will reap the whirlwind. The machinery of terror, perfected on those we abandoned and betrayed, including the Palestinians in Gaza, is ready for us.
Chris Hedges is a Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist who was a foreign correspondent for 15 years for The New York Times, where he served as the Middle East bureau chief and Balkan bureau chief for the paper. He is the host of show “The Chris Hedges Report”. This commentary was first published on the Chris Hedges Substack page and is republished with permission.
ER Report: Here is a summary of significant articles published on EveningReport.nz on January 26, 2026.
Samoan playwright found dead in prison, local media report RNZ Pacific Samoan playwright, author and poet Papali’i Sia Figiel has died in prison, according to local media reports. Local media, citing sources at the country’s main correctional facility in Apia, are reporting that Papali’i, 58, was found dead in her prison cell on Monday. She was being held at Tanumalala Prison, awaiting her next
Kalafi Moala: My view of tyrannical Trump COMMENTARY: By Kalafi Moala, publisher of Talanoa ‘o Tonga As a journalist based in Tonga, I have chosen mostly to refrain from giving a view of US President Donald Trump, one way or another, as I thought that he would sooner or later get over his incredible childishness and tyrannical behavior, and start doing something
A major overhaul of NZ’s local government is underway – will it really fix what’s broken? Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Guy C. Charlton, Associate Professor, University of New England Phil Walter/Getty Images With a general election looming, the largest shake-up of New Zealand’s local government system in three decades sits on the table. New Zealanders are being invited to have their say on the draft policy proposal,
Opposition to moving Australia Day from January 26 is hardening: new research Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Lowe, Chair in Contemporary History, Deakin University Australians are deeply divided over whether January 26 is an appropriate day to celebrate Australia Day – and we are no longer debating it as much as doubling down in entrenched camps. Over the past five years, we have
Comfort them or let them tough it out? How parents shape a child’s pain response Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Joshua Pate, Senior Lecturer in Physiotherapy, University of Technology Sydney Atlantic Ambience/Pexels It happens in slow motion. Your six-year-old daughter is sprinting across the playground at school drop-off time when her toe catches on uneven ground. She goes down hard. The playground goes silent. She freezes and
Human composting, natural burials, water cremation: greener ways to go when you die Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sandra van der Laan, Professor of Accounting, University of Sydney Photo by DEAD GOOD LEGACIES/Sarah Johnson Photography on Unsplash All of us, sooner or later, will need to make a decision about the final resting place for ourselves or a loved one. But the usual options offered
Practise using bags and lunchboxes: how to build your child’s confidence as they start school Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Fiona Boylan, Senior Lecturer, School of Education, Edith Cowan University Wander Women Collective/ Getty Images Starting school is a big moment in a child’s life. It is a time filled with new routines, new people and new places. These changes can also mean it is sometimes a
How this ‘dirtbag’ billionaire chose to do capitalism differently Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Wendy Scaife, Adjunct Associate Professor and Director, Australian Centre for Philanthropy and Nonprofit Studies, Queensland University of Technology Budrul Chukrut/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images Few people globally have influenced business, sport, the environment and philanthropy like Patagonia founder Yvon Chouinard. Chouinard’s inventive approach across these spheres makes
Curious Kids: in ancient Egypt, what was the Sphinx all about? Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Serena Love, Honorary Research Fellow in Archaeology, The University of Queensland Photo by KHALED DESOUKI/AFP via Getty Images In ancient Egypt, what was the Sphinx all about? – Effie, age 8, New Plymouth, New Zealand. One of the most mysterious and iconic monuments of ancient Egypt is
Astronaut Katherine Bennell-Pegg is 2026 Australian of the Year Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra The first Australian to qualify as an astronaut under Australia’s space program, Katherine Bennell-Pegg, is the 2026 Australian of the Year. Bennell-Pegg, 41, who has yet to go to space, graduated from Basic Astronaut Training in 2024 as part of
Gaza peacekeeping deployment – five clear questions Fiji cannot ignore ANALYSIS: By Jim Sanday The recent announcement by Fiji’s Minister of Defence and Veterans Affairs that Fiji will consider contributing troops to a proposed international stabilisation force in Gaza imposes a responsibility on all of us to ask the hard questions before the decision is finalised by Cabinet. At the outset, let’s all be clear
Albanese takes safe course, appointing defence chief Greg Moriarty to replace Kevin Rudd Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has appointed the Secretary of the Defence Department, Greg Moriarty, to be Australia’s new ambassador to Washington, succeeding Kevin Rudd, who leaves the position in March. The highly-respected senior bureaucrat is a safe choice, and his
As a journalist based in Tonga, I have chosen mostly to refrain from giving a view of US President Donald Trump, one way or another, as I thought that he would sooner or later get over his incredible childishness and tyrannical behavior, and start doing something credible for his country, and the world.
I was initially horrified in 2024 watching Trump in a White House televised meeting with Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky in which he rudely bullied the Ukrainian leader; told lies and acted arrogantly, humiliating him.
Also, I watched him boast unceasingly about “Making America Great Again” (MAGA).
He created an ICE force, unleashing them in states like Minnesota against their will, killing people in Minneapolis and wrongly arresting citizens while looking for illegals to be deported.
Tonga was listed among nations which were banned from entry into the USA, affecting many students who were planning to take up further schooling for 2026. Tongan families who planned to visit the graduation of their children were no longer allowed into the USA.
He ordered America’s military to attack Venezuela and kidnapped the President, against international law; also controlled the sale of their oil.
When the Opposition leader of that country offered him her Noble Peace Prize Award, he accepted — something he has tried to get saying he has “settled peace in 8 wars”.
Bombing of Nigeria He ordered the bombing of Nigeria as a reaction to the “killing of Christians”. Is this what Jesus would have done whenever there are Christians who are persecuted anywhere in the world? Or is this Trump’s way to help boost his image among American Christians?
And then came the Greenland issue, which he called Iceland in a speech in Switzerland. He has threatened to invade this country which is under Denmark and NATO; then offered to buy it, and then after threats, changed his mind and announced there has been “a deal involving NATO, a peace framework for the future.”
But Trump could not help himself by boasting that “if it was not for us, German would be your language today”. He did not realise that German is the main language spoken in Switzerland.
Much more can be said about what this Nazi-style dictator is doing in America and the world, but the one that eventually tipped me over, was his most recent public statement, during a boast-fest in the White House that “God must be proud of me!”
How can a human be more deceived?
The narcissism of this man exceeds anyone else in that he now boasts that “God must be proud” of him! If God is proud of him, then God must be behind every move he makes.
Trump is not just a product of his own making. He has the support of the extreme rightist Republican Party, and a huge number of American Evangelicals. This is a huge concern, because the views of these groups continue to fuel the ungodly narcissism that is so much a part of Trump’s personality and character.
‘He is always right’ Its not only a case of “might is right” but that “he is always right” and that is why God must be proud of him!
What is also most shocking is that Trump supporters not only worship him as “a god” but also give great sounding explanations to Trump’s actions. An example is like saying Trump is only bringing the Venezuelan President (and his wife) to America to stand trial for drug smuggling.
Never mind about his cruelty, his arrogance, his lies, his “Epstein-style” immorality, and abuse of power resulting in senseless deaths.
“He is a wonderful Christian,” I was told by a Christian leader in the USA, who happens to be a friend of mine. Another Christian leader in Tonga said, “I like Trump because he opposes abortion, the murder of unborn babies.” My response was that I am also apposed to the murder of unborn babies, but I am also opposed to the murder of those who are already born.
I do take some of this personally because as an American citizen, I am a registered Republican voter out of Hawai’i. I am also an evangelical Christian. And yet Donald Trump, President of the country of my citizenship is definitely the most tyrannical and unprincipled leader of the free world we’ve had for some time.
Resisting the Trump nonsense does not mean endorsement of Biden and Obama or the Democrats for that matter. The people of America put Trump where he is, and the people of America have allowed him to do what he has done — his illegal and cruel actions, his senseless threats, his bullying of other world leaders, and international organisations, and so much more.
Reflection of US society It can be true that a people deserve the leader they get.
In a Republic like America, they voted him in. Trump has become a reflection of American society, a warlike people who seem to look down on everyone else, and whose history is filled with cruel takeovers like they did in Hawai’i and other Pacific Islands; wiped out hundreds of thousands in Japan with the world’s first nuclear weapons, and fought wars in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Iran supposedly “to save the world” while killing countless others.
I recently saw an anti-Trump poster that says: “There is nothing more dangerous than an idiot who thinks he is a genius!” I do not think the President of the United States is an idiot, neither do I think he is a genius. But he is dangerous because he is a so-called Christian who does un-Christian things, he is a god-worshipper whose god is himself!
I am publishing the following article by Michael Jochum which speaks for a lot of people including myself.
At the World Economic Forum in Davos, Donald Trump didn’t merely embarrass the United States in front of its allies; he revealed, with clinical clarity, the pathology that now defines his presidency — and the pathology his supporters actively crave. The bluster, the grievance, the thinly veiled threats, the adolescent swagger masquerading as strength: this is not drift or decline. It is the point.
Here’s the dangerous truth that finally snaps into focus after Davos: the unhinged Trump on that stage is exactly the president his followers want. They don’t tolerate the chaos; they require it. They don’t excuse the cruelty; they cheer it. They don’t misunderstand the geopolitical land-grabs and war-mongering postures; they see them as proof of dominance. The spectacle is the substance.
[embedded content]
What makes this moment uniquely perilous isn’t just one man’s depravity. It’s the millions who looked at that performance and thought, Finally — someone who speaks for me. We are not up against a conventional politician or an opposing platform.
We are up against a movement animated by:
The racism embedded in “Make America Great Again,” which has always translated to Make America White Again.
The misogyny that waved off “Grab ’em by the pussy” as locker-room talk and called accountability hysteria.
The anti-intellectualism that confuses cruelty with strength and treats knowledge as weakness.
A provincial, grievance-soaked worldview that mistakes bluster for leadership and exclusion for sovereignty.
Trump is not a nightmare by accident. He is the most unprepared, unqualified, and disgraced president in American history by design. A bigot. A hater. A sexist. A xenophobe. A man with the intellectual and emotional maturity of a five-year-old child. He is mentally ill. He is a pathological liar who lies about his lies. He is obsessed with verbally attacking Hillary Clinton, and he reveals his deep racism through his constant, obsessive disparagement of Barack Obama. Donald Trump is a disgrace to humanity.
I have never heard — nor am I hearing — one single coherent, rational, intelligent, informed, educated, moral, fact-based, sane, mature, patriotic, or politically valid reason to support this illiterate, illegitimate, mentally ill, fish-mouthed “president”. What I do hear, loud and ugly, is resentment, self-hatred, impotent rage, and the glee of people who seem perversely proud that they have endangered everyone in this country.
This is no longer left versus right. The real question is whether we normalise this collective sickness — or excise it before it metastasizes further.
Every time someone says, “But the economy . . . and those illegals . . . ” to justify their support, listen closely. They are telling you exactly which part of Trump’s reflection they see themselves in.
The good news? Mirrors can be shattered. But only if we stop looking away.
Samoan playwright, author and poet Papali’i Sia Figiel has died in prison, according to local media reports.
Local media, citing sources at the country’s main correctional facility in Apia, are reporting that Papali’i, 58, was found dead in her prison cell on Monday.
RNZ Pacific has contacted the Samoan police for comment.
Samoa Observer reports she had been in custody since 2024 for the alleged murder of Professor Caroline Gabbard.
Often described as Samoa’s first woman novelist, Papali’i’s first book, where we once belonged (1996), won the Best First Book award in the South East Asia/South Pacific region of the Commonwealth Writers Prize in 1997. Her second novel was They who do not grieve (1999).
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
The government’s case for reform is that the status quo is inefficient, confusing to voters and “tangled in duplication, disagreements and decisions that don’t make sense”.
It argues these problems will only intensify as councils take on new responsibilities, from resource management reform to water services and climate adaptation. Its proposed solution: removing an entire tier of elected local government.
While reform may well be overdue, the proposal raises crucial questions about democratic representation, accountability and how regional decisions should be made.
These issues sit at the heart of the consultation – and they matter as much as the promise of efficiency or lower costs.
How the proposed changes would work
The proposal would abolish regional councils and replace them with combined territorial boards made up of locally elected mayors. Voters would elect only one set of local representatives, rather than both territorial and regional councillors.
The new boards would take on the legal responsibilities of existing regional councils, while much of the regional bureaucracy would remain. Mayors on the boards would not have equal voting power; instead, votes would be weighted by population, with adjustments set by the Local Government Commission.
The proposal also allows – though not as a preferred option – for a Crown Commissioner to be appointed to a territorial boards. Depending on the circumstances, that commissioner could have no vote, a veto, or more than half of the weighted votes, to ensure national interests are taken into account.
The boards’ primary task would be to prepare a regional reorganisation plan within two years of establishment.
These plans would aim to encourage cooperation between councils to reduce costs, improve efficiency and deliver services better aligned with regional needs, while safeguarding local voices. They would also examine whether combined councils or alternative regional entities could deliver services more effectively.
Importantly, the plans would consider how local government works with post-settlement governance entities in relation to Treaty of Waitangi settlements.
They would be guided by a central government review of council functions, assessing whether some responsibilities should be reallocated to other agencies, delivered through different models, or removed where national consistency is required.
Once completed, each plan would be assessed against national priorities, financial viability, service quality, governance and treaty obligations. The outcome could range from retaining the territorial board to modifying or dissolving it, depending on the region.
Where the plan falls short
There is little question that New Zealand’s local government system is no longer serving the needs of communities.
The sector is awash in paperwork, rates have increased, services reduced and it seems unable to deal with a multitude of problems that surfaced during the pandemic.
To this extent, the draft proposal, with its focus on shared efficiencies, reducing the number of local institutions and attempting to reinvigorate local democracy, is welcome. But it comes with significant shortcomings.
First, it does not require a prior assessment of national legislation and policy that shapes – and often constrains – local government functions. Many of the costs and inefficiencies councils face stem from nationally imposed mandates.
Reforming governance structures without examining these obligations risks entrenching, or even worsening, existing problems.
Moreover, the proposal does not consider the Local Government Act 2002, which imposes significant procedural and substantive obligations on councils that could be directly affected by legislative reform and any resulting reorganisation plan.
Second, eliminating regional councils before undertaking a comprehensive review of service delivery may exacerbate existing problems rather than resolve them.
Simply removing elected regional councillors while awaiting a central government review of service delivery is unlikely to resolve pressing local problems or uncover issues not already well known to local officials.
Will voter turnout improve?
The government also presumes, without clear evidence, that regional councillors are a major contributor to local government problems. Even under the plan, local government would still face too many nationally imposed obligations and too little funding to operate effectively.
Instead, the new boards have potential to increase parochial non-regional decision-making and create legitimacy issues due to how votes are allocated.
Nor is there much reason to think that restructuring councils in this way would lead to higher voter turnout in local elections. Given New Zealand voters routinely navigate the complexities of MMP, it is unconvincing to attribute low turnout to voter confusion.
A more plausible explanation lies in the growing centralisation of policy making by successive governments – a trend that won’t change under this proposal.
Lastly, by removing regional constituencies, the proposal effectively eliminates the possibility of Māori constituencies at the regional level. Given the likely outcome of more centralised local government, this change would remove an important mechanism for Māori representation and participation as treaty partners.
Retaining the option of Māori wards and constituencies is crucial to reflecting local aspirations, supporting reconciliation and ensuring meaningful involvement in regional decision making.
With changes of this scale on the table, the consultation now underway deserves careful scrutiny of what might be simplified, but also what could be lost.
Guy C. Charlton does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
