As tensions rose ahead of Easter, US President Donald Trump publicly criticised Pope Leo XIV, accusing the pontiff of “interfering in political matters he does not fully understand”.
During a rally, Trump reportedly said: “The Vatican should focus on religion, not tell strong nations how they should defend themselves. America will always put its security first.”
The remarks quickly drew global attention and prompted a calm but firm response from the Pope.
Speaking at the Vatican, Pope Leo XIV responded: “The Church cannot remain silent when power is used without moral responsibility. Faith must guide humanity toward peace, not justify conflict.”
Following the exchange of statements, many Catholic faithful around the world also began voicing their opinions.
Many believers expressed support for the message of peace and moral responsibility emphasised by Pope Leo XIV, arguing that faith should be used to bring people together and promote peace, rather than to justify conflict.
Across religious forums and social media platforms, Catholics called on political leaders to respect the spiritual role of the Church, while also encouraging dialogue between politics and religion to be conducted with humility, reconciliation, and mutual respect.
Many also expressed hope that the Pope’s message would continue to inspire efforts toward peace around the world.
New Zealand celebrates the Easter Vigil at St Patrick’s Cathedral in Auckland Tāmaki Makaurau yesterday. Image: Asia Pacific Report
In the coming years, if Iran survives as a sovereign state and retains control over the Strait of Hormuz, countries like Australia, New Zealand, the UK, South Korea and Japan will be made to pay hundreds of billions of dollars in reparations for the US-Israeli war on Iran.
For this to come to pass, Iran must fight the aggressors to a standstill and ensure they can impose, if necessary, a chokehold on the oil, gas and fertilisers vital to the global economy.
So, when next you see an image of spectacular US-Israeli violence, think this: “I might have to pay for that”.
There is no doubt that US-Israel has succeeded in setting fire to Iran, inflicting a heavy death toll, and hundreds of billions of dollars in damages to the civilian infrastructure of the country.
As the Leader of the so-called “Free World” said this week: the aim is to bomb Iran back to the Stone Age.
Destruction now far worse The destruction is now far worse, approaching 100,000 structures. By the end of March hundreds of schools, dozens of universities, much of the civilian infrastructure including major bridges, energy systems and cultural sites had been attacked by the Americans and Israelis. Does anyone still believe they have come to Iran to free the people?
Who should pay for reconstruction? The Iranian government is clear: we should — because this immense crime was, from their perspective, aided and abetted by Australia, the UK, EU, New Zealand and others, who, as with the genocide in Gaza, did nothing meaningful to stop it.
According to Lloyds, Iran has now set up a toll booth at the Strait of Hormuz — referred to by some as “The Aya-Toll-a Booth” — to tax ships that pass through the strait. It may be questionable under the Law of the Sea but this would be to quibble after the US-Israelis blitzkrieg.
The Majlis (Iranian Parliament) is finalising a law declaring Iranian “sovereignty, control and oversight” of the Strait, something it had never asserted before. The bill introduces a system of transit fees for commercial vessels passing the Hormuz Strait, effectively imposing a tax of up to $2 million per vessel that wishes to pass.
A large oil tanker has a cargo worth about $200 million so the fee is not excessive. Multiply that by more than 100 ship movements per day under peacetime conditions and Iran could be in receipt of tens of billions of dollars per year.
Given the rogue states who launched this war will never submit to international law or reparations it seems an elegant solution.
Under the system, ships must now provide their International Maritime Organisation (IMO) number, cargo manifest, crew names, ownership details and destination before Iran will issue a safe passage clearance. The law bans vessels from the US, Israel, and their allies, while granting safe transit to China, Russia, India, Pakistan, Iraq, Bangladesh and other friendly nations.
Iran needs to win For this to fully come to fruition, Iran needs to win.
Professor Robert Pape, a top US expert on warfare, based at the University of Chicago, says Iran will likely emerge from this terrible war as a super-power. Many analysts, such as Colonel Daniel Davis, Mark Sleboda, Annelle Sheline, and Professor John Mearsheimer, now see an Iranian victory as likely.
Professor Pape himself has run simulations of US-Iran wars for decades and is clear: “Trump made a huge mistake.”
Professor Pape, who was one of the prime architects of the US Air Force’s war curriculum, told journalist Mahmoud Ansari that Trump and others are currently confusing tactical success with strategic outcomes. For the moment, the Americans and Israelis are enjoying success after success: killing leaders and school girls, blowing stuff up and so on.
“That can be mesmerising, and cause this illusion of precision control but it is not the same thing as a strategic victory. Iran before the war controlled 4 percent of the world’s oil. Twenty-six days later they control 20 percent of the world’s oil.”
As Trita Parsi of the Quincy Institute pointed out this week, Denmark charged transit fees for 400 years for vessels to pass through the Øresund Strait into and out of the Baltic. Panama, Egypt and Turkey all charge transit fees.
The countries who played the starring supporting roles in the genocide in Gaza — Germany, UK, Australia — and supported Israel and America in their rampages across the Middle East for decades may — if they are lucky — get access to the Gulf again but may have to pay a heavy price for their role in the destruction of the lives of tens of millions of people.
NZ awaits eventual negotiations The energy security of a minor henchman like New Zealand will have to await eventual negotiations between its major suppliers — South Korea and Singapore — and Iran.
Bloodied but as yet unbowed, Iran knows it can — and must — rise like the Phoenix from the ashes.
In the Iranian version of the Phoenix tradition — reaching back thousands of years — the Phoenix (Simurgh in Farsi) must face death and destruction before being reborn and revitalised.
The Simurgh is so ancient it possesses the wisdom of the ages: in other words it knows how to survive calamities that would consume others. This is called civilisational resilience and it is baked into the DNA of the Iranian people.
ER Report: Here is a summary of significant articles published on EveningReport.nz on April 5, 2026.
Protesters condemn Luxon govt for failing to condemn illegal war on Iran Asia Pacific Report New Zealand’s government was taken to task today for its lack of a principled stand against Israel’s Gaza genocide and the illegal and unprovoked US-Israel war on Iran. Several speakers at a rally in the heart of Auckland expressed disappointment and anger at Prime Minister Christopher Luxon’s failure to condemn the war
New Zealand’s government was taken to task today for its lack of a principled stand against Israel’s Gaza genocide and the illegal and unprovoked US-Israel war on Iran.
Several speakers at a rally in the heart of Auckland expressed disappointment and anger at Prime Minister Christopher Luxon’s failure to condemn the war of aggression against Iran, one of the major supporters of Palestinian self-determination and justice.
The speakers from several cultures were scathing about New Zealand’s weak stance in the rally at Te Komititanga Square with a theme of “Welfare not warfare”.
The criticism comes as US President Donald Trump is reportedly seeking a record $1.5 trillion in “defence” spending for the coming year along with massive social cutbacks, according to a White House details released yesterday, while New Zealand’s budget allows for an unprecedented NZ$12 billion four-year plan to overhaul the country’s military.
Bibi Amena, a twice-displaced refugee from Afghanistan who has experienced the devastation of war and lost family members while resisting the Soviet invasion and occupation of Afghanistan, said the illegal assassination of a high profile head of state and respected figure among Shia Muslims around the world should have been condemned.
“At the very least our government should have condemned America and Israel in the strongest words possible,” she said.
New Zealand should have distanced itself from America and Israel “and their crumbling empire”.
Helen Clark quoted She quoted former prime minister Helen Clark who at the beginning of this war described New Zealand’s response as “a disgrace” and that it was in the country’s best interests to keep advocating for international law.
“No War With Iran” protesters in Auckland’s Te Komititanga Square today. Image: Asia Pacific Report
“New Zealand is not a mighty country, and if we trample international law and forego an independent foreign policy, we are left at the mercy of countries far bigger and far stronger than us,” Amena said.
“Let’s be loud and clear when we say that Israel and America’s war on Iran is illegal — it’s illegitimate, unprovoked and immoral.”
A Tehran-born psychology student, Ali Reza, who migrated to New Zealand in 2013, was also strongly critical of the government’s weak stance over the war.
“Some politicians seem to have trouble with their spines. Iran has many excellent spinal surgeons who could help them with that.”
Ali Reza (right) with MC Achmat Esau speaking in Te Komititanga Square today . . . “Some politicians seem to have trouble with their spines. Iran has many excellent spinal surgeons who could help them with that.” Image: Asia Pacific Report
He praised the Palestinian resistance in the face of the 76th years “brutality, occupation, mass murder and mass displacement” by Israel.
“Meanwhile, the Sudanese people were suffering through a devastating civil war caused by the UAE (United Arab Emirates) and its master Israel. The enemy’s lies set records displaying psychotic levels of manipulation and exploitation,” he said.
“The enemy renewed their specialisation in the discipline of evil wrongdoings, pioneering in numerous fields, followed by their murderous campaign in Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq and Iran, all funded by the United States.”
Choice for Aotearoa Leeann Wahanui-Peters of the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) called for a choice for Aotearoa — one between “the security of our whānau and the lies and profits of warmongers and their masters in Wall Street, the City of London, and the shadow bankers of Black Rock and company”.
“A choice between a home, a warm home and weapons,” she said. “A choice between a future of justice, peace and prosperity for all and a past of war and exploitation for the few.
“For decades, we have been told that the world is dangerous and that the only way to be safe is to spend more on the military.”
“This is a lie,” Wahanui-Peters said.
PSNA’s Leeann Wahanui-Peters . . . “The greatest threat to the safety of a child in Aotearoa isn’t a missile from a distant land.” Image: Asia Pacific Report
“The greatest threat to the safety of a child in Aotearoa isn’t a missile from a distant land. It is the coldness of a house their parents can’t afford to heat, or living in a car.
“It is their hunger in their stomach because their school lunch has been cut. It is the despair of a future with no jobs and no hope.”
And yet, said Wahanui-Peters, New Zealand’s “coalition regime” chose to be “fiscally irresponsible” and chose military assets ahead of the best interests of the country’s people.
A Palestinian and a Tino Rangatiratanga flag fluttering in the breeze at today’s rally in Auckland. Image: Asia Pacific Report
‘Gateway for hell’ Bibi Amena said New Zealand’s silence over Israeli crimes in Palestine “opened the gateway for hell” in Iran.
“In the past 30 days of aggression, Israeli and American bombs have slaughtered over 3000 innocent Iranian children, women and men.
“They have attacked and destroyed energy and water supplies, civilian infrastructure, oil facilities, schools and hospitals. All of these attacks are illegal under international law.
“So why has our government remained silent? Why do we allow America and Israel to commit war crime after war crime with impunity?”
Amena referenced the first day of the illegal war on Iran, an American Tomahawk missile targeting a girls’ elementary school in the city of Minab, killing more than 160 girls aged between 7 and 12.
She ended her speech with a short quote “which went viral on social media” by Professor Foad Izadi from the University of Tehran: “Iran is fighting the Epstein class of the world, that either rapes little girls, or bombs little girls.”
Organisers of the Stop Wars Aotearoa coalition said there would be a major rally with the theme “No More Wars” in Auckland’s Aotea Square and a protest march to the US Consulate next Saturday, April 11, at 2pm.
A “Boycott Israeli Apartheid” banner at the Auckland rally today. Image: Asia Pacific Report
ER Report: Here is a summary of significant articles published on EveningReport.nz on April 4, 2026.
French National Assembly rejects New Caledonia’s constitutional reform By Patrick Decloitre, RNZ Pacific correspondent French Pacific desk A Constitutional Reform Bill dedicated to New Caledonia was rejected on Thursday by the French National Assembly (Lower House) without debate, by a gathering of opposition parties by a score of 190 to 107. The rejection came in the form of the endorsement of a preliminary
President Trump, don’t listen to your sycophants on Iran, this isn’t reality TV COMMENTARY: By Robert Reich Mr Trump, may I have a word? Bad enough for you to insist — in the face of all evidence to the contrary — that you “won” the 2020 election. But it’s another thing for you to pretend — in the face of mounting deaths and injuries, ballooning expenses, and rising
A Constitutional Reform Bill dedicated to New Caledonia was rejected on Thursday by the French National Assembly (Lower House) without debate, by a gathering of opposition parties by a score of 190 to 107.
The rejection came in the form of the endorsement of a preliminary Bill filed by a left wing opposition, Emmanuel Tjibaou, on behalf of the GDR group (Gauche démocrate et républicaine).
The “prior rejection motion” means that if the rejection motion is adopted, then it closes the current sitting on the matter and the Bill would then have to come back to the other House of Parliament, the Senate, following the “shuttle” rule.
Tjibaou, who is an indigenous Kanak pro-independence leader, is one of the two MPs representing New Caledonia in the Assembly.
French Assemblée Nationale rejects a Constitutional Bill for New Caledonia on Thursday. by 190-107. Image: Assemblée Nationale/RNZ Pacific
The text was originally tabled for a vote to be held on 1 April 2026, but this was later delayed by one day, following an announcement by Speaker Yaël Braun-Pivet.
However, on Thursday, during a sitting that only debated motives from the government and its Minister for Overseas Naïma Moutchou, the rapporteur Philippe Gosselin and representatives from all parties present, it quickly became clear that most of the opposition parties were going to support the rejection motion, and vote against the text without further debate.
The sitting only lasted 01 hour 40 minutes.
Kanak Emmanuel Tjibaou speaking at the French National Assembly during the debate on Constitutional reform Bill for New Caledonia. Image: Assemblée Nationale/RNZ Pacific
Tjibaou, speaking in support of his rejection motion, stressed that the Constitutional Bill, in his view, was “not consensual”, because his party, the FLNKS (Kanak and Socialist National Liberation Front) was opposed to the text and that the Bill “did not seek to reach a compromise” between all stakeholders.
Tjibaou said this was in contradiction to the previous Matignon-Oudinot (1988) and Nouméa Accord (1998), which initiated a decolonisation process for New Caledonia.
The present Constitutional Bill derives from talks held in July 2025 and January 2026 between New Caledonia political stakeholders and the French government. This was on two occasions — in the small city of Bougival in July 2025 and later in January 2026 in Paris, at the French Presidential palace of Élysée, and the French ministry of Overseas territories in Rue Oudinot.
Hence the name of Bougival-Élysée-Oudinot (BEO) for a text and an expanded project.
The project also envisions the creation of a “State of New Caledonia”, with a correlated “New Caledonia Nationality” available to people who are already French citizens.
Other participating parties pro-France and pro-independence (two pro-independence members of FLNKS) have since split to create their own “UNI” (Union Nationale pour l’Indépendance).
They have maintained their commitment to the BEO process, including their legislative adaptation (in the form of a Constitutional Amendment and an “organic Law”, which would de facto become New Caledonia’s constitution).
Tjibaou: ‘a logic of assimilation’ But the BEO text, in August 2025, was unequivocally opposed by the FLNKS, one of the main components of the pro-independence movement.
The FLNKS later explained it saw these, as well as a planned process of transfer of more powers from Paris to Nouméa, was, in their view, just a “lure” of independence.
Tjibaou said on Thursday the text was at best “symbolic”.
“To us, this amounts to a perennial status within France… It’s a logic of assimilation… It cannot be compared to a decolonisation in accordance with the UN resolutions and the international law”, he told MPs.
He called on local elections to be held sooner than later, currently no later than 28 June 2026.
Tjibaou said it was ironic that “a pro-independence” should tell the Minister that “when our Kanak country is damaged, it is also France that is damaged”… Because “when you make decisions that are leading us to chaos, you are also jeopardising France’s place in the Pacific”, he said at the tribune.
Moutchou: ‘There is no other agreement’ Moutchou, in her reply, said the rejection of the Bill would have repercussions on New Caledonians’ everyday life.
She stressed what New Caledonians needed, after the riots of May 2024 and a severe economic downfall since, was “visibility”, especially on the part of economic stakeholders who needed stability in order to restore confidence and investment.
Minister for Overseas Naïma Moutchou speaking at France’s National Assembly Constitutional reform Bill for New Caledonia. Image: Assemblée Nationale/RNZ Pacific
“There is no other agreement. The Bougival process was approved by 5 of the 6 political parties of New Caledonia.
“Some are mentioning the absence of FLNKS. I’ve always maintained the principles of transparency, dialogue information for all. And the door was never closed”, she said.
“And the politics of the empty chair cannot dictate the future of a territory.
“So what do we do? How much longer do we have to wait… To be responsible, we move on with those who are here… Consensus does not mean unanimity, consensus is not perfection, it’s a point of equilibrium”, she replied to Tjibaou.
“And while we have this text that is not perfect, but opens a way, those who say, ‘we will wait and see later’ risk bringing us back to a confrontational situation”.
Minister for Overseas Naïma Moutchou . . . the rejection of the Bill will have “repercussions on New Caledonians’ everyday life”. Image: Assemblée Nationale/RNZ Pacific
Metzdorf’s disappointment The other MP for New Caledonia, pro-France Nicolas Metzdorf, also took to the tribune to express disappointment.
“I don’t know what more we should do. After the 2024 riots, you asked us to find a political agreement. We did this and we made big concessions, we, the non-independentists. We did this for the good of New Caledonia.
“Then you said we had to meet again to further clarify… On Kanak identity and the self-determination process. So now we are back with two political agreements.”
“And now you are sending us back home without a debate… You know, New Caledonia may be far from Paris, but tonight, many are watching this debate on TV and they’re thinking ‘What will happen to us?”
“Many have lost their home, their work, but even worse, they have lost hope to live in peace in New Caledonia”.
“What I am asking (MPs) today is just to have the common decency to debate on this (Bill)… These agreements are being supported by the majority of New Caledonia’s political class (including the moderate pro-independence parties within the Union Nationale pour l’Indépendance), but also by the economic and business sector.”
“I’m asking for a vote on these accords and I’m asking to organise a consultation of New Caledonia’s people, because at the end of the day, we are the only legitimate ones to decide on our future.”
What now? Following the rejection vote on Thursday, French Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu said all parties that had signed the Bougival-Elysée-Oudinot Accord would meet “next week”, because this is what was agreed in case of a deadlock.
Commenting on future options, Metzdorf told French media in Paris that “all options are now on the table”.
After the National Assembly’s rejection, another possibility was to bring the text back to the Upper House (the Senate).
Another option (that was almost implemented a few months ago, but later abandoned) would be to bring back a process of “consultation” directly in New Caledonia in the form of a de facto referendum for or against the Bougival process.
But the sensitive issue of who is eligible to vote at local elections remains for the looming provincial elections (which would now have to be held no later than 28 June 2026).
Pro-France parties are still determined to have those restrictions changed to allow the “frozen” electoral roll to be more open, if not fully “unfrozen”.
This could be the subject of separate negotiations between New Caledonia’s opposing parties in the coming days.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Bad enough for you to insist — in the face of all evidence to the contrary — that you “won” the 2020 election.
But it’s another thing for you to pretend — in the face of mounting deaths and injuries, ballooning expenses, and rising prices — that you won, or are winning, the war with Iran you began on February 28.
“Let me say, we’ve won,” you told a rally in Kentucky on March 11.
“I think we’ve won,” you said on the White House South Lawn on March 20.
“We’ve won this war. The war has been won,” you said in the Oval Office on March 24.
“We are winning so big,” you told a fundraising dinner on March 25.
“We’ve had regime change,” you told reporters just a few days ago. “The one regime was decimated, destroyed, they’re all dead. The next regime is mostly dead.” Iran has now moved onto its “third regime,” and American negotiators are now speaking to “a whole different group of people” who have “been very reasonable,” you said.
You’re making this up You’re making all this up. In fact, you’re losing your war. And so is America and much of the rest of the world.
After a month, your war has already cost 13 American lives, cost American taxpayers more than US$30 billion, cost American consumers at least a dollar more per gallon of gas than they paid a month ago, pushed up food prices and mortgage rates, and pushed down the value of 401(k) retirement plans.
It’s mangled supply chains for industries that rely on items such as fertiliser to grow food or helium to make computer chips. It’s also wreaked havoc across the Middle East with at least 1574 civilians killed in Iran, including 236 children, and at least 50 killed in Iran’s attacks on other Gulf nations.
You assumed Iran would give up its nuclear programme. Wrong. After more than a month of bombing by the United States and Israel, you’ve most likely stiffened the regime’s resolve to produce a nuclear weapon.
In this respect, too, America is worse off — more endangered than we were in 2018 before you withdrew the United States from the Iran nuclear deal negotiated by former President Barack Obama. In that deal, Iran agreed to restrict its nuclear programme — reducing uranium stockpiles by 98 percent and capping enrichment at 3.67 percent, and allowing inspections — in exchange for relief from UN, EU, and US nuclear-related sanctions.
Iran now holds a stockpile of approximately 970 pounds of uranium enriched up to 60 percent purity, according to the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation. That’s close to weapons-grade. No one knows where it’s stored.
You thought winning this war would be as easy as abducting Nicolás Maduro from Venezuela and setting up a puppet regime there. Wrong again. The old ayatollah is gone, but the new one and his regime are even more radical and hard line.
Embraced asymmetric warfare You assumed America’s military might would weaken Iran’s military capacity. Wrong. They’ve embraced asymmetric warfare — using cheap drones and missiles and blocking the Strait of Hormuz — rather than take on America’s and Israel’s superior forces directly.
You thought the regime would soon cave. Wrong. It’s been over a month and they’re the ones playing the waiting game. They think they can withstand the mounting political and economic pressures better and longer than you and America can. They may be correct.
Reportedly, you’ve told aides you’re now willing to end the war even if Iran continues to block the Strait of Hormuz. Maybe this is your best option at this point. But it will allow Iran to decide in the future how much oil gets through and for whom, and could cause the economic damage to the US to grow exponentially worse.
Mr Trump, do you really believe you won this war? Do you really believe America is better off than it was when you began the war?
Maybe the people around you are telling you that you’ve won the war and we’re better off because you punish the bearers of bad news and reward those who tell you what you want to hear. Presumably you’re hearing the same fictionalised good news from Republicans in Congress, from sycophantic leaders abroad, from other assorted lackeys and suck-ups.
Or maybe you think that if you can convince enough people that you won and we’re better off, you will have won and America will be better off. Because for you it’s always about public perceptions of reality rather than reality itself.
No truth, only belief Everything depends on hype, spin, exaggeration, and outright lies. For you there’s no truth, only belief.
Or maybe you think that if you keep saying you won or are winning, and America has come out on top, your magical thinking will in fact come true.
But this isn’t a game, and you’re not a magician.
This is real blood and guts. Real pain. Real deaths and injuries. Real price increases at the gas pump. Real hardships for real people — in America, in the Middle East, and elsewhere.
You can’t pretend, sir. This isn’t reality television. This is for real. And the reality is Americans are worse off now and less secure than we were when you started this.
Robert Reich is an American professor, writer, former Secretary of Labour, and author of The System, The Common Good, Saving Capitalism, Aftershock, Supercapitalism, The Work of Nations. He is also co-founder of Inequality Media. This commentary was originally published on his Facebook page and is republished under Creative Commons.
ER Report: Here is a summary of significant articles published on EveningReport.nz on April 3, 2026.
US bombing targets bridges and Pasteur Institute – ‘symbols of Iran’s scientific strength’, says spokeswoman Al Mayadeen English An Iranian government spokesperson, Fatemeh Mohajerani, has declared that the attacked “bridges and the Pasteur Institute are symbols of Iran’s scientific strength” in response to the latest US onslaught. She added that they were “the product of a civilisation that spans thousands of years” and that “its depth is hard to grasp
Bumblebees can perceive rhythm, despite their brains being the size of a sesame seed Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrew Barron, Professor, School of Natural Sciences, Macquarie University Humans are creatures of rhythms. As far as we know, humans have always sung and always danced. We can recognise a song by its rhythm alone, regardless of whether it is played fast or slow. We seem to
Grattan on Friday: A future plan on fuel should be central to Albanese government’s reform agenda Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra Using one lens, you could view the present contest between the Albanese government and the Taylor-Canavan opposition as pragmatism versus populism. A week ago the opposition, which perennially berates the government for economic irresponsibility, urged a cut in the fuel
Fuel prices are driving more Australians to EVs – and secondhand cars are in high demand Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Scott Dwyer, Research Director, Energy Futures, University of Technology Sydney As conflict in the Middle East sends diesel and petrol prices skyrocketing, more and more Australians and New Zealanders are showing interest in electric vehicles. But is this translating to sales? March data shows the answer is
Do trans women have an advantage in sport? The genetics of sex are complex Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jenny Graves, Distinguished Professor of Genetics and Vice Chancellor’s Fellow, La Trobe University Last week, the International Olympic Committee announced it will determine whether athletes are eligible for women’s events by mandating a once-in-a-lifetime screening for the male-determining gene, SRY. But this new rule raises many questions
‘Small and underwhelming’: Albanese’s gambling reforms won’t do much to reduce harm Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Samantha Thomas, Professor of Public Health, Deakin University More than 1,000 days after the release of the Murphy report, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has finally announced decisive action on tackling gambling advertising in Australia. In mid-2023, the late Labor MP Peta Murphy presented a report that recommended
In the age of AI, why do Australian company boards have so few technology experts? Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Natalie Elms, Senior Lecturer, School of Accountancy, Queensland University of Technology The global economy is undergoing major transformation as artificial intelligence (AI) filters into almost every industry – reshaping business models and investment decisions. For those who sit on a company’s board, setting overall strategy and holding
An ancient oracle warned invading Persia would backfire – from Croesus to Trump, rulers have failed to listen Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Edwell, Associate Professor in Ancient History, Macquarie University Invasions of ancient Persia were always daunting tasks. They often led to disaster. In the 6th and 5th centuries BCE, the Persian empire came to dominate a vast and varied geography with Iran at its heart. Comprising modern
Easter has a soundtrack just like Christmas, so why do we never hear it? Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Wendy Hargreaves, Academic in the School of Education and Creative Arts, University of Southern Queensland You can’t visit the shops around Christmas time without hearing Feliz Navidad, Silent Night, or Mariah Carey’s All I Want for Christmas is You. So why was Kate Ceberano’s song Bedroom Eyes
Winter crops need to be sown – but Australia’s farmers are worried about fertilisers and fuel Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Marit E. Kragt, Professor of Agricultural Economics, The University of Western Australia War in the Middle East has put a spotlight on the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow sea passage through which 20% of global oil supply is shipped. But far less attention has been paid to
Apps pressure delivery riders into courting danger – here’s what needs to change Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andres Fielbaum, Lecturer in Transport, University of Sydney Picture this: you’re competing in a time-trial cycling race along a route that’s not known in advance. Instead of following a marked course, you receive instructions via notifications on your mobile phone. Looking at your phone while cycling is
How to enjoy Easter chocolate without wrecking your sleep Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Charlotte Gupta, Sleep Researcher, Appleton Institute, HealthWise Research Group, CQUniversity Australia Easter is here and chocolate is everywhere – crowding shop shelves, piling up on desks, and likely already sitting in your pantry. But if you’ve been finding it harder to sleep recently, late-night Easter eggs could
NZ, allies express ‘deep concern’ about Israeli death penalty bill for Palestinians By Lillian Hanly, RNZ News political reporter New Zealand has joined Australia, France, Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom in expressing “deep concern” about an Israeli bill expanding the death penalty for Palestinians. Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters posted on social media last night, indicating New Zealand had joined the other nations, and emphasising the
An Iranian government spokesperson, Fatemeh Mohajerani, has declared that the attacked “bridges and the Pasteur Institute are symbols of Iran’s scientific strength” in response to the latest US onslaught.
She added that they were “the product of a civilisation that spans thousands of years” and that “its depth is hard to grasp for those who speak the language of the ‘Stone Age.’”
“For a land that has lit the lamps of knowledge for centuries, these threats carry only one meaning: you can strike the infrastructure, but you will not touch the roots of a nation . . .
“Iran will rebuild and continue moving forward,” Mohajerani said.
This comes as the United States and Israel have escalated their attacks on civilian infrastructure in Iran, destroying a historical medical research facility, as well as a vital bridge connecting the capital to other regions in the country.
The illegal and unprovoked US-Israeli war of aggression on Iran has targeted and destroyed the Pasteur Institute of Iran, one of the country’s leading public health and research institutions, in a direct attack on civilian and scientific infrastructure in the country.
JUST IN:
US and Israel have targeted Iran’s B1 Bridge in Karaj again, the tallest bridge in the Middle East.
The renewed strike occurred while rescue and relief teams were assisting victims from the initial attack… See more pic.twitter.com/EojvvsPp9V
— Ayatollah Alireza Arafi (@Realarafi) April 2, 2026
Humans are creatures of rhythms. As far as we know, humans have always sung and always danced. We can recognise a song by its rhythm alone, regardless of whether it is played fast or slow.
We seem to have an almost effortless capacity to pick up on rhythmic patterns, and we have presumed this ability to require the very large and powerful human brain.
But our new research, published today in the journal Science, shows humans are not alone in mastering rhythm. Even the bumblebee, which has a brain the size of a sesame seed, has an ability to quickly learn abstract rhythms.
A world full of rhythms
Rhythms are everywhere in nature.
We hear them in the songs of birds and frogs and the ultrasonic hunting chirps of bats. And we see them in the flashing displays of fireflies, the rhythmic shakes of a peacock’s tail, the waggle dances of honey bees and the courtship dances of fruit flies.
But, up to now, we have assumed these were innate rhythmic patterns: the animals are not learning a rhythm; they are simply rolling out an evolved behavioural program.
Apart from humans, only a few species of birds and mammals have been shown to be able to learn and recognise the structure of a rhythm regardless of whether it is played fast or slow.
This reinforced the perception that only smart animals with big brains can learn a rhythm. But big-brained animals are the exception in the animal kingdom. Most animals have evolved tiny brains (by our standards) and they can still solve all the problems they need to solve to survive and thrive.
But can they recognise rhythm?
Following the bumblebeat
To explore this, our team from Southern Medical University and Macquarie University worked with bumblebees – big beautiful bees that are easy to keep and train, and are hugely motivated to collect sips of nectar to take back their nest.
Working with individually labelled bumblebees, we trained them to forage from artificial flowers with embedded LED lights we could control. One flashing light pattern offered a sugary treat, while flowers with another flashing pattern did not.
The only way bees could distinguish the patterns was by their rhythmic structure. In this way we could train the bees to prefer one rhythmic pattern of flashes over another – for example, dot-dash-dot-dash (repeating) versus dot-dot-dash-dash (repeating).
[embedded content]
In one experiment, bees learned that one flashing light pattern indicated rewarding sugar water, while another flashing pattern indicated an unpalatable solution. Source: Bee lab at Southern Medical University.
Once the bees had been trained for an afternoon, we tested them on flashing flowers that offered no sugar. We found bees preferred to visit the flower flashing the rhythm that had been rewarded with sugar in training. This shows they could learn to recognise a rhythm linked to reward.
Without any extra training of the bees, we could show they could recognise their trained rhythm regardless of whether it was played faster or slower. This shows bees had learned a rhythm regardless of tempo – the first evidence that bees had learned a flexible rhythm.
Recognising the rhythm
To test the bees further, we asked whether they could recognise a rhythm regardless of how it was presented.
Bees are deaf at the frequencies we can hear, but are very sensitive to vibration. We trained bumblebees in a maze with a vibrating floor at the junction in the maze.
We could make the floor pulse with rhythm. Using this technique, we trained bees that one rhythm (say, dot-dot-dash-dash) meant the sugar reward was located in the left arm of the maze, whereas another rhythm (say, dot-dash-dot-dash) meant the sugar reward was in the right arm.
We knew bees could learn the maze because their success in finding the sugar first time improved with training. Once the bees were trained and performed well in the maze, we changed the maze so now there was a flashing LED light at the junction and no vibrating floor.
The bees trained with vibration were able to use the rhythmic pulses of light to work out which arm of the maze to pick to find the sugar. This showed bees could recognise a rhythm regardless of how it was played out. In other words, the bees had a sense of abstract rhythm.
As far as we know, this ability has only previously been shown in humans.
[embedded content]
In one experiment, bees could recognise rhythm regardless of whether it was delivered via pulsing lights or vibrations. Video: Bee lab at Southern Medical University.
Changing the rhythm of our understanding
That the bumblebees did so well in these tests of rhythm learning changes how we think about what is needed to perceive and learn rhythm.
In humans and mammals, rhythm learning is very complicated, involving multiple regions of our large and complex brains.
But perhaps there are simpler ways a tiny brain can achieve the same thing.
Brains themselves are full of rhythms as neurons pulse with impulses. Many neural circuits use rhythmic properties of synchronous and asynchronous nerve impulses to organise their function. Perhaps there is something in the rhythmic properties of brains themselves that attunes them to detect rhythms in nature.
If we can capture that insight, and give miniature sensors a capacity to detect rhythmic temporal structure, there could be all sorts of applications: from lightweight solutions to speech and music recognition to diagnosis of heart irregularities, or pre-epileptic brain waves.
Using one lens, you could view the present contest between the Albanese government and the Taylor-Canavan opposition as pragmatism versus populism.
A week ago the opposition, which perennially berates the government for economic irresponsibility, urged a cut in the fuel excise. True, the Coalition proposed offsets, but it was a policy seen as counterproductive by many economists.
The opposition knew it would be popular, however – a judgement shared by the government, which days later announced a cut.
On a totally different front, Special Minister of State Don Farrell had over the summer been in discussions with the Liberals and Nationals about his proposal to expand the size of the parliament. The Liberals were sceptical, although some privately supported it; the Nationals under David Littleproud were in favour.
Then Matt Canavan became Nationals leader and the right-wing lobby group Advance started campaigning against the idea (which has much to commend it once you get beyond the knee-jerk reaction).
This week, Canavan and Angus Taylor launched an attack on the plan. They were playing to sheer populism – people hate politicians. Within hours Albanese, judging the proposal would only bring him political grief, publicly killed it in parliament suggesting, in effect, he’d be a mug to pursue it. He said on Thursday the debate would not have been “healthy for our democracy”, and would end without change.
In the process, Albanese threw one of his most senior ministers under the bus, just like he did with Treasurer Jim Chalmers earlier this term when he pulled the rug from under part of Chalmers’ superannuation tax legislation.
The prime minister is fortunate these ministers are not like Paul Keating who, when dudded by Hawke on policy, didn’t take it lying down. Chalmers might sulk a bit, but stays calm publicly. Farrell, a factional hard man, just sucks it up.
Albanese is bringing his cautious, pragmatic approach to dealing with what is likely to be the worst crisis he will have to face in his prime ministership.
As the fuel crisis started to unfold, the prime minister mostly left the running to Energy Minister Chris Bowen. But a week ago, with the situation deteriorating, the PM changed tack, becoming engaged in a major way. By Monday, National Cabinet was meeting and the federal government announced its excise cut, together with and followed by other emergency measures.
Albanese’s strategy is multifold. Get ahead of the crisis where possible. Be seen to be responding. Try to maintain community calm, while at the same time warning about the risk of things worsening. And bring the public along.
Albanese became preoccupied with communicating, prompting his Wednesday night address to the nation. It was designed to grab public attention – paradoxically, with the PM so visible on a daily basis, “cut through” actually becomes harder.
Predictably, sections of the media panned the address. But that is to overthink it. It aimed to reassure, with the message that people should have a normal Easter, while realistically foreshadowing difficult months ahead. The suggestions of what people should do to save fuel (just take what you need, use public transport where you can) came with the message this would help those (like farmers, tradies and nurses) who have to drive.
Albanese is fighting off fears among some people that we’re headed to a COVID-like situation of extreme restrictions on daily life. He’s been anxious to avoid (so far) the “r” word, rationing, which is seen as having overtones of the COVID lockdowns.
In fact the comparisons with COVID are mostly irrational. COVID was totally different. This crisis might be full of danger for the economy and uncertainty for individuals, but COVID was about life and death. We’ve been through fuel crises before; there was no precedent in living memory for COVID.
Also, what Australia did during the pandemic, at least in the early stages and despite mistakes and excesses, was regarded as positive compared to many countries, in terms of lives saved. But in memory and in light of the lingering effects on young people, the response has come to be seen by many as wrong-headed.
The PM’s Thursday speech at the National Press Club was another effort to get messages out from an elevated platform. One notable feature was his declaration that the fuel crisis would not derail the government’s intentions to pursue reform in the May 12 budget.
Chalmers has been talking about plans to use the budget to advance tax reform and other changes. However many questioned whether new circumstances would lead Albanese to kill this drive.
But the prime minister said on Thursday this would be “our government’s most important budget to date and it will be our most ambitious. It has to be.”
“Economic reform that drives growth, boosts productivity, helps tackle inflation and lifts living standards is always necessary. And in times of uncertainty such as this, it is urgent,” he said.
They may be comforting words for Chalmers; they also set a marker for judging the budget. It’s more than a month away and a lot of its key decisions are yet to be taken – Chalmers has said it will be finalised later than usual.
One area that should be addressed in the budget, or separately but urgently, is a plan to put Australia’s fuel situation on a stronger long term footing. Australia has only a month’s supply in reserve, much less than many countries. Our refineries are down to two. Albanese was vague when asked about the longer term plans for fuel security, saying the government would consider measures “in a practical way” but pointing to the huge cost of going to a 90 day reserve (our international obligation).
The Iran war has shown how easily our position can be compromised. How our supply chains would be placed in a conflict in the Pacific doesn’t bear thinking about. A comprehensive, detailed, credible fuel plan should be at the centre of any “reform” agenda.
As conflict in the Middle East sends diesel and petrol prices skyrocketing, more and more Australians and New Zealanders are showing interest in electric vehicles.
But is this translating to sales? March data shows the answer is yes – EV registrations have shot up sharply in Australia and New Zealand.
Manufacturer order books are filling up, EV subscription services are full and wait times have blown out to months for popular models.
Much of the focus to date has been on new cars. But most people don’t buy new. When Australians buy cars, they tend to buy them secondhand. The ratio of used to new cars is almost two to one. EVs are cheaper to run, but have – until very recently – been more expensive to buy, which acts as a barrier.
Demand for secondhand EVs is surging through auctions and car yards, as cost-conscious households seek out ways to immediately cut costs and reduce exposure to global oil shocks. The Australian government is now expected to introduce fuel rationing after Easter.
Fuel price pain is driving the change
The Iran conflict has triggered the second global oil crisis in the past five years. The first was the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, which drove major disruption to oil markets. If the Iran war drags on, this crisis could be far larger. The International Energy Agency expects this crisis to be much bigger than the 2022 crisis and the oil shocks of the 1970s.
The Australian government has responded by temporarily halving fuel excise tax, just as it did in 2022. This will give immediate relief, but will do nothing if supply tightens as expected this month.
The oil crisis comes as many people struggle in earnest with the cost of living. Fuel is a major expense, especially in car-dependent regional towns and outer suburbs. Many early EV adopters live in outer suburbs of major cities, where cars are the main mode of transport.
Since the start of the war, petrol prices have increased by about 80 cents per litre and diesel by more than a dollar a litre. For those who need a weekly fill of 50 to 60 litres, this would equate to an extra $40 to $50 for petrol or an extra $50 to $60 for diesel.
Fuel prices are expected to make food and many other products and services more expensive. It’s small wonder more people are looking for cheaper alternatives – especially for households where other forms of transport aren’t viable.
Households in outer suburbs and regional towns are heavily exposed to fuel price pain – but often have easy access to charging an EV at home.Ed Harvey/Pexels, CC BY-NC-SA
Secondhand EVs in demand
By world standards, Australia has been slow to take up battery electric vehicles. Sales hit 8% of new car sales late last year (14% including plug-in hybrid vehicles).
One reason for this is that EVs have long been more expensive than their combustion engine equivalents. The upfront price difference has dropped rapidly, but is still a deterrent.
That’s why used EVs are now in such demand as a way for households under financial strain to get access. EVs were already much cheaper to run than combustion engine cars, even before the oil crisis. The difference is now even starker, especially for those who can charge at home.
It has taken time for a secondhand market in EVs to develop. The cars for sale now are often coming from expired novated lease agreements, or from government and corporate fleets once they are replaced as part of regular fleet renewal cycles.
Lower income households need support to shift
To date, Australia has offered little targeted support to encourage lower income households to switch to electric vehicles. This means the current trends are both significant and fragile.
Overseas, governments in parts of Europe and the United States have more actively encouraged uptake.
France has pioneered social leasing since 2024 to address affordability barriers for EVs targeting low and middle income households. It works by offering eligible households a new EV from A$170 per month with no upfront deposit, made possible through government subsidies of up to A$12,000 to reduce the total cost. At the end of the lease period, the car can be purchased outright or returned to the dealer.
In the US, Washington State’s EV Instant Rebate Program included social leasing provisions which helped 4,000 lower income households get an EV. Of these, almost 90% said they would not have been able to purchase the EV without the rebate.
These approaches could work to encourage uptake among households who would benefit most from going electric in both Australia and New Zealand. For many households and small businesses, private vehicles are a lifeline and the only option available. But for many, secondhand or more affordable EVs are still unaffordable.
This week, Australia’s clean energy bank announced a $100m program of discounted car loans to reduce the cost of finance for new and used EVs. These types of initiatives are a good start, but more will be needed to expand access to new and used EVs.
New measures could include targeted financial incentives to improve affordability and broaden access (including encouraging carmakers to bring more affordable and smaller EVs to market), a commitment from all levels of government to continue to expand EVs within their fleets, and consistent national policy to avoid boom and bust cycles in what’s still an emerging market. Over time, these measures would boost the supply of secondhand EVs.
While temporary cuts to fuel duty will reduce fuel bills in the short term, they won’t be enough. Coordinated action, tailored incentives and consistent policy will be needed to support households and businesses in going electric while making sure no-one is left behind.
Last week, the International Olympic Committee announced it will determine whether athletes are eligible for women’s events by mandating a once-in-a-lifetime screening for the male-determining gene, SRY.
But this new rule raises many questions – about why “female” is being defined this way, whether there is evidence trans women have an advantage, and whether a “level playing field” in sport is even possible.
Testing for sex
In humans and other mammals, the SRY gene determines sex in the early embryo. This gene kickstarts the development of testes and their production of androgens – male hormones (testosterone and its derivatives), which drive male development.
The SRY gene lies on the Y chromosome. Males have an X and a Y chromosome, whereas females have two X chromosomes.
Over the decades, sex tests changed from anatomical inspection to using microscopes to detect the second X in women or the Y chromosome in men. But testing was slow, and misdiagnosed athletes with sex chromosome variation.
So a test was developed to detect the SRY gene directly. This is the test the International Olympic Committee will use.
But it’s not as simple to determine “male” or “female” as you might think. The SRY gene activates a network of dozens of genes that promote testis development or block ovary formation. Variation in any of these genes can produce girls with SRY or boys with no SRY.
Indeed, the scientist who co-discovered the SRY gene has warned that this test misdiagnoses athletes with variant sex genes and chromosomes.
For example, some women have an inactive form of the SRY gene that does not induce testis development. Other women have a typical SRY gene, and testes that produce androgens, but have an inactive form of the molecule that activates androgens, so their bodies can’t use male hormones. The SRY test would misdiagnose these women as biological males and ban them.
Likewise, there are men with two X chromosomes who lack SRY but have other variant genes that override it. According to the SRY test they would be allowed to compete in Olympic women’s events.
The International Olympic Committee test must take account of these variants.
What is the evidence for male advantage in sport?
Over decades, physiological studies have shown men have, on average, larger hearts, more efficient lung function and greater muscle mass than women.
As for any trait, there are wide distributions that overlap – for example, there are tall women and short men. However, on average, there can be no doubt men are bigger and stronger than women.
Recent evidence implies that these differences are just the tip of the iceberg. Nearly all our 20,000-odd genes are not on the Y chromosome and are shared by both sexes. But research in 2017 shows that nearly one-third of our 20,000 genes act differently in men and women. Not just in reproductive tissues, but in heart, lungs, brain – everywhere. The same sex differences are seen in monkeys and are apparent before birth.
In three kinds of muscle cells, 2,100 genes work differently in men and women. So sex differences are much more profound than we had appreciated.
Traditionally, these differences have been attributed to the powerful effects of androgens on development at every stage – in the embryo, through childhood and particularly at puberty.
But experiments with mice with genetically manipulated sex chromosomes have showed many fundamental aspects of physiology – such as fat and energy metabolism – are associated not with SRY or hormones, but with the number of X chromosomes.
And the ongoing health advantages provided by the Y chromosome can be seen by the negative effects when men lose it in some cells as they age.
So there are major sex differences in function in every tissue, and it’s not all due to hormones.
But what’s the evidence for transgender advantage in sport?
This is much less clear.
Transitioning from male to female requires hormone replacement. This means suppressing androgens and taking oestrogen, which is much more active in females.
This dramatically changes the body. A trans woman taking oestrogen will develop breasts and more body fat, and lose muscle mass. Her testes will also atrophy.
Trans girls may also take puberty blockers before going through male puberty. These medications stop the body producing the surge of androgens that leads to irreversible physical changes.
So the question of whether trans women athletes have a physical advantage over cis women comes down to understanding what irreversible sex differences took place before and during puberty to organ growth and function, as well as any ongoing non-hormonal differences that might affect function in relevant tissues.
Here the evidence is contradictory, and varies according to when and how someone transitioned. Some studies show significant differences in performance indicators and others don’t. There is some agreement that trans women have, on average, longer limbs, a stronger hand grip and greater muscle mass. But after two years, their cardiac and respiratory function resembles that of cis women.
We have no data on gene activity in trans women athletes, so there are questions we can’t answer. Do the 2,100 genes in their muscle cells revert to a female pattern of activity? Do other genes on the Y chromosome protect their heart and kidney function? Does the lack of a second X improve their fat and energy metabolism?
Where is this level playing field?
So where does this leave the International Olympics Committee ban on transgender athletes? Do we need more data? Do we need to modify our thinking?
I would expect more data would just confirm that trans women who went through male puberty do, on average, have some advantages in organ size and function that are not reversible by hormone therapy or are hormone-independent. Even if transition was before puberty, non-hormone effects apparent in the early embryo probably manifest as more subtle differences in performance.
These differences may be slight. But cis women may contend they are significant in elite sports, where competitors can win medals by running or swimming 0.01 seconds faster than everyone else.
Like many attempts to regulate human behaviour, this ban founders on human variability.
Further complicating things, there is already great physical variation among cisgender athletes in the very attributes that make them excel at sport. For instance, variation in androgen levels has already provoked calls to ban hyper-androgenised women and to mandate allowable hormone levels.
This gets a bit ridiculous – do we ban exceptionally tall women from playing basketball?
Participation in sport is important for health and social connections. Sometimes it’s a lifesaver for trans women.
So discussing alternatives – such as open competitions that run alongside the Olympics, or categories based on something other than sex – remains crucial.
But maybe we need to admit that the playing field in sport can never be truly level. Elite athletes are probably off the charts in many physical and physiological attributes. Is this fair on the rest of us?
In mid-2023, the late Labor MP Peta Murphy presented a report that recommended a ban on gambling advertising due to the harms caused by those ads on TV, at sports venues and online.
Despite widespread cross-party support for the recommendations, Albanese failed to commit to any action – until this week.
So, what are the changes, do they go far enough and will they work?
Its terms of reference covered online gambling, with Murphy calling for a
phased, comprehensive ban on all gambling advertising on all media, broadcast and online, that leaves no room for circumvention.
The report was broadly supported by all sides of politics, but many were left frustrated by Albanese’s delay in pushing tangible reforms.
What are the new reforms?
After almost three years, Albanese told the National Press Club in Canberra on Thursday he was implementing several restrictions to “minimise children’s exposure to gambling harm”. These are
restricting gambling advertising on broadcast television to no more than three ads each hour between 6am-8:30pm, with a complete ban during live sport broadcasts within those hours
banning gambling ads on the radio during school drop-off and pick up times (8am-to 9am and 3pm-4pm)
banning gambling ads through online platforms, unless people have a logged-in account, are over 18 and have the option to opt out of gambling advertising
banning the use of celebrities and sports players in gambling ads, along with odds-style ads targeting sports fans
banning gambling ads in sports venues and on players’ and officials’ uniforms.
Albanese said:
We’re getting the balance right here, letting adults have a punt if they want to but also making sure Australian children don’t see betting ads everywhere they look. What we don’t want is kids growing up thinking that footy and gambling are the same thing.
The government will also look to crack down on online “pocket pokies”, offshore gambling providers and also strengthen BetStop – the national self-exclusion register.
He said his government would aim to enforce these changes from January 1, 2027.
But research shows the majority of Australians wanted action on gambling ads: about 75% supported a total ban, while about 80% supported a ban on social media, online, in stadiums and on players’ uniforms.
The proposed measures fall well short of the comprehensive reforms recommended by Murphy.
Sure, this is a step in the right direction. But it’s a pretty small and underwhelming one – the government is offering a diluted package of gambling reforms.
Young people in Australia are growing up in environments saturated with betting promotions, normalised through sport, media and digital platforms. Our research shows young people see gambling advertising “everywhere” and think it can be highly influential in shaping attitudes and encouraging gambling.
The proposed reforms do little to address this exposure in a meaningful way.
Limiting ads to three per hour during the day on television does little to reduce children’s exposure to gambling ads. It just regulates the pace of the exposure. A child watching afternoon or early evening programming will still be exposed to a steady stream of gambling messages.
Likewise, banning ads during live sport sounds significant but only applies within certain hours, leaving ample opportunity for exposure before and after games, and across other programming and media channels.
Perhaps most concerning is what these reforms do not include.
There is no comprehensive ban on gambling advertising, despite this being a central recommendation of the Murphy report. Without such a ban, the industry retains significant freedom to continue promoting its products – simply shifting strategies across platforms, time slots and formats to maintain reach.
Peta Murphy speaks at a press conference at Parliament House in Canberra in 2023.Mick Tsikas/AAP
And while the reforms focus on banning celebrities and athletes in gambling advertising, they miss how marketing is already evolving.
Young people consistently tell us that influencer content embedded into their social media feeds can be even more powerful than traditional celebrity endorsements. They say influencer promotions feel more relatable, more authentic, and are often harder to recognise than advertising.
They are exactly the kinds of strategies the industry will continue to lean into.
The problem with partial regulation
The most fundamental problem with partial regulation is that industries adapt. Online gambling is a high-tech industry that has demonstrated on multiple occasions that when one channel is restricted, marketing spending flows into another.
Without a comprehensive approach, including a national regulator to set the rules, these reforms risk creating an illusion of action.
Research is already showing us how quickly these strategies shift. As traditional sports betting audiences become more regulated, our recent research shows how the industry is increasingly targeting women through lifestyle branding, influencer marketing, and the integration of gambling into social and digital spaces.
The inconsistencies in the policy also raise an important question: if gambling promotions are deemed harmful enough to be removed from stadiums and player uniforms, why are they still acceptable across other forms of media that children consume daily?
What we are seeing is not a bold public health response but a cautious, politically palatable compromise. It allows the government to claim it is acting, while avoiding more substantive reforms that would likely face resistance from the gambling industry, sporting codes, and broadcasters.
Peta Murphy was serious about protecting young Australians from gambling industry harm. The government’s proposed reforms fail the Murphy test.
So why was Kate Ceberano’s song Bedroom Eyes blaring through the speakers as I did my Easter chocolate shopping this week?
Both Easter and Christmas come with religious beliefs, secular icons, public holidays and highway traffic jams – but where Christmas music thrives on a commercial level, the Easter soundtrack seems trapped behind the one rabbit-proof fence that actually worked.
The commercialisation of Christmas – which ramped up in department stores in the early 20th century – gradually encouraged tolerance of religious songs in public shopping centres.
We don’t mind celebrating the birth of a baby, regardless of our beliefs. It’s a joyful human experience. But the torture and death of a man on Good Friday is deeply disturbing – and the triumphant Easter Sunday resurrection stumps advertisers.
Easter fares no better with secular icons. A jolly bearded Santa offers a comforting grandfather figure who grants wishes. This is arguably more likely to lure consumers than a zoologically-confused rabbit with eggs. (Not to mention rabbits are a government-declared pest).
From a consumer perspective, Santa’s toy sack also trumps the Easter Bunny’s basket. The sack holds all manner of toys and useful items, while chocolate eggs offer a sugar-high followed by weight gain and acne.
Easter gifts weren’t always about chocolate, though. Historically, the presents were much more varied. As noted by American sociologist James Barnett in 1949, old Easter advertisements featured perfumes, liquor, Bibles and, most notably, new clothes.
Classics from great composers
Easter music may not make supermarket playlists, but it still exists.
Those seeking a high art musical experience can attend orchestral and choral performances held in concert halls across Australian cities. One favourite is Johann Sebastian Bach’s St John Passion. This 1724 composition tells Christ’s crucifixion story, and allows the listener space for spiritual and life reflections.
Another masterpiece is George Frideric Handel’s Messiah, written in 1742. Messiah tells the entire story of Christ, making it popular at both Christmas and Easter. The famous Hallelujah Chorus is goose-bump material in live performances. For many, it is a divine musical experience.
[embedded content]
Church service hymns
Those wanting a community singing experience can attend one of the many Easter church services held throughout the long weekend.
Traditional Good Friday services present solemn songs, focusing on Christ’s suffering and death. You’ll hear treasures such as Isaac Watts’ famous hymn When I Survey the Wondrous Cross and the moving African American spiritualWere You There recorded by The Mills Brothers. Sung in a group, these slow-paced songs deliver beautiful harmonies and a sense of community.
In 1950, Gene Autry (who was the first to record Frosty the Snowman) took a shot at the Easter music market with his re-recording of Here Comes Peter Cottontail – with some success. Vocal stars followed the trend with Nat King Cole singing Easter Sunday Morning, and Rosemary Clooney’s version of Eggbert The Easter Egg.
Another zany addition that came soon after was Ray Anthony’s The Bunny Hop. While this song began as a 1950s dance craze, it was absorbed into the Easter repertoire.
More contemporary secular Easter hits are hard to find. Composer Colin Buchanan tapped into a distinctly Australian flavour with his 2016 children’s song Aussie Easter Hat Parade. But you’d be hard pressed to hear it playing at the supermarket.
Easter does have a soundtrack. But much like a chocolate egg hunt, you have to dig around to find it.
Perhaps where it lacks the most is in contemporary hits. The writers of the 2011 children’s film Hop tried to find a path forward; they took the popular 1965 hit I Want Candy and repurposed it to be about chocolate.
But just how you would adapt Bedroom Eyes is beyond me.
Invasions of ancient Persia were always daunting tasks. They often led to disaster.
In the 6th and 5th centuries BCE, the Persian empire came to dominate a vast and varied geography with Iran at its heart.
Comprising modern Iran, Iraq, Turkey, the Persian Gulf and parts of other neighbouring countries, the Persian Empire was established and ruled by the Achaemenids. This powerful dynasty lasted all the way to about 330 BCE when Alexander the Great defeated its last ruler, Darius III.
But in the early days of this Achaemenid Persian expansion (546 BCE), the legendary King Croesus (from Lydia, in western Turkey) decided to challenge it.
Reputedly the richest man in the world, Croesus consulted the famed Oracle of Apollo at Delphi (in Greece). The oracle, according to ancient writer Herodotus, told Croesus:
that if he should send an army against the Persians he would destroy a great empire.
Croesus’ subsequent invasion and defeat by the Persian king, Cyrus, saw the destruction of his own empire. The oracle accurately foretold the outcome but not as Croesus had hoped.
Croesus wasn’t the last ruler to invade Persia and realise he’d bitten off more than he could chew.
From the 6th century BCE to the 4th century CE, Greeks and Romans invaded Persia multiple times. The risks were high, the logistics complicated.
In fact – as US President Donald Trump is now discovering – wars like these, in this part of the world, are a lot easier to start than they are to end.
Complex and high-risk
The vast resources and manpower of the Achaemenid empire, together with its varied geography, made any invasion of Persia complex and high-risk.
When Alexander the Great (also known as Alexander III of Macedon) invaded in 334 BCE, he led stunning military successes against the Persians over the next few years.
But by the time of his premature death in Babylon in 323 BCE, organisation of the vast territory he had conquered was a hodge-podge of short-term arrangements.
Over time, the memory of Alexander in the Iranian territories he conquered was one of contempt. The Persian territory he conquered couldn’t be held by his successors.
Around 70 years after Alexander’s death, a new dynasty emerged in Iran.
Known as the Arsacid Parthians, they would dominate much of the former Achaemenid territory for centuries.
The Arsacid Parthians became the key rivals of the Romans as they (the Romans) expanded further east from the 1st century BCE onwards.
The first invasion of the Parthian empire by the Romans ended in total disaster – for the Romans.
The Roman general Crassus invaded Parthian imperial territory in southern Turkey in 53 BCE. The Parthian army annihilated Crassus’ forces near the city of Carrhae. Around 20,000 Roman soldiers died (including Crassus and his son) and 10,000 were captured.
This disaster would live in the Roman memory for centuries.
‘A source of constant wars and great expense’
Even when Roman invasions of the Parthian empire in the 2nd century CE were successful, there was often a sting in the tail. The emperor Trajan invaded all the way to the Persian Gulf in 116/117 CE but couldn’t hold any of his gains.
But one contemporary Roman writer, Cassius Dio, thought these gains were more trouble than they were worth:
He [emperor Septimius Severus] used to declare that he had added a vast territory to the empire and had made it a bulwark of Syria. On the contrary, it is shown by the facts themselves that this conquest has been a source of constant wars and great expense to us.
The Roman emperor Gordian III died in battle against the Sasanians in 244 CE. He led a large-scale invasion of the Persian empire but died trying to attack the capital, Seleucia-Ctesiphon. His successor (Philip I) signed a humiliating peace treaty to ransom what was left of the army.
But the ultimate humiliations for Roman emperors were yet to come.
In 260 CE, the emperor Valerian was captured by the Persian king, Shapur I.
Legendary accounts claimed Valerian served as a footstool for Shapur when he mounted his horse.
Rock reliefs from the 3rd century depicting Valerian and Philip I in subjection to Shapur survive in Iran to this day.
The ensuing peace treaty saw Rome lose key territory and fortresses in northern Mesopotamia.
It would take more than a century for Rome to recover from this defeat.
Most ancient invasions of the Persian empire caused serious problems for those who prosecuted them.
The varied and sometimes harsh nature of the geography was an important factor. The national resolve and military preparedness were others.
While the current US-Israel war against Iran is different in many ways to ancient wars directed at Persia, the 3rd-century Sasanian rock reliefs are reminders of what can go wrong.
The global economy is undergoing major transformation as artificial intelligence (AI) filters into almost every industry – reshaping business models and investment decisions.
For those who sit on a company’s board, setting overall strategy and holding management to account, the shift is raising the bar on what’s required. Board members need to understand the new technology they’re investing in. They must also be equipped to oversee complex technological risks.
Given this, you’d expect to see large companies stacking their boards with directors who have science, technology, engineering and maths (STEM) expertise. But that isn’t the case.
Our new research shows that at the largest 500 listed companies in Australia, many boards lack members with sufficient technological expertise. More than half had no directors with STEM expertise on their board.
Here’s why that’s a problem – and why all of us have a stake in fixing it.
What we found
We examined the backgrounds and expertise of directors from the largest 500 firms listed on the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) and compared board composition in 2007 to 2022.
We were interested in whether the number of directors with STEM expertise had increased to match the significant technological advancements that had taken place over that time.
We were surprised by the results.
We found the backgrounds and expertise of directors from Australia’s largest firms changed very little over 15 years. Directors with STEM expertise remained underrepresented on boards, increasing from 8% to just 13% over the period.
By comparison, directors with backgrounds in the traditional fields of accounting, banking and law occupied 42% of board seats (up from 40% in 2007). Directors with “C-suite” experience – roles such as chief executive officer, chief financial officer and so on – made up 35% of all board positions in 2022.
Even in industries with a scientific focus, such as technology and health care, we found accountants and bankers still outnumbered directors with STEM expertise.
Our study only goes up to 2022, when AI was relatively new on the scene. But newer data suggest the picture hasn’t changed much.
The 2025 Watermark Search International Board Diversity Index (which covers the largest 300 companies on the ASX) paints a similar picture. Directors with expertise in accounting, financial, legal or general management backgrounds still dominated boards (75%).
Technology has come a long way since 2007, when Apple launched the first iPhone. Are Australian company boards keeping up?Paul Sakuma/AP
Why is this a problem?
Research shows corporate strategy and investment decisions are shaped by the backgrounds and characteristics of the top management team – including board members.
Our research makes a clear case for getting more STEM expertise into the boardroom. We found companies with greater STEM representation on their boards invested more in innovation and investors valued them more highly.
This aligns with other research, which shows “innovativeness” is linked to better company performance, growth and survival.
STEM expertise becomes even more valuable in low-tech industries or companies where the chief executive doesn’t have a STEM background. Here, a director can step in to provide technical expertise and fill critical gaps in innovation strategy and capabilities.
Australia is falling behind
On innovation more broadly, Australia is falling behind many of its peers. A recent independent report the federal government commissioned found Australia’s research and innovation system was “broken” and needed significant reform.
But Australia still wants to be an innovation leader. This week, the federal government and global AI giant Anthropic signed a memorandum of understanding, backing plans to expand Australia’s AI infrastructure and attract big tech to Australia. Anthropic has previously announced it will open an office in Sydney this year.
There is clearly a strong appetite to invest in innovation and Australian firms that are willing to embrace it. The question is whether boards are adequately equipped to make the most of this momentum.
A lack of STEM expertise doesn’t just limit firms’ innovation, it also increases their exposure to cyber risks. With a cyber attack reported in Australia every six minutes this has become one of the biggest threats to business growth and profits.
Major breaches have repeatedly made headlines in recent years, placing added pressure on boards to have robust cybersecurity measures in place.
In the new global economy shaped by the opportunities of AI and the threat of cyberattacks, technology is no longer a back-office function. It’s at the forefront of company policy and strategy.
To keep pace with this shift, companies should look to bring more technical expertise to the boardroom. All their customers, employees and suppliers – and Australians as a whole – have a stake in whether the boards get this right.
War in the Middle East has put a spotlight on the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow sea passage through which 20% of global oil supply is shipped. But far less attention has been paid to another essential product derived from oil and gas, on which the world also relies: fertiliser.
Roughly 20–30% of global fertiliser supply, such as urea, ammonia and phosphate, comes from the Middle East. The effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz has halted fertiliser exports from countries such as Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar.
For farmers in Australia, the disruption could not have come at a worse time. Most winter season grain crops are sown between April and June. While some farmers may have already secured their supply in preparation for the busy seeding season, others are still waiting for their fertiliser delivery.
How are fertilisers made?
Farmers apply fertilisers to provide their crops with essential nutrients, such as nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium. Without adequate fertiliser, crops such as wheat, barley and canola will produce lower yields with lower protein content.
Urea is one of the world’s most important nitrogen fertilisers. Urea is produced through a carbon-intensive process known as Haber-Bosch. First, ammonia is synthesised from atmospheric nitrogen and hydrogen (usually derived from fossil gas). This ammonia is converted into urea, a white and odourless pellet, which is easier to transport, store and apply on farms.
With limited domestic production capacity, Australian farmers are almost completely reliant on imported urea. Australian agriculture imported 3.85 million tonnes of urea in 2024, most of it from the Middle East. With reduced global supply, the world price of urea has risen from A$675 per tonne in February, to more than $1,000 at the end of March, significantly increasing costs.
What does this mean for farmers?
Australia has limited domestic capacity to produce urea. Incitec Pivot Limited’s Gibson Island facility was Australia’s only manufacturer of urea until its closure in 2022.
Timing is everything in farming. Many Australian farmers are only weeks away from sowing. Even if fertiliser can be sourced from elsewhere in the world, it may not arrive in time.
Farmers may respond by planting fewer crops, leaving some land fallow, or turning to crops that require less fertiliser. If the Strait of Hormuz blockade persists well into 2026, we will face competing demand for fertiliser from farmers in the northern hemisphere. And Australia’s supply of “top-up” fertiliser (applied during the growing season to ensure crops reach their yield) will be affected. This could mean lower grain yields and reduced feed supply for livestock and poultry production.
Will our food cost more?
Food prices are influenced by more than fertiliser costs. Farmers are also grappling with increasing fuel costs. Soaring fuel prices affect all parts of the food supply chain, from processing and packaging, to transport, storage and retail. It is likely these collective impacts will increase food prices for customers.
Fertiliser and fuel costs constitute 25–30% of a cropping business’ total farm costs, so a sharp increase in both will significantly affect farm profitability.
Farmers only receive a small share of the price consumers pay for produce. At lower yields, farmers will face the squeeze of less production revenue and higher costs of production. While some producers may be able to weather the storm, others are facing a difficult year ahead.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Charlotte Gupta, Sleep Researcher, Appleton Institute, HealthWise Research Group, CQUniversity Australia
Easter is here and chocolate is everywhere – crowding shop shelves, piling up on desks, and likely already sitting in your pantry.
But if you’ve been finding it harder to sleep recently, late-night Easter eggs could be part of the problem.
That’s because some chocolate ingredients, including caffeine and sugar, may be sneakily impacting your sleep.
But if you love chocolate, you don’t have to give it up completely. Instead, here are some science-backed tips for enjoying it without sacrificing your sleep.
The science of chocolate
Most of us will agree that chocolate is delicious. This is because it’s made of tasty ingredients such as cocoa, cocoa butter and sugar.
But it’s more than just a sweet treat. Chocolate contains hundreds of naturally occurring compounds including mild stimulants, which are substances that make the mind or body more active. These stimulants can impact how well you sleep.
Here are three ingredients worth knowing about.
Sugar
Sugar is one of the main ingredients in chocolate. When you eat high-sugar foods, such as chocolate eggs, your blood sugar levels tend to rise quickly. In response, your body releases insulin to bring those levels back down.
So if you eat chocolate in the evening, you’ll likely experience a blood sugar spike. This will temporarily boost your energy levels, but also means you’re less likely to feel naturally sleepy. When that spike wears off, your blood sugar levels will suddenly dip. All these fluctuations can disrupt sleep quality later, making it harder to stay asleep at night.
Caffeine
Chocolate also contains caffeine. Caffeine works by blocking a sleep-promoting chemical in your brain, called adenosine. When the adenosine signal is blocked, we feel more alert. While this is useful during the day, consuming caffeine in the evening can make it harder to fall asleep.
A single chocolate mini-egg contains a tiny amount of caffeine, typically just a few milligrams. If we compare this with a shot of espresso, which contains between 50 and 70 milligrams of caffeine, this doesn’t seem like a lot. But if you eat multiple chocolate eggs at once, say during Easter, this caffeine may start to affect your sleep. Even small amounts of caffeine can delay how quickly you fall asleep, and also impact how how well you sleep. And combining caffeine with sugar, in foods such as Easter eggs, can compound these effects.
Theobromine
Chocolate also contains theobromine, a stimulant commonly found in cocoa beans. Theobromine is similar to caffeine in that it blocks the adenosine signal. Theobromine can also increase your heart rate, meaning you’re more likely to feel restless. So while it isn’t as strong as caffeine, theobromine may impact your ability to fall and stay asleep.
The good news
Thankfully, you don’t have to give up chocolate to sleep well. But if you are tucking into some Easter eggs, here are three questions to ask yourself.
1. When am I eating?
Eating anything close to bedtime can make it harder to fall asleep, and may reduce the quality of your sleep. It might also increase your chance of having vivid dreams.
Late-night eating can also lead to digestive problems. Research suggests the human body has a harder time digesting food at night. If you eat food right before bed it can cause various symptoms, including acid reflux. Acid reflux is a common digestive condition where stomach acid flows back into your food pipe, causing an uncomfortable burning sensation. Eating chocolate in the evening may cause acid reflux because ingredients such as caffeine and theobromine relax the muscles that keep stomach acid in place.
So it’s best to avoid eating any food, including chocolate, at least three hours before you go to bed.
2. What am I eating?
Dark chocolate typically contains more cocoa than other kinds of chocolate. This means it also contains higher levels of caffeine and theobromine. So if you’re reaching for chocolate late at night, it may be best to avoid dark chocolate.
White chocolate is not made from cocoa solids, so generally contains no caffeine. However, it still has a high sugar and fat content. So you should also consider limiting how much white chocolate you eat before bed.
During the day, you can enjoy whatever kind of chocolate you prefer. But in the evening, it’s best to avoid eating any chocolate too close to bedtime.
3. How much am I eating?
Enjoying a small chocolate egg after dinner is unlikely to affect your sleep in any noticeable way. But eating a whole chocolate bunny, particularly right before bed, is another story. What’s key is managing your portions and giving your body time to digest before you head to bed.
The bottom line
For most people, eating chocolate won’t have a major impact on your sleep. But it helps to keep track of when, what, and how much chocolate you’re eating, particularly around bedtime. That way you can enjoy your Easter eggs without sacrificing any shut-eye.
Picture this: you’re competing in a time-trial cycling race along a route that’s not known in advance. Instead of following a marked course, you receive instructions via notifications on your mobile phone.
Looking at your phone while cycling is extremely dangerous. But to stay on track, you must consult it nearly continuously.
If such a race took place on the streets of a busy, car-oriented city like Sydney, you would likely opt out. Yet food-delivery riders face precisely this situation every day: they receive order notifications while riding, and if they don’t check them, they lose the order and their hourly earnings suffer.
This is just one example of the dangerous incentive structure under which riders operate. These incentives are a central focus of our study just published in Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, based on in-depth interviews with ten food-delivery riders in Sydney.
Previous studies have mostly addressed individual factors that make some riders more prone to risky behaviour. In contrast, our study examines platform decisions and operations. This includes how orders are assigned, what information is transmitted and when, and how payment is structured.
What did our study find?
Our findings can be summarised in six platform-related issues that systematically generate time pressure and encourage risk-taking.
Several orders at once: the handling of multiple orders, often with opaque delivery sequences, creates conflicts with customers and forces riders to rush. As one rider explained:
When handling multiple orders, I’m often directed to deliver the second order first. This leaves the first customer waiting for a long time, causing a big delay and making me take risks because I’m getting messages.
No control over restaurant timing: unpredictable food preparation times reduce riders’ hourly earnings, incentivising them to “make up” lost time on the road.
Fierce competition: intense competition among riders requires immediate acceptance of orders, even while cycling. One rider said:
I have to compete with other riders for food orders. Because of this, I often engage in unsafe behaviours, such as checking my phone while riding my bike.
Gamified risks: incentive systems structured around tight time windows turn work into a target-driven “game”, where completing more deliveries unlocks bonuses. This encourages riders to push beyond safe limits in order to secure the reward.
Star ratings: customer review systems tie riders’ future access to jobs to punctuality and perceived service quality, amplifying anxiety about delays.
Ordering ahead: Pre-orders (scheduled deliveries) create stricter expectations on timing without reducing uncertainty in preparation. When delays occur upstream – especially at restaurants – the responsibility is effectively shifted onto riders. As one rider said:
Waiting time at restaurants reduces my hourly rate. To make up for it, I tend to rush more.
Taken together, these mechanisms actively structure the conditions under which risky cycling becomes an economically rational response for delivery riders.
It doesn’t have to be this way
Regulating these platforms has proven difficult worldwide. Our findings identify some obvious and less obvious measures to consider:
Prohibit sending new orders to riders on the road
Platforms know which riders are currently serving an order. Sending a new one prompts them to check their phone while cycling. On the other hand, preventing this would likely reduce order bundling – one of the main things that makes deliveries so efficient. But the apps could build a feature where, based on settings the rider selects beforehand, orders are assigned automatically.
Provide more transparent information to customers
If customers could see when a rider is handling multiple orders and how long preparation times are expected to be, they’d be less likely to criticise the riders or penalise them with low ratings.
Redesign incentive and rating systems
Incentive schemes and customer ratings should be redesigned so that riders are not penalised for delays beyond their control, such as restaurant preparation times. Similarly, bonuses should not reward completing a high number of deliveries within unrealistically short periods.
Introduce an effective maximum speed
Riders often run red lights or use footpaths to move faster and complete more deliveries. Platforms could calculate a reasonable return time to a “hotspot” with many restaurants in one place, and refrain from assigning new orders before that time. This would remove incentives for riders to rush.
Dangerous deliveries are cheaper
Implementing many of these measures is far from straightforward. For example, coming up with settings to automatically assign and accept orders would require negotiations between platforms and riders.
An effective maximum speed could be resisted by both riders and the platforms: by delivering fewer orders per hour, the total revenue would decrease. This would reduce both the platforms’ profit and the riders’ earnings.
This last aspect points to one of the crucial tensions in the meal-delivery industry: the lack of safety is actually profitable. The faster the riders go, the better the business performs and the cheaper the meals become.
However, improving safety means slowing deliveries down and thus reducing the income. Compensating for those earnings losses in a job that’s already precarious would likely require higher delivery prices.
In other words, the low price of a delivered meal partly depends on riders taking risks. Ultimately, we all have to ask ourselves: are we willing to pay the true cost of safe meal delivery?
Acknowledgements: this study was led by Minjun Song, School of Civil Engineering, University of Sydney.
