Category: Evening Report

ER Report: Here is a summary of significant articles published on EveningReport.nz on March 20, 2026.

I’m a kidney surgeon. Here’s why I hope I never see you
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anthony Dat, Consultant Urological Surgeon and Adjunct Lecturer, Department of Surgery, School of Clinical Sciences, Monash University As a urological surgeon, I meet many patients with chronic (long-term) kidney disease. Sometimes, I see patients that have progressed to the point where their kidneys do not work at

Labor set for landslide in final South Australian polls with One Nation ahead of Liberals
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne The South Australian state election is Saturday, with polls closing at 6:30pm AEDT. The 47 lower house seats will be elected in single-member electorates using preferential voting.

Bacterial meningitis is deadly, but can also have life-altering long-term effects – new study
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Octavia Calder-Dawe, Lecturer in Health Psychology, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington Bacterial meningitis is once again in global headlines, with recent cases linked to the University of Otago in New Zealand and a fast-growing outbreak at the University of Kent in England. Bacterial meningitis

Many tourism hotspots are ‘de-marketing’ – with mixed success. We researched the smartest ways to do it
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anne Hardy, Adjunct professor, Tourism, Southern Cross University Those who watched the recent Milan Cortina Winter Olympics and Paralympics probably placed Italy high on their travel bucket lists. Global events frequently generate abrupt spikes in visitor demand. This is a boon for many tourism operators and business

Keith Rankin Analysis – Turkmenistan: The Hermit Autocracy in the Centre of Eurasia
Analysis by Keith Rankin, 17 March 2026. Iran is a crucial country in Southwest Asia. Not only is it strategically placed with respect to maritime transport, it also has land borders with seven countries. Most of these countries have been in the world news in the last decade, generally in relation to some conflict or

Why Iran is attacking Gulf energy infrastructure
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Matthew Powell, Teaching Fellow in Strategic and Air Power Studies, University of Portsmouth Iran targeted energy facilities across the Middle East on March 18, including the world’s largest liquefied natural gas hub in Qatar, in retaliation for Israeli strikes on an Iranian gas field hours earlier. Iran

Why drawing eyes on food packaging could stop seagulls stealing your chips
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Laura Kelley, Associate Professor, Centre for Ecology and Conservation, University of Exeter The increasingly urban lifestyles of seagulls in the UK and around Europe has made them experts at grabbing food from unsuspecting outdoor diners. Herring gulls in particular are gaining a reputation for food theft in

Return of the oil shock: lessons from a crisis New Zealand has seen before
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Basil Sharp, Professor of Energy Economics, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau The world’s energy situation is growing more volatile by the day. The US-Israel war on Iran has effectively shut one of the world’s most important oil choke points, the Strait of Hormuz, sending the price

What does One Nation actually believe in?
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kurt Sengul, Research fellow, Far-Right Communication, Macquarie University One Nation’s unprecedented surge in the polls raises important questions about whether a party built on grievance can present coherent policies to voters. While a Pauline Hanson-led federal government remains highly unlikely, One Nation now sees itself as a

Indigenous Australians always come off worst in disasters. This needs to stop
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bhiamie Williamson, Research Fellow in Disaster Resilience, Monash University Indigenous communities are often the worst hit when major disasters strike. The recent floods across the Northern Territory are a case in point. Last week, residents in the regional centre of Katherine were either evacuated or sought shelter

Some kids stop swimming lessons too early. How well can your child actually swim?
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hannah Graefe, Adjunct Research Fellow, Centre for Alcohol Policy Research, La Trobe University As the weather starts to cool down and outdoor pools shut, are you thinking of pressing pause on your child’s swimming lessons, or even stopping altogether? If your child has reached a certain level,

Fines alone won’t stop big tech behaving badly. Here’s what might work
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lauren C. Hall, PhD Candidate in Psychology, University of Tasmania As countries around the world look to follow Australia’s lead and implement a social media ban for kids, many are also considering fines as an enforcement mechanism. This is part of the playbook when it comes to

What is Flumist, the new flu vaccine for kids that’s sprayed in their noses?
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Allen Cheng, Professor of Infectious Diseases, Monash University Many kids are scared of getting needles, and this can stop them getting vaccinations that protect that against the flu. Less than one in four Australian children were vaccinated against influenza in 2025. This winter, Australian families have another

How does your super balance compare to other people your age?
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Natalie Peng, Lecturer in Accounting, The University of Queensland If you have ever checked your super balance and wondered whether you are “behind” for your age, you aren’t alone. To see where you truly sit, you should ignore “averages”, which can be skewed by a small number

Shifting more healthcare to the private sector calls for a clear government plan – where is it?
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Robin Gauld, Executive Dean, Bond Business School, Bond University Access to public elective services such as hip replacements or cataract surgery has long been inadequate in New Zealand, with extended wait times and exclusion of those not assessed as high priority despite genuine clinical need. Workforce shortages

Seattle tried to guarantee higher pay for delivery drivers – here’s why it didn’t work as intended
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrew Garin, Associate Professor of Economics, Carnegie Mellon University If you’ve ever ordered food through DoorDash, Uber Eats or Instacart, you may have realized the person who delivers it isn’t a salaried employee. They’re gig workers – independent contractors who pick up delivery tasks through an app,

China’s growing grip on the fragile Solomon Islands media sector
SPECIAL REPORT: Reporters Without Borders Since the Solomon Islands established diplomatic relations with China in 2019, the Pacific country has become a strategic arena for Beijing’s influence. By capitalising on the economic fragility of the local media sector, China has stepped up conditional funding, editorial partnerships and influence programmes to disseminate its narratives. Reporters Without

Australian charities funding Israel’s illegal settlements ‘untouchable’, says Labor govt
The Labor government has told the Senate that Australian charities don’t have to comply with international law, nor will they be compelled. Michael West Media reports. SPECIAL REPORT: By Stephanie Tran The Albanese government has rejected a proposal to strip tax-deductible status from Australian charities found to be supporting illegal occupations, amid mounting scrutiny over

Grattan on Friday: Chalmers is trying to make economic uncertainty a springboard for reform
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra When he talks about the May 12 budget, Treasurer Jim Chalmers always stresses that what’s done on things like the capital gains tax discount will be a matter for cabinet. It would be more accurate to say the fate of

Heading to Bali, Vietnam or Thailand? Why a measles vaccine is more important than ever
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Niall Johnston, Conjoint Associate Lecturer, Faculty of Medicine, UNSW Sydney If you’re planning an Easter holiday to Bali, Vietnam or Thailand, it’s a good time to check if you and your family are vaccinated against measles. These are among destinations in Southeast Asia with ongoing measles outbreaks,

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/03/20/er-report-a-roundup-of-significant-articles-on-eveningreport-nz-for-march-20-2026/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anthony Dat, Consultant Urological Surgeon and Adjunct Lecturer, Department of Surgery, School of Clinical Sciences, Monash University

As a urological surgeon, I meet many patients with chronic (long-term) kidney disease.

Sometimes, I see patients that have progressed to the point where their kidneys do not work at all. This leads to the toxic build-up of waste products, meaning they need regular dialysis or a kidney transplant.

While these treatments are lifesaving, access to them is becoming increasingly challenging.

As more people are newly diagnosed with chronic kidney disease, the larger the demand for dialysis. By 2032, it is expected dialysis rates in Australia will surge by almost 86% compared with rates in 2022.

Many dialysis units across the country have more patients than they can treat. Some patients wait on average two to three years for a kidney transplant.

So my colleagues and I are increasingly working in a health-care system at capacity caring for people with kidney disease.

Clearly, it would be better for patients and the health system if we detected kidney disease early and treated it before it progressed.

Kidney Health Australia’s action plan provides a practical blueprint of how to get there.

The cost of kidney disease

An estimated one in seven Australian adults have indicators of chronic kidney disease, the vast majority not knowing it.

About three out of four Australian adults have at least one factor that increases their risk of chronic kidney disease. This includes diabetes or high blood pressure.

Chronic kidney disease is associated with a higher risk of heart attack, stroke and premature death.

It also has a significant public health impact, costing Australia A$9.9 billion a year.

Remind me, what do your kidneys actually do?

The kidneys are two fist-sized organs that sit at the back of the abdomen and perform some of the body’s most essential tasks.

They are best known to filter waste and excess fluid from the bloodstream to produce urine.

They produce hormones that help support red blood cell production and bone health. They also regulate blood pressure by maintaining the balance of salts and minerals in the body.

But kidney disease can start and progress for a variety of reasons.

For instance, high blood glucose (sugar) levels and high blood pressure can damage kidney blood vessels and nephrons (filtering units). This affects the kidneys’ ability to filter blood.

Kidney disease is often ‘silent’

Kidney disease is often described as “silent”. That’s because kidneys can lose up to 90% of their function before development of symptoms including:

• fatigue

• swelling in the legs and ankles

• persistent high blood pressure

• shortness of breath

• needing to urinate more often, especially at night

• foamy urine.

Unfortunately, kidney damage is often irreversible by this stage. So we need to focus on preventing kidney damage in the first place.

What you can do now

Not all causes of chronic kidney disease are easily preventable. However, there are ways to reduce the chance of kidney disease:

Check in with your GP to make sure you are:

• controlling your blood pressure

• managing your diabetes well

• maintaining a healthy weight

• eating a healthy diet with minimal salt intake

• not smoking

• exercising regularly

• drinking enough water

• avoiding excessive use, over long periods, of NSAIDs (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs), such as ibuprofen.

How do we catch kidney disease early?

Kidney Health Australia proposes GPs perform a “kidney health check” on people at higher risk every one to two years. This would include:

• people with diabetes, high blood pressure, heart disease, or who are obese

• First Nations people

• people who smoke or vape (or who have done so in the past)

• people with a family history of kidney disease

• those aged over 60.

This check would include a blood pressure reading, blood test for kidney function and urine test checking protein levels.

It has been estimated early detection and treatment of kidney disease could prevent more than 38,000 premature deaths, generate 165,000 extra years of healthy life, and deliver a saving of $45 for every $1 invested over the next 20 years.

The best dialysis is the one you never need

By the time many patients reach specialists like me, the damage to their kidneys is advanced and irreversible.

Many causes of kidney disease, however, such as high blood pressure and diabetes are largely preventable.

Greater awareness of how to look after your kidneys, simple screening and early intervention could stop many Australians progressing to kidney failure.

– ref. I’m a kidney surgeon. Here’s why I hope I never see you – https://theconversation.com/im-a-kidney-surgeon-heres-why-i-hope-i-never-see-you-278193

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/03/20/im-a-kidney-surgeon-heres-why-i-hope-i-never-see-you-278193/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne

The South Australian state election is Saturday, with polls closing at 6:30pm AEDT. The 47 lower house seats will be elected in single-member electorates using preferential voting.

In the past few days, we have had SA polls from Newspoll, DemosAU, YouGov and Fox & Hedgehog. These polls all suggest a Labor landslide, with Labor’s primary vote at 37–40% and the Greens at 11–12%. One Nation is in the low 20s, supplanting the Liberals (high teens) as the main right-wing party.

Breakdowns from the DemosAU, YouGov and Fox & Hedgehog polls suggest Labor is doing particularly well in Adelaide. The Liberals will likely beat One Nation on primary votes in many Adelaide seats, but if Labor wins these seats, it won’t count for the Liberals. In regional seats, One Nation is likely to beat the Liberals and win the seats.

On these polls, the Liberals could be wiped out in the lower house and be replaced by One Nation as the main right-wing party. But Labor would win a landslide.

Eleven of the 22 upper house seats will also be up for election by statewide proportional representation with preferences. A quota for election is one-twelfth of the vote or 8.3%.

In previous SA elections, only ordinary votes cast on election day have been counted on election night. However, legislation passed in 2024 will allow pre-poll and postal votes to also be counted on the night.

By the end of the night, we will have a much higher share of the overall vote counted than at previous SA elections. However, the pre-poll votes will take much longer to count than those cast on election day.

This article also includes a New South Wales Resolve poll that has Labor’s primary vote slumping eight points since January to 29% as One Nation debuts with 23%.

SA Newspoll

A SA Newspoll, conducted March 12–18 from a sample of 1,048, gave Labor 40% of the primary vote (down four since the mid-February Newspoll), One Nation 22% (down two), the Liberals 16% (up two), the Greens 12% (steady) and all Others 10% (up four). No two-party estimate was reported.

Labor Premier Peter Malinauskas’ net approval was down six points to +34 (65% satisfied, 31% dissatisfied). Liberal leader Ashton Hurn’s net approval was up four points to +8 (43% satisfied, 35% dissatisfied). Malinauskas led Hurn as better premier by 64–22 (67–19 previously).

SA DemosAU poll

A SA DemoaAU and Ace Strategies poll for InDaily, conducted March 12–18 from a sample of 1,242, gave Labor 37% of the primary vote (down six since the early February DemosAU poll), One Nation 23% (up four), the Liberals 17% (down one), the Greens 11% (down one) and all Others 12% (up four). No two-party estimates were provided.

Malinauskas’ net positive score was +29 (49% positive, 20% negative), while Hurn was at net zero (21% positive, 21% negative). One Nation’s lead upper house candidate Cory Bernardi was at net -16 net (36% negative, 20% positive).

SA YouGov poll

A SA YouGov poll for The Advertiser, conducted March 9–17 from a sample of 1,265, gave Labor 38% of the primary vote (up one since the mid-February YouGov poll), One Nation 22% (steady), the Liberals 19% (down one), the Greens 12% (down one), independents 5% (down one) and others 4% (up two).

By respondent preferences, Labor led both One Nation and the Liberals by 59–41, a one-point gain for One Nation vs Labor and steady against the Liberals.

Malinauskas’ net approval was down three points to +33, with 63% satisfied and 30% dissatisfied. Hurn’s net approval was steady at +7 (42% satisfied, 35% dissatisfied). Malinauskas led Hurn as better premier by 62–23 (64–20 previously).

SA Fox & Hedgehog poll

A SA Fox & Hedgehog poll, conducted March 6–16 from a sample of 1,008, gave Labor 38% of the primary vote (down two since the early February F&H poll, One Nation 21% (up one), the Liberals 18% (down one), the Greens 11% (down one) and all Others 12% (up three).

By respondent preferences, Labor led One Nation by 59–41, a four-point gain for One Nation. They led the Liberals by 60–40, a one-point gain for the Liberals. In a three-party preferred, where Green and Other voters are asked to choose between Labor, the Liberals and One Nation, Labor had 52% (down two), One Nation 26% (up one) and the Liberals 22% (up one).

Malinauskas’ net approval was up two points to +33 (52% approve, 19% disapprove). Hurn’s net approval was up three to +10 (25% approve, 15% disapprove). Malinauskas led Hurn as preferred premier by 55–22 (54–22 previously). Bernardi’s net approval was down five to -9 (23% disapprove, 14% approve).

Federal politicians included in this SA poll were Anthony Albanese (down six to -15 net approval), Pauline Hanson (down five to +5) and Angus Taylor (up six to -1).

NSW Resolve poll: Labor slumps as One Nation debuts with 23%

The New South Wales state election is in March 2027. A Resolve poll for The Sydney Morning Herald was conducted March 9–14 from a sample of 1,100. Unlike most previous NSW Resolve polls, this was conducted in one week, not over two months.

Labor had 29% of the primary vote (down eight since the December to January Resolve poll), the Coalition 25% (down two), One Nation 23% (not previously asked for), the Greens 10% (steady), independents 8% (down three) and others 5% (down ten).

Resolve doesn’t usually give a two-party estimate for its state polls, but analyst Kevin Bonham gave Labor about a 53–47 lead over the Coalition. Optional preferential voting in NSW hurts the right as there’s a split between One Nation and the Coalition.

Despite Labor’s slump on voting intentions, Labor incumbent Chris Minns held a 38–17 lead as preferred premier over Liberal leader Kellie Sloane (40–18 in January). On the NSW state outlook, 30% said it would get worse in the next year, 19% better and 51% said no change.

This poll contrasts with a NSW DemosAU early March poll that gave Labor 34% of the primary vote, the Coalition 23%, One Nation 21% and the Greens 15%.

Federal Morgan poll and further Resolve questions

A national Morgan poll, conducted March 9–15 from a sample of 1,654, gave Labor 28.5% of the primary vote (up two since the March 2–8 Morgan poll), the Coalition 24% (up 1.5), One Nation 22.5% (down one), the Greens 12.5% (down two) and all Others 12.5% (down 0.5).

By respondent preferences, Labor led the Coalition by 54–46, a 0.5-point gain for the Coalition. By 2025 election preference flows, Labor led by 52–48, a one-point gain for the Coalition.

I previously covered the national Resolve poll for Nine newspapers. In additional questions, respondents were pessimistic about the near-term economic outlook, with 44% expecting it to get worse in the next year and 21% better and more pessimism about shorter horizons. But in the next five years, “get better” led by 33–30.

On the rising cost of living, 40% thought the federal government most responsible, 17% global factors, 10% state and territory governments, 6% businesses and 6% the Reserve Bank.

– ref. Labor set for landslide in final South Australian polls with One Nation ahead of Liberals – https://theconversation.com/labor-set-for-landslide-in-final-south-australian-polls-with-one-nation-ahead-of-liberals-278426

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/03/20/labor-set-for-landslide-in-final-south-australian-polls-with-one-nation-ahead-of-liberals-278426/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anne Hardy, Adjunct professor, Tourism, Southern Cross University

Those who watched the recent Milan Cortina Winter Olympics and Paralympics probably placed Italy high on their travel bucket lists.

Global events frequently generate abrupt spikes in visitor demand.

This is a boon for many tourism operators and business owners, but it often leads to short-term yet significant pressures on destinations, resulting in concerns regarding overtourism.

Some destinations are therefore actively trying to reduce tourism – with mixed success.

We recently researched how tourism destinations could do this successfully without causing major disruptions.

Overtourism and ‘de-marketing’

Overtourism can strain local communities and damages heritage and ecosystems.

Many of our favourite destinations are now trying to “de-market” themselves.

“De-marketing” is a term that has been used since 1971.

Rather than using the traditional “4 Ps” of marketing (price, produce, place and promotion) to attract tourists, de-marketing uses them to keep people away.

Tasmania’s Overland Track: a case study

Our soon-to-be-published research shows de-marketing risks failure if it ignores trends and pressures in society.

We found successful de-marketing cannot be conducted from one angle, such as changing the way a location is marketed. This is because attractions, businesses cultures, residents, heritage assets and natural areas all form the tourism system – when one is altered, the entire system is affected.

The Overland Track in southwest Tasmania, Australia, illustrates this well.

By the 1990s, the 65-kilometre, five-day hike was under significant strain. Rising visitor numbers, overcrowded huts, waste issues and track erosion were reducing environmental quality and visitor satisfaction.

Following extensive consultation, in 2011 the Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service introduced a suite of measures:

• a booking and permit system
• a track fee
• capped daily departures
• the introduction of free mid‑track access for Tasmanians to maintain local recreation opportunities.

In 2011, hiker numbers were at 8,260 per year. Since then, there has been modest increase, and for the past three years numbers have stabilised at around 11,000 per year.

Using permits and capped daily departures slowed the growth of visitors, while track fees provide revenue from which rangers are employed and improvements to trails, huts and toilets can be made. This in turn reduces track erosion and environmental impacts.

Sometimes it backfires

Ironically, as destinations have tried to de-market themselves, media coverage of their actions can cause these attempts to backfire.

Locations such as Venice, Barcelona and Amsterdam are recent examples.

Amsterdam attracts around 20 million visitors a year and in 2023 the city tried to push back.

Its “stay away” campaign targeted young British men searching online for terms like “stag weekend” or “pub crawl,” aiming to deter tourists seeking party trips.

The campaign backfired.

Some businesses began selling “stay away” t-shirts and promoting rebellious “stay away weekends” while the campaign was parodied on social media.

Instead of discouraging this market, the message became a meme – and, for some, a reason to visit.

Why there is often pushback

De-marketing can be successful. But how can destinations that have had major investments from private and public stakeholders suddenly slow down business without triggering economic instability and resistance?

Not surprisingly, there is often pushback from businesses. Sudden halts to tourism hurt the hip pockets of those whose livelihood depends upon it. In Venice in 2021 for example, a ban on large cruise ships from entering the Venetian lagoon was met with resistance from local business leaders.

Regulating tourist behaviour, banning short-term rental accommodation and tourists taxes are popular responses to overtourism but are often ineffectual.

Iceland introduced a tourist tax in 2024 but what followed was a rise in tourist numbers.

Taxes can create revenue to repair environmental damage but they do not reduce people’s desire to travel.

How it can be done successfully

Our research shows successful de-marketing requires simultaneous use of soft and harsh responses.

Harsh responses include caps on visitor numbers, complete bans, regulations on visitor movement and raising pricing or taxes.

Soft responses include changing the types of attractions on offer (to attract certain tourist segments), codes of conduct, educational campaigns and using social media to promote initiatives.

Both soft and harsh responses must be co-designed with the tourism industry and community.

Technology can also be used.

Majorca, in Spain, has implemented an AI-powered platform to help tourists plan trips. At the same time, it recommends alternative attractions when tourist attractions are crowded.

Travellers can also contribute: staying longer rather than taking short, high-impact trips, avoiding peak periods and looking beyond algorithm-driven “must-see” lists can reduce pressure.

The most responsible travel choices are rarely the most “Instagrammable”. And sometimes, the most sustainable decision is not where to go, but when, or whether to go at all.

– ref. Many tourism hotspots are ‘de-marketing’ – with mixed success. We researched the smartest ways to do it – https://theconversation.com/many-tourism-hotspots-are-de-marketing-with-mixed-success-we-researched-the-smartest-ways-to-do-it-276966

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/03/20/many-tourism-hotspots-are-de-marketing-with-mixed-success-we-researched-the-smartest-ways-to-do-it-276966/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Octavia Calder-Dawe, Lecturer in Health Psychology, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington

Bacterial meningitis is once again in global headlines, with recent cases linked to the University of Otago in New Zealand and a fast-growing outbreak at the University of Kent in England.

Bacterial meningitis is well known as an acute, deadly illness. The World Health Organization estimates about one in six infected people will die – even with prompt medical care and antibiotic treatment.

While this frightening statistic makes headlines, less well understood is what happens to those who survive this highly contagious infectious disease.

Much of the existing research on bacterial meningitis tends to follow a similar pattern, focused on the acute phase when people are hospitalised and receiving treatment.

While this makes sense, it also bolsters the idea that bacterial meningitis is a short-term illness that is effectively dealt with by the time patients leave hospital.

This is not the case. Emerging international evidence suggests a majority of patients experience ongoing and life-altering physical, psychological and social impacts well beyond the acute treatment phase.

Our new research with people who survived bacterial meningitis is the first of its kind conducted in Aotearoa New Zealand.

With support from the Meningitis Foundation Aotearoa New Zealand, we collated exploratory survey responses from 16 adult participants, followed by in-depth interviews with ten of these people.

This allowed us to build a nuanced, personalised picture of what life after meningitis is actually like. Our findings show significant and long-lasting impacts of infection.

Ongoing impacts long after acute illness

Participants emphasised that bacterial meningitis was a long-term illness with far-reaching impacts.

Far from being “cured” at hospital discharge, participants described experiencing multiple chronic after-effects, including fatigue, difficulties with concentration, memory and emotional regulation, persistent headaches, and issues with mobility, vision and hearing.

These after-effects were permanent for some and persisted for years for others.

Ongoing symptoms had major implications for how participants were able to live their lives. They affected their ability to work and support themselves, to study and to maintain relationships with others.

In turn, this had serious downstream effects on mental health. Participants linked their experiences to anxiety, depression and suicidality. As one reflected:

I thought my life was absolutely done and dusted.

Lack of guidance and support

In the context of these life-changing impacts, participants described an absence of accurate and useful medical advice about after-effects and recovery trajectories.

This information vacuum made the adjustment to living with lasting impacts especially difficult to understand and cope with. Interviewees described feeling abandoned and did not know whether and where they could access help.

Those we interviewed were not offered mental health follow-up despite having faced a life-threatening medical diagnosis – a known risk factor for post-traumatic stress disorder.

Many described leaving hospital in shock, with no accident compensation cover and no ongoing primary care plan or specialist referral in place. One participant explained her experience like this:

When I was eventually discharged, there was no support. There was no brochure to tell me that I could go and talk to someone or a list of potential after-effects.

Reflecting the focus on acute care, participants were typically treated by healthcare providers as if they were recovered and would be ready to resume their normal activities soon.

Several participants were told by doctors to return to work or school within weeks.

This proved to be alarmingly inaccurate advice. Most of those we spoke to experienced after-effects that affected their ability to work, study and socialise for months or years.

Without access to formalised aftercare, close family and friends filled the gaps. Many participants described being discharged from hospital while unable to feed themselves, and unable to move unassisted. In these situations, support from loved ones was vital.

Our findings demonstrate that bacterial meningitis is much more than a life-threatening infection. It is an acute disease with serious, chronic after-effects which are poorly understood and often go unrecognised.

Alongside efforts to raise vaccination rates and improve symptom recognition, we need to do better by those living with the impacts of this cruel disease.

Our recommendations highlight that patients and families need realistic information and responsive support to help them adjust to life after bacterial meningitis.

– ref. Bacterial meningitis is deadly, but can also have life-altering long-term effects – new study – https://theconversation.com/bacterial-meningitis-is-deadly-but-can-also-have-life-altering-long-term-effects-new-study-278545

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/03/20/bacterial-meningitis-is-deadly-but-can-also-have-life-altering-long-term-effects-new-study-278545/

Analysis by Keith Rankin, 17 March 2026.

Iran is a crucial country in Southwest Asia. Not only is it strategically placed with respect to maritime transport, it also has land borders with seven countries. Most of these countries have been in the world news in the last decade, generally in relation to some conflict or other.

Two of these are currently at war with each other: Afghanistan and Pakistan (refer ‘I heard a huge blast’: Afghan journalist describes Kabul rehab hospital strikes, Sky News, 16 March 2026). Two others were at war a few years ago: Armenia and Azerbaijan. And Iraq has been in five separate wars, one against Iran itself, and one against Iran’s near-neighbour Kuwait, two against the wider West, and one against ISIL. Türkiye, by contrast, has been a sea of relative stability, and is indeed the main recipient of Iranian refugees at present.

But what about Turkmenistan, a country which has a 1,000km border with Iran; and important demographic and cultural links with Iran? A country successfully hiding in plain sight.

Korea was dubbed the ‘Hermit Kingdom’ in the nineteenth century, and since the Korean War (ceasefire in 1953) North Korea is not uncommonly still called that. But, at least in our awareness, Turkmenistan makes North Korea seem rather gregarious in terms of its relations with the world. I understand that it’s harder to get a visa to visit Turkmenistan than to visit North Korea.

Google: “Ashgabat, the capital, was rebuilt [after a big earthquake in 1948] in Soviet style in the mid-20th century and is filled with grand monuments honouring former president Saparmurat Niyazov.” This architectural gigantism is reminiscent of North Korea. BBC, 17 Sep 2016: “Turkmenistan has unveiled a gleaming new international airport with a roof in the shape of a flying falcon. … Ashgabat [the capital, and close to the Iranian border] boasts several other unique structures, including a publishing house in shape of an open book [and] two giant golden statues of both Mr Berdymukhamedov and his late predecessor Saparmyrat Niyazov.”

Economy

Turkmenistan, on the southeastern side of the Caspian Sea, has an ancient history in terms of trade along the Silk Road; it was indeed a land of transit in the times of caravans and camels.

In 1881 it was annexed and fully incorporated into the Russian Empire. And, during Soviet Union times, it was a full republic of that Union. Since the Soviet split-up, Turkmenistan, in true Orwellian fashion, has largely denied that it was ever part of the Soviet Union. Its population, believed to be just over six million, is kept in perpetual ignorance of the wider world. There is a relatively large regional diaspora of Turkmen people.

That ignorance is mutual. The West knows as little about Turkmenistan as Turkmen subjects know about The West. Interestingly, I looked up the CIA Factbook – a widely favoured reference resource for political geography – to verify my own knowledge. And I found this; the Factbook was closed last month (though see the wayback machine). Not widely reported, but note this on CNN: CIA terminates its World Factbook, overthrowing reference regime, 6 Feb 2026.

I found some maps still on the CIA website: https://www.cia.gov/resources/map/india/ and https://www.cia.gov/resources/map/turkmenistan/. While the maps on India are reasonably current (2023), this map of Turkmenistan dates back to 2008. Not exactly state-of-the-art intelligence.

Turkmenistan is not a poor country. It has substantial oil reserves, and has huge barely tapped natural gas reserves, comparable to those of Qatar. Despite contrived inequality between rulers and subjects, its people are not as poor as North Korea’s. Its long-distance trade nowadays passes mostly either to The West via the Caspian Sea, then Azerbaijan and Georgia; or to China via just one other country, Kazakhstan. There will also be regional trade with its four land neighbours: Iran, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, and Kazakhstan.

Strategic Matters

For reasons fully beyond its control, Turkmenistan finds its most natural neighbour and most natural ally, Iran, in fullscale war with both regional and global hegemons. I suspect that there are very few Iranian citizens seeking refuge in Turkmenistan, even though many living near Turkmenistan – including in bombed nearby cities such as Mashhad (refer Iran’s Mashhad Airport Targeted Amid Ongoing Israeli Strikes, The Caspian Post, 1 March 2016) – are now living in considerable danger.

Wars typically spill over, in one form or another, into neighbouring countries. Further, Turkmenistan might now become coveted for its geopolitically strategic location and resources. War might come in more than a local spill.

Airspace

Once upon a long time ago, the most strategic spaces in the world were land-spaces, especially central Asian steppes such as those of Turkmenistan. The last incursions from the East into Europe came from these lands: those invasions by Genghis Khan in the twelfth century, and Tamerlane in the fourteenth.

The last incursion from the East into Western Europe was that of Attila the Hun in the fifth century. Since those invasions – and since earlier western conquests, eg those of Alexander the Great – there have been many Western megalomaniacs invading Asia. The main opportunity for the West arose from the strategic development of seaspace trumping landspace.

Nowadays, airspace to a considerable extent trumps both landspace and seaspace. There are two components of this. The first is the military exploitation of airspace, a form of warfare favoured by most modern tyrants. The second is the civilian – and peaceful economic – use of airspace for long-distance transit and trade.

My guess is that, at least up until now, long-haul flights will have avoided overflying Turkmenistan. (Avoidance of countries’ airspace is not uncommon: in 2008 I flew Cathay Pacific from Hong Kong to Seoul return, and the flights avoided Chinese airspace. And I flew from Shenyang in China to Seoul by Korean Airlines, a flight that took a wide circle route to avoid North Korea.)

As it is now, if civil flights want to avoid both Turkmenistan and all countries currently at war, a flight from Singapore to London (say) would have to fly over Nepal, China, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and then over the Black Sea. That’s a very narrow corridor for two-directional long-haul flying. Turkmenistan airspace would ease this constraint somewhat. But how safe can we expect any of Iran’s neighbours to be in the future? Certainly, with airspace now being the geopolitically dominant space today, Turkmenistan comes at a premium; potentially a new aerial Silk Road.

Safe national airspaces are important, not only to avoid being shot-down as Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 was in 2014, but also as potential emergency landing sites. How will long-distance civilian air travel function during a twenty-first century world war?

Conclusion

Most of us have some geographical blindspots and many historical blindspots. Some places and historical events are blind to most of us. If democracy is to survive in any form, we need populations – not just ‘experts’ – with more knowledge of the world. And, if not unbiased knowledge (very difficult to achieve), then at least knowledge with relatively balanced biases.

Turkmenistan is a strategically placed nation towards which most better-informed people have almost no knowledge. For us in the West, that lack of geographical knowledge is ignorance by choice, or by having priorities determined by our not knowing what we don’t know, even when those places are in plain sight. For the Turkmen subject people, their ignorance is different; it’s by design.

*******

Keith Rankin (keith at rankin dot nz), trained as an economic historian, is a retired lecturer in Economics and Statistics. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand.

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/03/20/keith-rankin-analysis-turkmenistan-the-hermit-autocracy-in-the-centre-of-eurasia/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Matthew Powell, Teaching Fellow in Strategic and Air Power Studies, University of Portsmouth

Iran targeted energy facilities across the Middle East on March 18, including the world’s largest liquefied natural gas hub in Qatar, in retaliation for Israeli strikes on an Iranian gas field hours earlier.

Iran has gone on to attack other energy facilities across the Gulf. This has included hitting a Saudi refinery on the Red Sea and setting two Kuwaiti oil refineries ablaze in an intensification of its campaign against energy infrastructure in the region.

As an expert on military strategy, I see the Iranian attacks on Gulf energy facilities as part of a broader strategic agenda the regime in Tehran has employed to try and ensure its survival.

Iran’s attacks on energy infrastructure since the start of the conflict have been accompanied with wider missile and drone strikes against US military bases and infrastructure in the region. Through these attacks, which have killed seven American service personnel so far, the regime has looked to demonstrate its capacity and capability not only to international audiences but also the Iranian population.

This includes, perhaps most importantly, those responsible for maintaining Iran’s internal security. If those tasked with this responsibility began to doubt the regime’s capacity to respond to attack, they might become less inclined to suppress rebellions and uprisings.

The ability to exercise force has long been central to maintaining the regime’s domestic political position in Iran. This has been demonstrated by the brutal repression of various protest movements over the past decade or so.

In its attacks on Gulf energy infrastructure, Iran has two main goals. The first is to hit the Gulf states economically in the hope that this will reduce their willingness to provide support to the US.

Gulf countries are heavily reliant on the export of energy for revenue. In Qatar, for example, earnings from the hydrocarbon sector accounted for 83% of total government revenues in 2023. These revenues help Gulf states maintain the low tax regime that is enjoyed by their populations.

If these revenues reduce substantially because energy cannot be processed, some of these nations may begin to question their alliances with the US. Such a scenario would reduce the ability of the US to conduct military operations in the Middle East and project its power and influence on the region.

The war is already having a significant impact on these countries. Goldman Sachs has estimated that Qatar and Kuwait could see their GDP drop by 14% if the war lasts until the end of April. Likewise, Capital Economics has suggested that GDP in the region could fall by between 10% to 15% if the conflict causes lasting damage to energy infrastructure.

Rifts do not yet appear to be emerging between the US and its Middle Eastern allies. But Tehran will be calculating that prolonged attacks – alongside continued disruption to the vital strait of Hormuz shipping lane – will add strain to relations.

Raising energy prices

Iran’s second, and wider, goal is to raise global energy prices. The Middle East is a key energy supplier globally, so disruption to supplies in this region can have an almost immediate impact on prices.

The price of a barrel of Brent crude, the global benchmark for oil pricing, has increased from around US$68 (£51) on February 27 to nearly US$100. This has so far largely been the result of disruption to the strait of Hormuz, which has prevented the Gulf states from supplying their energy to global markets.

But Tehran’s calculation appears to be that further efforts to reduce Gulf energy supplies will force nations worldwide, who are having to implement costly policies to reduce the impact of increased energy prices on their populations, to question the actions of the US in Iran.

In the Philippines, which is highly dependent on the Gulf oil, the government has told its agencies to cut electricity and fuel use by between 10% and 20%. Vietnam has introduced work-from-home policies for many public sector workers. And the UK government has announced a £53 million support package for people who rely on oil for central heating.

Iran’s final strategic consideration is that attacking energy facilities may help erode domestic support for Trump in the US. This could force a change in political direction. The price of petrol has already increased to an average of US$3.60 per gallon in the US – a level not seen since the opening days of Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine.

This price increase will be passed on to consumers, creating a headache for Trump ahead of midterm elections in November. Trump’s platform of reducing the inflation seen under the Biden administration was a key part of the election campaign that successfully returned him to the White House.

Iran’s attacks on energy infrastructure are likely to continue. This is because they enable the regime in Tehran to increase the costs of the war even to those who are not directly involved, ramping up global pressure on the US to draw the conflict to a close.

– ref. Why Iran is attacking Gulf energy infrastructure – https://theconversation.com/why-iran-is-attacking-gulf-energy-infrastructure-278815

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/03/20/why-iran-is-attacking-gulf-energy-infrastructure-278815/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Basil Sharp, Professor of Energy Economics, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

The world’s energy situation is growing more volatile by the day.

The US-Israel war on Iran has effectively shut one of the world’s most important oil choke points, the Strait of Hormuz, sending the price of Brent crude over US $100 a barrel for the first time since the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Tit-for-tat attacks on gas fields in the region are compounding the crisis.

In New Zealand, the fallout is being directly felt with rising fuel prices, to which the government may respond with targeted support for some.

It has already warned a prolonged conflict could drive up inflation, slow economic growth and even lead to fuel restrictions.

At this stage, it says such a step is not yet needed. But a four-level contingency plan shows how quickly the government could move ahead if conditions worsen.

There has also been talk of other extraordinary interventions, available under the 45-year-old Petroleum Demand Restraint Act. Again, these are measures the government says would only be necessary if fuel supply were seriously disrupted.

Unsurprisingly, this has all focused attention on the vulnerability of New Zealand’s fuel security. In particular, there has been renewed political debate over whether the 2022 closure of Marsden Point refinery made the country less resilient.

Experts say the difference would be marginal. But for those who lived through New Zealand’s past oil shocks, the events unfolding now will come with a strong sense of déjà vu.

And with talk of reviving interventionist measures from decades ago, the question is whether the country has learned enough to respond differently this time?

Lessons from the Muldoon era

New Zealand’s response to the soaring oil prices of the 1970s, similarly driven by turmoil in the Middle East, came at a time of extensive government control of the economy and energy sector under the National government of Robert Muldoon.

The discovery of Taranaki’s Māui gas field in 1969 appeared to offer New Zealand a trump card for energy supply. But it was tied to a long-term “take-or-pay” contract, meaning taxpayers ultimately carried the cost whether the gas was used or not.

This was the beginning of the “Think Big” strategy. Large-scale projects, including gas-to-gasoline and CNG/LPG conversion, were promoted as pathways to energy security, with little room for dissent.

At the same time, the Petroleum Demand Restraint Act was used to impose restricted petrol sales and carless days, along with reduced speed limits.

Much of this intervention proved costly and ineffective. When global oil prices fell sharply in the mid-1980s, New Zealand was left with debt-funded infrastructure that no longer made economic sense.

From 1984, the economy shifted away from heavy government intervention towards a more market-based model. Nearly four decades later, there are some valuable lessons to be drawn from those interventionist responses to past oil shocks.

One is the appreciation that markets are complex systems, with many players. Interdependence exists across economies. Actions by one sovereign country, such as an oil embargo, inevitably affect others. Complexity plays out over time.

The current government’s response to the energy crisis needs to recognise that any heavy-handed decisions made now may influence the system for decades, often in ways that are difficult to predict.

Another lesson is that New Zealand is actually well positioned to let markets do what they do best: price scarcity.

When prices rise, people adjust their behaviour in response. Farmers faced with higher diesel and fertiliser costs, for example, do what they are renowned for: adapting and modifying.

With higher prices at the pump, many motorists may also prove able to adjust by using public transport, working from home or switching to electric vehicles.

Of course, the impact will be uneven and regressive. But the government directly intervening in the market with hardline measures similar to the Muldoon era should not be the answer.

A new fix, or old risks?

Lessons about the state meddling in energy markets should also apply to the government’s recently announced plans to build a liquefied natural gas (LNG) import terminal.

The facility, likely to be based in Taranaki, is purposed to provide a back-up fuel source for electricity generation during periods of low hydro storage or weak wind. While that appears logical, the plan nonetheless warrants careful consideration.

Māui gas was a sovereign asset. By contrast, the government’s proposal would rely on imported LNG, tying New Zealand to overseas suppliers and long-term contracts that may prove inflexible and costly.

It also risks the prospect – as the present emergency in the Middle East does – of suppliers invoking “force majeure” clauses to suspend deliveries during crises.

A gas backup could also reduce incentives to invest in alternative energy sources or manage demand, while raising questions about how gas would be integrated into the electricity system and who would ultimately control its use.

While efforts to improve the reliability of electricity are welcome, past experience should make us wary of direct government involvement in commercial enterprise.

The current crisis should be treated as a strategic policy opportunity as the government reconsiders New Zealand’s energy settings to build a more resilient and sustainable system.

– ref. Return of the oil shock: lessons from a crisis New Zealand has seen before – https://theconversation.com/return-of-the-oil-shock-lessons-from-a-crisis-new-zealand-has-seen-before-278657

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/03/20/return-of-the-oil-shock-lessons-from-a-crisis-new-zealand-has-seen-before-278657/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Laura Kelley, Associate Professor, Centre for Ecology and Conservation, University of Exeter

The increasingly urban lifestyles of seagulls in the UK and around Europe has made them experts at grabbing food from unsuspecting outdoor diners. Herring gulls in particular are gaining a reputation for food theft in seaside towns like Falmouth in Cornwall, where I live.

On a day out at the beach last summer, I watched as one rummaged through an unattended bag and hopped off with a packet of crisps. Sadly, the gull didn’t hang around long enough for me to see whether it successfully opened the packaging.

Watching this kind of behaviour led me and my colleague Neeltje Boogert to explore new ways of deterring these resourceful birds. Our new research shows that displaying a pair of eyes on food packaging can be enough to stop some gulls from pinching your food.

This builds on our previous work which showed herring gulls approach food more slowly when someone is looking at them directly, compared with if they are looking away.

Many animals – both wild and domesticated – are very aware of eyes, which can indicate the presence of a predator or be used to communicate intent. Direct eye contact often conveys aggression, while looking away indicates a lack of threat.

Animals generally respond defensively when they see eyes staring at them. This is probably an instinctive tendency, since avoiding being eaten by a predator can be a split-second response.

Some animals may have evolved markings to exploit this behaviour. So-called eyespots are found on many insects, amphibians and fish, and they come in a variety of colour, size and pattern combinations.

Exactly how eyespots might deter predators has been hotly debated by scientists for over a century. They may increase predator wariness by being mistaken for predator eyes, or divert attacks to less important parts of the body.

Given that evolution suggests eyes are a good way of increasing animal wariness, the idea of mimicking nature by using fake eyes to deter other animals has been tried in a variety of settings.

In Botswana, livestock are at risk of being eaten by ambush predators such as lions and leopards, which causes conflict with farmers. To test whether eyespots could reduce the risk of predation, experimenters painted pairs of eyes or crosses on the rumps of cattle, or left them unmarked. This was repeated across multiple cattle herds, and any attacks on cattle were recorded.

During the study, 19 cattle were killed by lions or leopards – but none of the cattle with eyespots on their rumps were among them. They were also attacked less than either cattle with crosses or unmarked cattle, suggesting that eyespots can be an effective deterrent for a wide range of animals.

Put off by the eyes

For our study of herring gulls, we tested this idea in coastal towns in Cornwall where gulls are known to take food from people eating outside. We stuck pairs of eyes onto food takeaway boxes and presented individual gulls with a choice of two boxes placed two metres apart on the ground: one box with eyes and one plain box.

Gulls appeared to be put off by the eyes, as they were slower to approach and less likely to peck at these boxes, compared with the ones without eyes.

We also wanted to know whether gulls would, over time, figure out that the eyes on boxes were not really threatening. To test this, we presented 30 gulls with one takeaway box either with or without eyes, but did this three times for each gull over a short amount of time.

Around half the birds never pecked at the box with eyes, whereas the other half quickly approached and pecked. This suggests there could be a sustained effect from the fake eyes for some gulls that do not realise they are being tricked.

We now want to test this in a more realistic setting, by teaming up with food vendors and asking them to use takeaway boxes with eyes on. While this might only ever deter half of gulls from stealing food, perhaps when paired with other deterrents – including shouting – it can have an impact on the amount of food theft.

Eye-like markings have already been used to exclude birds from certain areas, including keeping starlings away from crops, seabirds from fishing nets and raptors from airports.

[embedded content]

Humans respond to eyes too

It’s interesting to note that people, like gulls and many other animals, also pay attention to eyes. Images of human eyes have been found to reduce bicycle theft, reinforce honesty, and even increase charitable donations – all by creating the impression of being watched. This is probably because we are a social species, and tend to act more honestly if we feel we might be judged by an onlooker.

But as with herring gulls, the effect on human behaviour is inconsistent. Images of eyes can nudge behaviour in certain situations, but they don’t work on everyone.

Whether protecting chips, bicycles or cattle, the next step is to understand why some animals (and people) do not find eyes aversive. But already, the evidence is clear that fake eyes can offer a cheap, simple way to mitigate conflict with humans and other animals.

– ref. Why drawing eyes on food packaging could stop seagulls stealing your chips – https://theconversation.com/why-drawing-eyes-on-food-packaging-could-stop-seagulls-stealing-your-chips-278269

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/03/20/why-drawing-eyes-on-food-packaging-could-stop-seagulls-stealing-your-chips-278269/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kurt Sengul, Research fellow, Far-Right Communication, Macquarie University

One Nation’s unprecedented surge in the polls raises important questions about whether a party built on grievance can present coherent policies to voters.

While a Pauline Hanson-led federal government remains highly unlikely, One Nation now sees itself as a viable alternative government.

So what does One Nation stand for? How would the party change the country, if given the chance?

Strong views, light on detail

Since launching in 1997, One Nation has been a party driven by grievance, defined more by what it opposes than by a comprehensive vision for the nation.

As with many far-right populist parties, One Nation has been accused of offering simple solutions to complex economic, social and cultural challenges.

The party has typically relied on its supporters prioritising the party’s values and principles over a developed policy platform. The party believes its key strength is that Australians know where Pauline Hanson stands on the issues that matter to them, such as immigration.

In contrast to what One Nation sees as out-of-touch political elites and unelected “woke” bureaucrats, the party prides itself on a “common sense” approach to policymaking that recognises the needs of “ordinary Australians”.

However, if the party continues to ride high in the polls, it will face mounting pressure from voters, journalists and competing parties to do something it has long avoided – produce detailed policies to address Australia’s complex challenges.

New National Party leader Matt Canavan – whose party faces its greatest threat from One Nation – has accused Hanson of leading a party without substance:

Pauline [Hanson] has been in politics for more than double the time I’ve been, and I struggle to point to a single dam, single road, single hospital, that Pauline has delivered in Australia.

As we move closer to the next federal election, these lines of attack are likely to intensify.

Immigration

When assessing One Nation’s policy positions, immigration is the logical starting point. It is the party’s foundational issue, and frames its responses to many of the major challenges facing Australia, from cost of living pressures and housing affordability, to national security and social cohesion.

Like most far-right parties, One Nation argues most of Australia’s problems can be explained by excessive immigration.

One Nation’s current immigration policy calls for capping visas at 130,000 per year, a reduction of more than 570,000 people from current levels, which it argues would “ease pressure on housing, wages, and infrastructure”. (This is despite experts highlighting serious flaws in the policy).

In addition to cutting net migration, the party has proposed an eight-year waiting period for citizenship and welfare, deporting 75,000 “illegal migrants”, withdrawing from the United Nations Refugee Convention, and “refusing entry to migrants from nations known to foster extremist ideologies that are incompatible with Australian values and way of life”.

Hanson has consistently called for a “Trump-style immigration ban” since 2017, which overwhelmingly targets Muslim-majority countries.

[embedded content]

The Economy and Cost of Living

Economic policy is arguably where One Nation is weakest. The party has faced accusations of flip-flops and about-faces on economic policy issues in the past. Even Hanson concedes the party needs to strengthen its economic pitch.

One Nation’s solution to Australia’s housing affordability and rental crises is to reduce housing demand by cutting immigration. At the same time, it wants to increase supply by banning foreign investment. The party has also proposed allowing Australians to use their superannuation to purchase a home.

Last year, Hanson announced the party planned to slash $90 billion in government spending. One Nation plans to do this through a range of cuts, including abolishing agencies such as the National Indigenous Australians Agency (NIAA) and the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA). It also wants to cut funding for arts and multicultural programs, as well as foreign aid, and withdraw from the UN and World Health Organization. It claims these moves will generate billions in savings.

One Nation has proposed levying royalties on gas producers, introducing income splitting for families to reduce their tax burden. It has also indicated support for flat income taxes.

To address immediate cost of living pressures, the party proposes cutting the fuel excise by 50% for three years, and immediately slashing electricity bills by 20%. However, as with most of One Nation’s policy proposals, there is no detail on how this would be achieved or what it would cost.

First Nations, climate change, education and health

Arguably, the party’s most consistent policy positions have been in areas affecting First Nations people. Hanson and One Nation have persistently opposed agencies and measures aimed at addressing the systematic inequalities faced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. These include native title, the Voice to Parliament, and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ASTIC) and the NIAA.

They are staunch critics of Australia’s climate change policies and renewable energy transition. The party has called for Australia to withdraw from the UN Paris Agreement, reverse its commitment to achieving net zero carbon emissions by 2050, build more coal fired power stations and embrace nuclear energy. It has repeatedly challenged the scientific evidence supporting human-induced climate change, boasting that One Nation “are the only political party to question climate science”.

One Nation is especially light on education and health policy. On education, the party is primarily concerned with ending what it calls “Western, white, gender, guilt shaming” and the “indoctrination of students” classrooms.

Key proposals on health include reducing the gestational limit for abortions, reviewing access to COVID-era medicines on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, and bolstering regional medical services by paying HECS-HELP loans of new doctors in full in exchange for working in regional communities. One Nation are opposed to vaccine mandates and are still pushing for a Royal Commission into the management of the pandemic by state and federal governments.

From grievance to governance

If One Nation wants to position itself as a serious force, a key challenge will be putting together coherent and substantive suite of policy proposals to take to voters. This is critical to shifting from a minor party of grievance to a mainstream political party and, as some have speculated, becoming the party of opposition across state and federal parliaments.

Should it manage to translate its polling spike into seats, One Nation will have an unprecedented opportunity to shape the state and national legislative agenda.

However, without policy details, One Nation risks falling foul of its supporters with on-the-fly decisions, as right-wing populist party Reform UK has recently experienced.

– ref. What does One Nation actually believe in? – https://theconversation.com/what-does-one-nation-actually-believe-in-278406

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/03/20/what-does-one-nation-actually-believe-in-278406/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hannah Graefe, Adjunct Research Fellow, Centre for Alcohol Policy Research, La Trobe University

As the weather starts to cool down and outdoor pools shut, are you thinking of pressing pause on your child’s swimming lessons, or even stopping altogether?

If your child has reached a certain level, has stopped making progress or is no longer enjoying their swimming lessons, you may also be considering pulling the pin.

But just because a child can float – or can even reliably swim some freestyle – they may not yet be water safe.

---

Read more: I’m a drowning prevention researcher – my kid’s school swimming carnival shocked me

---

Many children stop lessons around age 8

National data indicates many children stop swimming lessons around the age of eight.

Common reasons for this include parents assuming adequate competency, conflicting schedules (such as other sport activities), children’s lack of enjoyment/engagement, and financial challenges.

This is an issue. At the same time, Australia is seeing a decline in children’s swimming ability. Recent research suggests many cannot swim 50 metres continuously in a swimming pool – the national expectation of children aged 12.

We also know more broadly that families say they struggle to find the time, transport and money to invest in swimming lessons.

Parents can misjudge childrens’ ability

Studies overseas and in Australia show parents and carers can misjudge how far their children can swim in a pool and their level of water safety knowledge.

For example, our 2026 study showed when parents reported their 10–12-year-old child as an “okay” swimmer, 65% of these children could not swim 50m in a pool. Likewise, 38% of parent-reported “good” swimmers and 21% of “excellent” swimmers could also not swim this distance.

This becomes even more dangerous if applied to a beach, lake or river, which are much more variable and challenging swimming environments.

Most children in Australia learn to swim in a pool. There is a risk of assuming that because they are confident and experienced in a pool, they have the skills and knowledge to stay safe in open water with waves, colder water, tides, rips and other obstacles such as rocks.

Things are confusing

To add to the confusion, the content of swimming programs differs between providers. Similarly, the progress children need to make before moving to the next level in their swimming program also differs between providers.

It’s not mandatory for swimming programs to align with the national benchmarks for swimming and water safety, developed by Royal Life Saving Society Australia.

This makes it difficult for parents/carers to know how their child’s ability aligns with the national expectations of their age group. Without clear guidance, it’s understandable that parents may assume their child can swim in open water if, for example, they’re at the top level in their swimming class.

What do we need?

Ultimately, we need to encourage broader understanding and use of the national benchmarks so all people in Australia know what it means to “know how to swim”.

For all 12-year-olds, this includes being able to swim 50m continuously without stopping or touching the bottom, and being able to float for two minutes. It also includes rescue and survival activities and demonstrating water safety knowledge for a range of environments.

The expectation for those aged 17-plus is that they should be able to swim 400m continuously and float for five minutes.

Specifically we need:

• swimming programs to show how they align with national benchmarks including clear communication of expectations for parents/carers

• swim programs to provide opportunities to swim at beaches, rivers and lakes. This might mean linking pools with lifesaving clubs

• to improve access to these programs for families that struggle with costs and transport. All children should have adequate opportunities to learn how to be safe in the water.

– ref. Some kids stop swimming lessons too early. How well can your child actually swim? – https://theconversation.com/some-kids-stop-swimming-lessons-too-early-how-well-can-your-child-actually-swim-278665

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/03/20/some-kids-stop-swimming-lessons-too-early-how-well-can-your-child-actually-swim-278665/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bhiamie Williamson, Research Fellow in Disaster Resilience, Monash University

Indigenous communities are often the worst hit when major disasters strike. The recent floods across the Northern Territory are a case in point.

Last week, residents in the regional centre of Katherine were either evacuated or sought shelter at relief centres after the worst flooding in 28 years. Meanwhile, the remote Indigenous communities of Wugularr, Jilkminggan, Daly River and Palumpa were evacuated to Darwin. But the support provided to Indigenous communities appears to be different to that available to non-Indigenous residents.

The Northern Land Council has described how remote communities were left behind in the disaster response. And the North Australian Aboriginal Justice Agency has criticised the federal and NT governments for providing unequal support to Aboriginal people affected by the floods.

Today is Close the Gap day, a way for Indigenous Australians to remind governments of the commitments they’ve made to address racism and improve living standards. This must include addressing the inequitable treatment of Indigenous communities in times of disaster.

A widening gap

Tragically, many Indigenous peoples have come to expect discriminatory government responses in the wake of natural disasters. This reality is now widely recognised, with research spotlighting authorities’ inappropriate planning and unsuitable interventions during crises.

Indigenous peoples are over-represented in disaster-prone regions and towns. On average, nearly 15% of residents in impacted local government areas are Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. This is despite the fact Indigenous peoples make up just 3.8% of the Australian population.

The reality of racism means Indigenous communities are often left out, or even left behind, in emergency response. The failed evacuation of Borroloola in 2024, where Indigenous residents were told to go to the local airport to be evacuated only for the plane to not come, is just one example.

This is why the National Agreement on Closing the Gap has a specific clause, Clause 64, which requires local, state and federal governments to engage with Indigenous communities before, during and after disasters.

In our recent analysis, we examined whether governments are on track to meet those commitments. Specifically, we compared the commitments governments made with the practical actions they took.

Worryingly, our findings suggest all Australian governments are failing to close the gap in emergency preparedness. Worse still, there is almost no evidence emergency management agencies are actively working to meet their commitments outlined in the National Agreement.

As Australia braces for more extreme, climate-driven disasters, this gap in emergency support will only get bigger.

Money matters

Recovering from a disaster can be very expensive. And we are failing to support the financial needs of Indigenous communities impacted by major disasters.

We found the structure of most emergency relief payments means Indigenous people usually receive less financial support than non-Indigenous people. Currently, infants and children receive lower payments than adults. Given one in three Indigenous people are younger than 15 years old, this puts the broader Indigenous population at an economic disadvantage, right when they need the most support.

We also analysed how the Australian government distributed its largest disaster management program, the Disaster Ready Fund. This fund was created after the Bushfire Royal Commission in recognition that Australia must put more resources into disaster preparedness. This is because investing in communities before disasters strike reduces recovery costs.

However, out of the nearly A$800 million pledged to strengthen the nation’s disaster resilience, only A$22 million went to Indigenous organisations. That represents only 2.2% of the total fund. And our analysis reveals no Indigenous organisations in any of the regions impacted by the most recent northern Australian floods received funding through the Disaster Ready Fund.

So, where to from here?

The National Agreement on Closing the Gap has already given governments a framework to better support disaster-prone Indigenous communities.

But to hold them to account, Indigenous researchers, organisations and policy leaders have authored the first Indigenous-led review of the National Agreement. This review argues that when governments work collaboratively with Indigenous communities during disasters and pandemics, they achieve positive results.

The Australian Institute for Disaster Resilience’s evacuation guide for Indigenous communities also provides advice to support Indigenous communities during major emergencies.

When governments work respectfully and collaboratively with Indigenous communities positive change can, and often does, follow. So what does this look like in practice? Here are three suggestions.

• building formal partnerships with Indigenous organisations and actively involving them in decision-making processes
• committing $20 million of the Disaster Ready Fund each year to Indigenous organisations to strengthen resilience in remote communities
• requiring all emergency management agencies to report progress towards Clause 64 of the National Agreement to Close the Gap.

As Australians, we know all too well how destructive major disasters can be. And it is clear they have distinct and significant impacts on Indigenous communities. So it’s time the government prioritises their safety, before the next disaster hits.

– ref. Indigenous Australians always come off worst in disasters. This needs to stop – https://theconversation.com/indigenous-australians-always-come-off-worst-in-disasters-this-needs-to-stop-278071

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/03/20/indigenous-australians-always-come-off-worst-in-disasters-this-needs-to-stop-278071/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lauren C. Hall, PhD Candidate in Psychology, University of Tasmania

As countries around the world look to follow Australia’s lead and implement a social media ban for kids, many are also considering fines as an enforcement mechanism.

This is part of the playbook when it comes to regulating big tech. For example, last month the United Kingdom’s data watchdog fined Reddit £14 million (A$26 million) for unlawfully using children’s data.

In April 2025, the European Commission fined Apple and Meta €500 million (A$820 million) and €200 million (A$329 million) respectively for breaching the Digital Markets Act. And in September, the commission fined Google nearly €3 billion (A$4.9 billion) for abusive practices in online advertising technology.

But fines don’t always work to encourage companies to follow the law. For some companies, “illegal with a fine” is interpreted as “legal for a price”. So what are some other, more effective methods to encourage good corporate behaviour?

Fines can backfire

If fines are not consistent, immediate, and severe, they can backfire. If they do, bad behaviour may increase.

For example, a 2000 study examined the effect of childcare centres in Israel introducing fines for parents who regularly picked their children up late. But instead, these fines actually increased late pick-ups by parents.

Even after fines were stopped, the number of late pick-ups stayed higher than before.

Why? Because when there were fines, they were small (not severe), and parents could wait a month to pay (not immediate). However, parents got the immediate benefit of longer childcare.

Similarly, technology companies may decide a fine is cheaper than the costs to make changes, or any loss in money from fewer users and ad sales. And this could lead to them continuing with business-as-usual.

Corporate fines often fail because it may be unclear who in the company is directly responsible. Fines can also sometimes be too small to stop bad behaviour by large companies.

For these reasons, corporate re-offending is frequent, even if companies have been fined in the past.

A fine equals forgiveness

After introducing fines, behaviours previously considered socially or morally unacceptable may also be seen as “forgiven” by payment. This can increase bad behaviour.

The importance of unwanted behaviours may also be judged by the size of the fine.

If fines are seen as “small”, violations may also be seen as small, and bad behaviours may rise. Corporations may also see “small” fines as just a cost-of-doing-business.

Importantly, fine size is closely linked to a company’s financial size. For a small company, a fine could seem huge. The same sized fine may seem tiny to a large company. If similarly sized fines are given to companies making different revenue amounts, the companies may respond differently.

Changing company practices can also cost more for some companies than others. This too may affect how they respond to fines.

Furthermore, companies outside a legislative jurisdiction, or that have refused regulators’ demands in the past, may ignore fines altogether.

For example, 4Chan refused to pay fines issued under the UK’s Online Safety Act, and X decided to legally challenge instead of pay a €120 million (A$197 million) fine issued by the European Commission.

Given the borderless nature of some digital harms such as child sexual exploitation and abuse, coordinated changes to corporate laws, and international cooperation are needed.

Pulling multiple levers at once

So if fines alone don’t stop big tech and other businesses behaving badly, what will?

Research shows monitoring companies, and better resourcing regulators, are more effective than fines alone. Consistent regulator inspections combined with education also work well.

A 2025 paper suggests making “stand-alone consumer tech safety research centres” focused on reducing digital harms. This may require technology companies making data and algorithms available to these centres for inspection.

Then, regulators can look at if companies are using important and best practice safety features. For example, checking the images on sites to make sure users do not see harmful content online.

Regulators can also share knowledge with companies about laws and digital safety measures to improve consumer protections.

This cooperative model has been shown to be more effective than fines alone.

A 2016 study about what works when it comes to corporate deterrence found using multiple levers at the same time, such as monitoring, accountability, auditing, and punitive action were the most effective at stopping bad corporate behaviour.

Unfortunately, understanding the scope of digital harms, and best responses, have been limited by not enough resources, or access to data.

A 2025 paper highlights that increased data transparency from corporations will also improve evidence-informed decisions, ensuring regulation is fit-for-purpose.

As companies continue to prioritise rapid rollouts, with problems found after launch, fines may continue to be ineffective.

To tackle this problem, online regulators must ensure fines are complemented with other policy levers – and that the punishment for bad corporate behaviour is consistent, immediate and severe.

– ref. Fines alone won’t stop big tech behaving badly. Here’s what might work – https://theconversation.com/fines-alone-wont-stop-big-tech-behaving-badly-heres-what-might-work-276969

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/03/20/fines-alone-wont-stop-big-tech-behaving-badly-heres-what-might-work-276969/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Robin Gauld, Executive Dean, Bond Business School, Bond University

Access to public elective services such as hip replacements or cataract surgery has long been inadequate in New Zealand, with extended wait times and exclusion of those not assessed as high priority despite genuine clinical need.

Workforce shortages are adding pressure, and those unable to afford private treatment are increasingly experiencing unmet need, with wide-ranging impacts.

Current government policy intended to reduce public waiting lists by increasing provision through private services has therefore focused attention on the role of the private sector in the healthcare system.

Most recently, a report by the Westpac bank has detailed the growth of the private sector in health and government support for the trend. It positions private funding and provision of services as increasingly valuable, solving healthcare challenges and creating investor opportunities.

The latter may be true. Westpac recommends a public-private partnership model, with the private sector investing in infrastructure (hospitals and clinics), IT systems and digital services.

But if public-private partnerships are to be supported, some fundamental questions need addressing first.

Role of the private sector

In capitalist economies such as New Zealand, there will generally always be a role for the private sector in healthcare.

New Zealand has long had a mixed delivery model, with general practitioners (GPs) largely private and subsidised by government, and parallel public and private hospitals. GPs are the gatekeepers; specialist appointments require their referral.

Many specialists work in both public and private systems and GPs refer to either, with private options depending on the patient’s ability to pay. More than a third of New Zealanders hold voluntary private health insurance; others use their savings.

Emergencies and intensive care are dealt with by public hospitals only. The system is complex and can be difficult to navigate.

Many countries operate a public-private mix and partnerships. Each is different. Australia, for example, has what some consider the world’s best health system.

The mandatory tax-funded Medicare public insurance programme provides support for public and private services. There are also private insurance tax incentives for the better off.

However, Australia performs less well on equitable access to care, and a large for-profit private hospital group failed in 2025, requiring the public sector to step in.

Australia also has a reasonably self-contained private sector. Similar systems are found from the United States to Singapore, which have different mixes as well as access and equity challenges.

Need for clarity on policy

If private infrastructure is to be built up at a rate faster than public, then the government must consider the risk of potential market failures.

This means it needs to be clear about the architecture for a public-private mix, the policy levers it will apply, accountability arrangements and outcomes it expects.

Technology businesses are legendary for failing to deliver. This ranges from large-scale IT project failures such as the SWIFT project at the former Counties Manukau district health board to security lapses such as the recent data breach at Manage My Health. These come at massive taxpayer and system cost.

The same applies to equitable access to private care, patient charges and mounting private insurance costs.

New Zealand has some unique workforce arrangements and backup systems. Determined through a historical political agreement, public support for the private system is significant. This comes through GP subsidies for patients referred to private specialists, staff training through publicly funded tertiary providers, and public emergency and intensive care backup when things go wrong in private.

If political leaders want to facilitate growth in public-private partnerships, they must be clear about how this works and what their expectations are.

There is a need to debate how patients with complications from private treatment are paid for when transferred to the public sector, and whether taxpayers should subsidise GP appointments for those seeking private referral.

With private insurance premiums going up at rates way beyond inflation there may be limited appetite for extending insurance to such patients. Yet this important part of the health economy needs to be factored in.

Ensuring equity of access

The private sector is not self-contained and needs public input. Politicians need to consult on whether there is interest in designing effective public-private partnerships that will not favour the better off and not detract from the public sector.

As the private sector builds up, the public workforce and capacity will be undermined unless more specialists are recruited. Private work is more lucrative than public, and political leaders would be prudent to outline how the balance will be maintained.

Particularly important is attention to overall system architecture, including the funding model. If public-private partnerships are pursued, equity (if valued) requires a guarantee that every citizen has equal access. This means clarity on funding.

Perhaps New Zealand needs to consider extending the accident compensation scheme to cover healthcare, or a funding system similar to Australia’s Medicare or Japan’s insurance funds.

There are many examples New Zealand could draw from to ensure a public-private mix delivers as intended. But we need to know what the intention is. So far, political leaders haven’t delivered a clear plan.

– ref. Shifting more healthcare to the private sector calls for a clear government plan – where is it? – https://theconversation.com/shifting-more-healthcare-to-the-private-sector-calls-for-a-clear-government-plan-where-is-it-278197

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/03/20/shifting-more-healthcare-to-the-private-sector-calls-for-a-clear-government-plan-where-is-it-278197/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Natalie Peng, Lecturer in Accounting, The University of Queensland

If you have ever checked your super balance and wondered whether you are “behind” for your age, you aren’t alone.

To see where you truly sit, you should ignore “averages”, which can be skewed by a small number of very large balances. Instead, we look at the median, which is the middle value. Half of people have more than this amount, and half have less.

Some of us use our balance as a scorecard for how well we are doing at life. But super balances are rarely about how “good” you are with money. They are just a mirror of your working life. They reflect whether you worked full-time, took career breaks, or moved between jobs.

---

It’s easy to put off thinking about superannuation when retirement is years away. In this five-part series, we ask top experts to explain how to sort your super in a few simple steps, avoid greenwashing, and set goals for retirement.

---

When the super gender gap widens

You’ll notice in this table that the gap between men and women is small in their 20s but grows significantly from their 30s.

This is not a coincidence. Australia’s super system was built in the 1990s around the idea of an uninterrupted, full-time career over 40 years. In reality, many women reduce working hours or take parental leave during their careers. This slows their super contributions at exactly the point where long-term growth matters most.

In the super world, a dollar contributed at age 25 is worth far more than a dollar contributed at age 50, because it has more time to grow. Missing those mid-career years does not just mean contributing less. It means losing decades of compounding that cannot easily be replaced later.

Retirement savings are individual, but family decisions are shared

Australia’s super system treats us all as individuals. But most households make financial decisions together.

A couple might jointly decide that one parent will step back from paid work to care for children. Yet the retirement savings impact falls entirely on one person’s account.

The gender gap when people near retirement is clear in the data. Men aged 60 to 64 have a median super balance of $219,773, while women have $163,218.

Moreover, in that age bracket, 23% of women have no super at all, compared with 13% of men.

One way to manage this gender gap in retirement savings is through contribution splitting. This allows some concessional contributions made by the working partner to be transferred into the other partner’s super account. It can help both people maintain retirement savings, even if only one is currently earning an income.

Why playing it safe can be risky

Your super is invested across a mix of asset classes, such as cash, bonds, property and shares, to help it grow.

Most Australians are in a “balanced” option in the MySuper product, which is the default option if you don’t make an investment choice. This mixes higher growth assets like shares with more stable assets such as cash or bonds.

Cash and bonds tend to offer steadier returns in the short term but lower expected growth over longer time frames. Shares are more volatile from year to year but have historically delivered higher long-term returns.

If you are young, playing “safe” can actually be a risk.

With 30 years or more until retirement, a conservative option might protect you from a small dip today, but it stops you from getting the growth you need to live comfortably later. For a 25-year-old, the “roller coaster” of the stock market can turn out to be their best friend in the long run.

Consistency matters

The most powerful tool in your super is compounding. This is just a fancy way of saying you earn money on your money.

Small, regular contributions made early in your career can have a much larger impact than larger contributions made later in life. Adding an extra $20 a week in your 20s may ultimately do more for your retirement balance than adding $100 a week in your 50s, because the earlier contribution has far longer to grow.

One simple move: The 1% rule

You don’t need a complicated plan to boost your super. A great strategy is to “tax yourself” whenever you get a pay rise.

If you get a 3% raise, consider putting 1% into your super. You can do this either through voluntary contribution, or by asking your employer to increase your super contributions through a salary sacrifice arrangement.

The latter option may be an easier way to save for some people, as the extra contribution is automatic – set and forget.

Because this contribution comes from pre-tax income, you won’t feel the difference in your take-home pay, but because that money goes in before you see it, your “snowball” starts growing much faster without you having to change your lifestyle.

Your super balance is shaped as much by timing and life choices as by income. You cannot control every career break or life decision. But you can control whether small amounts go in early and consistently. The sooner your money starts working, the less you will have to.

Disclaimer: This article provides general information only and is not intended as financial advice.

– ref. How does your super balance compare to other people your age? – https://theconversation.com/how-does-your-super-balance-compare-to-other-people-your-age-276370

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/03/20/how-does-your-super-balance-compare-to-other-people-your-age-276370/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Allen Cheng, Professor of Infectious Diseases, Monash University

Many kids are scared of getting needles, and this can stop them getting vaccinations that protect that against the flu. Less than one in four Australian children were vaccinated against influenza in 2025.

This winter, Australian families have another option. A nasal flu vaccine called FluMist will be available for the first time for children aged 2–17 years.

FluMist is a needle-free alternative to the existing influenza vaccines. Nasal flu vaccines are widely used in the United Kingdom, Europe, Canada and the United States.

Recent studies in which both injectable and nasal flu vaccines are available suggest parents prefer a nasal vaccine, particularly when they’re hesitant about vaccination. As such, the nasal option could increase vaccination coverage in Australia and reduce the spread of flu, not only in children but potentially in the wider community.

FluMist will be free in some states and territories for certain age groups. It will also be available for a fee at selected pharmacies and immunisation providers.

Here’s what you need to know about how FluMist works, how effective it is, and whether your child is eligible.

What’s different about this vaccine?

Current vaccines used in Australia are all injected. They contain specific components of the influenza virus that are not capable of replicating.

FluMist is different. It contains a weakened “live” form of the flu strain. These types of vaccines are known as live attenuated vaccines. Other examples include MMR (measles, mumps, rubella), chickenpox and rotavirus vaccines.

With FluMist, six of the eight genetic segments in influenza virus are altered so they cannot replicate efficiently at normal body temperature. This means the virus only replicates in the nose (which is at a lower temperature), rather than deeper inside the body.

How do nasal sprays work? Are they more effective?

To give FluMist, a health professional sprays one dose of 0.1ml of the vaccine in each nostril. It is simple, painless and very well tolerated by children, even the very young.

Unlike injected vaccines, nasal vaccines trigger protective immune responses where influenza viruses enter the body – on the surface of the upper respiratory tract (the mucosa) including the nose and throat. So in theory, nasal sprays should work better than injections.

Early studies in the late 1990s suggested the vaccine provided very good protection against influenza in children – and might even provide some protection against influenza strains not contained in the vaccine.

However, in practice, data from subsequent studies suggests the live vaccine probably provides similar protection to the current injectable vaccines.

In the US, there was also an issue in the mid-2010s where the live attenuated vaccine (given as a nasal spray) was not as effective as the injected vaccines. This led to the recommendation for its use being withdrawn from 2016 until 2018.

As a result, changes were made to the process of selecting vaccine strains.

Data from more recent seasons shows nasal spray vaccines are now just as effective as injected vaccines. Both reduce influenza infection by 40–60%.

How safe is the nasal flu vaccine?

The vaccine is safe, with mostly similar side effects to the injected influenza vaccine.

The nasal flu vaccine has been used in the US since 2003, Canada since 2010, and Europe since 2011. The UK has had a national childhood program using the nasal vaccine since 2013.

A proportion of people may have side effects, but these are mild and transient. Over half of children will have a blocked or runny nose, and around one in ten have a fever or headache.

Those who are severely immunosuppressed (have a weakened immune system) or regularly take aspirin should not use FluMist.

If your child is mildly immunosuppressed, has severe asthma or another lung disease, speak to your GP or specialist about the vaccine. Adolescents who are pregnant should also seek medical advice.

What are the potential benefits?

The main benefit of a nasal vaccine is improving coverage in an age group where fear of needles stop children getting vaccinated and in settings where needles are a logistical hurdle.

The UK introduced a school-based vaccine program in 2013. This had an immediate impact on vaccine coverage, which had been very low before 2013. Now, around half of children there receive an annual influenza vaccine.

We know vaccinated children are less likely to fall sick and to take time off school. And evidence also suggests vaccinating this age group can reduce transmission of influenza in the community, thereby protecting others.

In the UK, studies suggest the introduction of influenza vaccines for school-aged children reduced GP presentations with influenza in all age groups.

Reducing influenza community transmission is expected to result in fewer influenza cases, lower health-care costs, and reduced pressure on hospital and health providers.

So, who can get the nasal flu vaccine?

In 2026, FluMist will be one of several influenza vaccines available in Australia. But funding arrangements vary across states and territories, affecting who is eligible for a free vaccine. Others will need to pay around $50–70.

From early April, the nasal vaccine will be available in:

• New South Wales and South Australia as state-funded programs (free) for children aged 2–4 (inclusive) and available on the private market (for around $50–70) for 5–17-year-olds

• Queensland as a state-funded program for 2–5-year-olds and privately for those aged 6–17 years

• Western Australia as a state-funded program for 2–11-year-olds (inclusive), and on the private market for those aged 12–17 years

• the Australian Capital Territory, Northern Territory, Tasmania and Victoria on the private market for 2–17 year olds.

The nasal vaccine is currently only registered in Australia for children.

– ref. What is Flumist, the new flu vaccine for kids that’s sprayed in their noses? – https://theconversation.com/what-is-flumist-the-new-flu-vaccine-for-kids-thats-sprayed-in-their-noses-273111

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/03/20/what-is-flumist-the-new-flu-vaccine-for-kids-thats-sprayed-in-their-noses-273111/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrew Garin, Associate Professor of Economics, Carnegie Mellon University

If you’ve ever ordered food through DoorDash, Uber Eats or Instacart, you may have realized the person who delivers it isn’t a salaried employee. They’re gig workers – independent contractors who pick up delivery tasks through an app, get paid per delivery and have no guaranteed hours, benefits or minimum wage protections.

Policymakers in several cities have tried to change that.

Seattle is a good example. In January 2024, the city implemented a law requiring delivery apps to pay drivers a minimum rate for each task: a combination of per-minute and per-mile minimum compensation that set a floor of US$5 per delivery.

The goal was straightforward: ensure that the people bringing you your lunch earn a decent living.

We are labor economists who have extensively studied the emergence of the gig economy and previous policy efforts designed to provide economic security to workers in unstable employment situations. We wanted to know how new gig economy regulations like the one in Seattle were playing out in practice.

When we studied what happened to delivery drivers’ earnings after Seattle’s payment rule took effect, we found that despite base pay per delivery roughly doubling, their total monthly earnings barely changed. That’s because competition among drivers for delivery tasks intensified while customers made fewer orders and tipped less on each order in the aftermath. Those effects combined washed out almost all of the intended gains.

No change in monthly earnings

To understand the policy’s effects, we used detailed data from Gridwise, an app that gig workers use to track their earnings across multiple delivery and ride-sharing platforms. This gave us an unusually complete view of how much the drivers were earning across all of the apps and platforms they were using.

We compared what happened to the earnings of drivers who were primarily working in Seattle before the law took effect with the earning of drivers working in other parts of Washington state, where nothing had changed. By tracking both groups over the months before and after the policy, we isolated the policy’s impact from broader trends affecting all drivers.

Base pay per delivery in Seattle jumped from about $5 to over $12, as intended. But base pay is only part of the picture. Tips typically make up most of a platform delivery driver’s income, since customers generally tip 10% to 20% of the cost of their meals.

After the law took effect, tips fell sharply. Delivery apps passed higher costs on to consumers through new fees. DoorDash added a roughly $5 “regulatory response fee” to Seattle orders, and customers responded by tipping less.

Some platforms went further: Uber Eats removed the option for Seattle customers to tip at checkout. The drop in tips offset more than one-third of the base pay increase.

The other major change was that drivers started completing fewer deliveries.

Beginning in the second month after the policy took effect, Seattle drivers who had been consistently active on the apps prior to the change completed roughly 20% to 30% fewer monthly deliveries than they would have without the policy.

Importantly, these drivers didn’t leave the apps. They were still logging on and spending about the same amount of time working. They just weren’t getting as many delivery offers.

What were drivers doing with all that extra time on the app? Our data shows they were spending more of it waiting.

The share of on-app time spent actually performing paid deliveries fell substantially. Wait times between tasks increased by about five minutes, nearly doubling from pre-policy levels. And drivers went farther between deliveries – suggesting they were actively cruising toward restaurant-dense areas to find their next task, burning more gas without being paid for those extra miles they were logging.

Put those pieces together – higher pay per delivery, but fewer deliveries and lower tips – and they almost exactly cancel out. After a brief bump in the first month, monthly earnings returned to pre-policy levels.

Why gig markets are different

To understand why this happened, it helps to think about how gig delivery markets differ from traditional employment.

In a conventional job, raising the minimum wage creates a clear divide: Workers who keep their jobs earn more, while others may struggle to find work if their employers cut jobs.

But in gig delivery, there’s no such divide. There’s no hiring or firing involved; anyone can download the app and start looking for work. Delivery tasks are distributed among everyone who is online, and there’s no sharp boundary between having a job and not having one.

When what drivers get paid per delivery rises, gig work becomes more attractive, drawing new drivers into the market. Meanwhile, higher costs to pay drivers are passed along to consumers through increased delivery prices, which can lead to fewer orders and lower tips. More drivers chasing fewer deliveries means longer waits for tasks.

This process continues until the higher pay per task is fully offset by the longer gaps between paid work.

Our data confirms this pattern.

While deliveries by existing drivers fell sharply in Seattle, new entrants arrived. Within three months, newcomers were doing most of Seattle’s deliveries.

What this means going forward

To be sure, gig workers’ low pay is a real problem. The impulse behind Seattle’s law reflects legitimate concerns.

But our findings do suggest that efforts to directly regulate what gig workers earn per task they complete won’t easily fix that problem.

As long as anyone can join the platform and start competing for deliveries, the guarantee of higher pay per task will attract more drivers until the benefit is competed away through longer wait times.

Other cities and states are choosing this route

Actually raising earnings might require limiting the number of active drivers – something like the taxi medallion systems some cities once used to ensure high driver pay.

But entry barriers undermine the flexibility that draws many people to gig work in the first place. And platform behavior matters too: If apps eventually restore normal tipping features rather than strategically discouraging tips, which New York City and some other jurisdictions are now requiring, the picture for drivers could improve somewhat.

Still, there may not be a solution that preserves all the benefits of the current system while also guaranteeing higher pay.

Nevertheless, several cities across the country are considering similar regulations.

New York City implemented its own minimum pay rate for delivery workers in late 2023. City councils and state lawmakers in Chicago, Colorado, Minnesota and elsewhere have proposed similar protections.

Seattle’s experience suggests all cities should proceed with caution and be aware of the limits of what per-task pay regulations can achieve when the door is always open to new workers.

– ref. Seattle tried to guarantee higher pay for delivery drivers – here’s why it didn’t work as intended – https://theconversation.com/seattle-tried-to-guarantee-higher-pay-for-delivery-drivers-heres-why-it-didnt-work-as-intended-276576

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/03/20/seattle-tried-to-guarantee-higher-pay-for-delivery-drivers-heres-why-it-didnt-work-as-intended-276576/

SPECIAL REPORT: Reporters Without Borders

Since the Solomon Islands established diplomatic relations with China in 2019, the Pacific country has become a strategic arena for Beijing’s influence.

By capitalising on the economic fragility of the local media sector, China has stepped up conditional funding, editorial partnerships and influence programmes to disseminate its narratives.

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) calls on the Solomon Islands’ government to make the viability and independence of the media sector a priority.

One day in January 2024, Lloyd Loji, publisher of the Island Sun, one of the country’s leading dailies, reportedly received a call from a Chinese diplomat.

According to the investigative outlet In-depth Solomons, the diplomat expressed the embassy’s “concern” about an op-ed published that same day on the election of the new president of Taiwan and its implications for relations between China and Western countries.

At the end of the call, the Chinese diplomat explicitly asked the newspaper to relay articles he had sent, reflecting Beijing’s official position on regional affairs.

The Chinese diplomat did not stop at interfering in the editorial line of the Island Sun.

In-depth Solomons reports that he also emailed the owners and editors of the country’s main media outlets, urging them to adopt the Chinese narrative on the Taiwanese elections and sharing two articles he asked them to publish.

The Solomon Star, the other major daily of the Solomon Islands, duly published the articles supplied by the Chinese embassy. Both the Solomon Star and Island Sun depend on Chinese funding as the country’s media landscape is facing structural economic difficulties.

Economic precarity as Beijing’s gateway
With fewer than 700,000 inhabitants and a limited advertising market — which is increasingly dominated by social media companies — news organisations in this nation face structural economic hardship.

These vulnerabilities deepened during the covid-19 pandemic and the collapse of traditional press revenues which mostly consist of advertising, making external funding essential to survival, whether from Australia, China or the United States.

Unlike support from other foreign partners, Chinese assistance often comes with editorial conditions.

After 15 years as a journalist in the Solomon Islands, Priestley Habru — now a PhD candidate at the University of Adelaide — told RSF about the demands made by the Chinese embassy to Island Sun after he left the outlet. According to his network, after the diplomatic mission donated computers, the newsroom was instructed to “stop publishing articles on Taiwan’s President.”

An investigation by the Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP), an international investigative journalism network, also revealed that in 2022 the Solomon Star sought SI$1.15 million (about US$140,000) from China to modernise its infrastructure, pledging in return to promote Beijing’s image as the islands’ “most generous and trustworthy” partner.

Following revelations about attempts by Chinese diplomats to directly interfere with the Island Sun and the country’s leading media outlets in early 2024, Beijing appears to have adopted a more discreet approach.

Ofani Eremae, president of the Media Association of Solomon Islands (MASI), explained to RSF that several local outlets have signed agreements with Chinese state media to use the state media’s content — which is fully controlled by the Chinese authorities — free of charge.

In early 2026, CCTV+, China’s state-owned international video news service, also offered MASI and In-depth Solomons use of its raw video footage and live broadcast signals free of charge, and invited them to sign cooperation agreements. Both In-depth Solomons and MASI have not yet responded to the proposal.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/03/20/chinas-growing-grip-on-the-fragile-solomon-islands-media-sector/

The Labor government has told the Senate that Australian charities don’t have to comply with international law, nor will they be compelled. Michael West Media reports.

SPECIAL REPORT: By Stephanie Tran

The Albanese government has rejected a proposal to strip tax-deductible status from Australian charities found to be supporting illegal occupations, amid mounting scrutiny over donations flowing to Israeli settlements and the Israel Defense Forces (IDF).

Michael West Media has identified 5 charities either sending money to the IDF or to parties associated with illegal West Bank settlements in Occupied Palestine.

The proposed amendment, introduced by Greens Senator Mehreen Faruqi, would explicitly bar organisations from receiving deductible gift recipient (DGR) status if they are found to have supported an “illegal occupation”.

“The fact that people are sending money to support the war crimes of the Israeli military and to expand illegal, violent settlements in the West Bank is bad enough, but that Australian taxpayers are subsidising these settlements is completely outrageous,” Faruqi said.

“Supporting these heinous crimes deserves investigation, not a tax deduction.”

The amendment, circulated in the Senate as part of the Treasury Laws Amendment (Supporting Choice in Superannuation and Other Measures) Bill 2025, would insert a new provision into the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 denying DGR endorsement to any entity that has “advocated, prepared, planned, assisted in, financed, fostered, supported … or contributed to the establishment, maintenance or expansion of the illegal occupation”.

It would also empower the foreign affairs minister to formally declare what constitutes an “illegal occupation” for the purposes of the law.

Charities funding illegal settlements
This year, MWM released a series of investigations revealing that Australian charities are funnelling tax-deductible donations to projects linked to Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, which are illegal under international law, as well as to initiatives supporting IDF soldiers.

In the Senate debate on the amendment, Greens Senator Penny Allman-Payne cited the findings of the MWM investigations.

She highlighted figures showing that Jewish National Fund Australia had remitted more than $125 million to Israel since 2009, while the United Israel Appeal Refugee Relief Fund had transferred approximately $376 million since 2013 via Keren Hayesod, with a portion of these funds used for settlement expansion and IDF-linked programmes.

Allman-Payne also referenced the activities of the Chai Charitable Foundation, which earlier this year hosted fundraisers for organisations providing direct support to IDF soldiers and settlement communities, including in Tekoa and Hebron, before removing the campaigns following questioning by MWM.

“It is obviously of significant concern if there are charitable organisations in Australia that are funnelling funds to illegal occupiers and illegal settlements,” Allman-Payne told the Senate.

She noted that the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission (ACNC) had received 896 complaints relating to 88 charities in connection with the Israel-Gaza conflict between October 2023 and December 2025.

“Given that these donations are tax-deductible . . .  that effectively means taxpayers are subsidising illegal occupation and militarisation,” she said.

Government rejects amendment
In response, Finance Minister Katy Gallagher stated that the government would not support the Greens amendment, arguing that existing regulatory frameworks already prohibit unlawful conduct by charities.

“There is no DGR category or purpose that allows charities to support illegal activities at home or abroad,” Gallagher said.

She pointed to the ACNC’s governance standards, which require charities to operate lawfully and remain accountable, as well as external conduct standards governing overseas activities.

However, Gallagher acknowledged a key limitation: those standards require compliance with Australian law, but

do not extend to conduct under international law.

Charities operating overseas must take “reasonable steps” to ensure proper governance and compliance with Australian legal obligations, including sanctions, anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing laws, she said.

Organisations found to be in breach risk losing their charitable registration, which can in turn lead to the loss of DGR status.

Referral for investigation
Gallagher suggested that concerns about specific organisations should be referred to the ACNC for investigation.

Faruqi said the government’s position amounted to wilful inaction.

“The Labor government clearly wants to keep its head in the sand and is looking the other way while this happens,” she said.

“This is just another example of the government’s complicity in the ethnic cleansing of Palestine.

“It is two-faced for the Government to say it supports a Palestinian state while effectively subsidising its destruction.”

Minister Gallagher and Andrew Leigh (Assistant Minister for Productivity, Competition, Charities and Treasury) were contacted for comment.

Regulatory obligations
A spokesperson from Leigh’s office provided the following response:

“The government expects all registered charities to meet their regulatory obligations and to obey all Australian laws. This is a condition of maintaining charitable status.

“The ACNC is the independent regulator of charities and complaints involving conduct that could harm people or involving the misuse of a charity for terrorism purposes or to foster extremism are a compliance priority for the ACNC.

“The ACNC already has powers to revoke the charitable status of charities involved in serious illegal activity.”

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/03/20/australian-charities-funding-israels-illegal-settlements-untouchable-says-labor-govt/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

When he talks about the May 12 budget, Treasurer Jim Chalmers always stresses that what’s done on things like the capital gains tax discount will be a matter for cabinet.

It would be more accurate to say the fate of controversial proposals will depend on where Anthony Albanese is willing to land.

Budget preparation, on which cabinet’s expenditure review committee is working, has been transformed by the ever worsening Middle East war.

The fuel shortages, particularly of diesel, will drag at the economy. The federal government on Thursday appointed a fuel coordinator, and national cabinet was briefed on the crisis. Chalmers has released modelling showing Australia’s inflation rate could hit 5% this year.

This week’s interest rate rise (driven by factors predating the war) combined with higher petrol prices will worsen the mood of disgruntled voters who were already in a cost-of-living squeeze.

As Chalmers said on Thursday, the Middle East conflict will now be “a defining influence” on the budget, given its effect on global growth and inflation and the flow through to Australia.

The uncertainty is making it much harder than usual to predict the budget’s moving parts. But Chalmers is trying to do a lot more than just produce a budget to manage extremely difficult times. He is attempting to use this budget to make his mark as an agent of change.

It’s the first budget of the term, and Labor has a massive majority; there should be never a better time for the government (read Albanese) to embrace boldness – unless the PM becomes spooked by the war crisis.

In a speech this week setting the scene for the budget, Chalmers talked a big game – and, by doing so, made himself a hostage. If the budget is judged to be a damp squib, the expectations he’s raised will come back to bite him.

Chalmers says the budget will contain three packages: on savings; productivity and investment; and taxation.

“If the main constraint we are collectively facing is capacity, these packages will help expand it,” he said.

“More savings to make even more room for the private sector to grow, while building fiscal buffers.

“Productivity enhancing reforms to boost supply, generate higher living standards and unlock more investment in the process, to help the economy grow without adding to price pressures.

“And tax reform to drive more productive investment, while supporting budget sustainability and equity, and helping to rebalance the system.”

With the debate raging about the role of government spending in fuelling inflation, Chalmers held out the prospect of “substantial” savings in the budget.

As it feared (without cause, it turned out) being pushed into minority at the election, the government threw a lot of money around, which has made containing spending more challenging and painful.

The pursuit of savings is further complicated by the unavoidable need for extra spending on defence.

If Chalmers is serious about budget repair, the government has to avoid giving in to the inevitable pressure for more cost-of-living relief which will only grow as many families’ budgets become further stretched.

On productivity, Chalmers says he is looking to “attracting and absorbing investment, making it easier to build and build faster, and cutting compliance costs where we can”.

Admirable objectives (which Chalmers would say he has been pursuing already) but, on the evidence, slow to advance in practice. Boosting productivity depends on many other players than the federal government, not least employers and unions, and on factors such as how fast and effective the take up of AI will be.

For those judging Chalmers’ “reform” credentials, the sharpest eyes will be on the budget’s tax changes.

Chalmers says his tax reform will be guided by three principles: promoting intergenerational equity, encouraging productive business investment, “if we can afford to”, and making the system “simpler and more sustainable”.

He has all but confirmed the capital gains tax discount will be pared back, which will be sold as a measure to help first home owners into the housing market.

A Senate inquiry, tabled this week, with a Labor/Greens/independent majority, found the discount, combined with negative gearing, “skewed the ownership of housing away from owner-occupiers and towards investors”.

---

Read more: Capital gains tax discount ‘skewed’ housing towards investors: Senate inquiry

---

The budget could take various options in curbing the 50% discount. One would be to refashion it towards new builds. Reining in the discount raises the issue of grandfathering, to soften the changes, which has its own options.

Cutting back the discount would have an indirect effect on negative gearing, which Chalmers has always been interested in tackling. But would Albanese be willing to go that far, for example by capping the number of properties an investor could negatively gear?

That is said to be potentially on the table but technical issues would need to be solved. Some government sources point out it would be harder to sell than the capital gains tax change because, although a relatively small number of people negatively gear (1.1 million taxpayers negatively geared properties on the latest available figures), there is a public perception it is widespread and many people aspire to buy investment properties.

Consideration of the tax arrangements for trusts is also likely part of the budget discussions.

In the 1980s and 1990s, governments cast their tax reforms in terms of very wide sets of measures with trade offs. This government’s current thinking appears inclined to a more targeted approach, with its present consideration focused on the tax treatment of assets.

It can counter criticism this is too limited by noting it has income tax cuts in the pipeline.

In his own economic speech this week, Albanese highlighted another contrast with the 1980s and 1990s.

Pointing to Australia’s vulnerabilities as the last link in the global supply chain, Albanese said it had a been different world when Hawke and Keating’s “great reforms” opened up the Australian economy – a more stable world with trade barriers coming down and strong regional growth.

“We cannot wait around hoping for those days to return”, he said.

In the new world, Australia had to “upgrade to a new economic model”. “We have to build an economy that is more resilient, more self-reliant and geared to our national strengths,” he said. “This is about making more things here.”

As the Middle East crisis buffets Australia, like it is doing to so many countries, Chalmers remains determined to see a bright side (a reminder of the old line about never wasting a good crisis). “All this economic uncertainty and volatility is a reason for more reform, not less. It’s a reason to go further, not slower,” he said.

– ref. Grattan on Friday: Chalmers is trying to make economic uncertainty a springboard for reform – https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-chalmers-is-trying-to-make-economic-uncertainty-a-springboard-for-reform-278186

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/03/19/grattan-on-friday-chalmers-is-trying-to-make-economic-uncertainty-a-springboard-for-reform-278186/