Category: MIL-OSI

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Guy C. Charlton, Associate Professor, University of New England

With a general election looming, the largest shake-up of New Zealand’s local government system in three decades sits on the table.

New Zealanders are being invited to have their say on the draft policy proposal, Simplifying Local Government, which would fundamentally reshape how councils operate.

The government’s case for reform is that the status quo is inefficient, confusing to voters and “tangled in duplication, disagreements and decisions that don’t make sense”.

It argues these problems will only intensify as councils take on new responsibilities, from resource management reform to water services and climate adaptation. Its proposed solution: removing an entire tier of elected local government.

While reform may well be overdue, the proposal raises crucial questions about democratic representation, accountability and how regional decisions should be made.

These issues sit at the heart of the consultation – and they matter as much as the promise of efficiency or lower costs.

How the proposed changes would work

The proposal would abolish regional councils and replace them with combined territorial boards made up of locally elected mayors. Voters would elect only one set of local representatives, rather than both territorial and regional councillors.

The new boards would take on the legal responsibilities of existing regional councils, while much of the regional bureaucracy would remain. Mayors on the boards would not have equal voting power; instead, votes would be weighted by population, with adjustments set by the Local Government Commission.

The proposal also allows – though not as a preferred option – for a Crown Commissioner to be appointed to a territorial boards. Depending on the circumstances, that commissioner could have no vote, a veto, or more than half of the weighted votes, to ensure national interests are taken into account.

The boards’ primary task would be to prepare a regional reorganisation plan within two years of establishment.

These plans would aim to encourage cooperation between councils to reduce costs, improve efficiency and deliver services better aligned with regional needs, while safeguarding local voices. They would also examine whether combined councils or alternative regional entities could deliver services more effectively.

Importantly, the plans would consider how local government works with post-settlement governance entities in relation to Treaty of Waitangi settlements.

They would be guided by a central government review of council functions, assessing whether some responsibilities should be reallocated to other agencies, delivered through different models, or removed where national consistency is required.

Once completed, each plan would be assessed against national priorities, financial viability, service quality, governance and treaty obligations. The outcome could range from retaining the territorial board to modifying or dissolving it, depending on the region.

Where the plan falls short

There is little question that New Zealand’s local government system is no longer serving the needs of communities.

The sector is awash in paperwork, rates have increased, services reduced and it seems unable to deal with a multitude of problems that surfaced during the pandemic.

To this extent, the draft proposal, with its focus on shared efficiencies, reducing the number of local institutions and attempting to reinvigorate local democracy, is welcome. But it comes with significant shortcomings.

First, it does not require a prior assessment of national legislation and policy that shapes – and often constrains – local government functions. Many of the costs and inefficiencies councils face stem from nationally imposed mandates.

Reforming governance structures without examining these obligations risks entrenching, or even worsening, existing problems.

Moreover, the proposal does not consider the Local Government Act 2002, which imposes significant procedural and substantive obligations on councils that could be directly affected by legislative reform and any resulting reorganisation plan.

Second, eliminating regional councils before undertaking a comprehensive review of service delivery may exacerbate existing problems rather than resolve them.

Simply removing elected regional councillors while awaiting a central government review of service delivery is unlikely to resolve pressing local problems or uncover issues not already well known to local officials.

Will voter turnout improve?

The government also presumes, without clear evidence, that regional councillors are a major contributor to local government problems. Even under the plan, local government would still face too many nationally imposed obligations and too little funding to operate effectively.

Instead, the new boards have potential to increase parochial non-regional decision-making and create legitimacy issues due to how votes are allocated.

Nor is there much reason to think that restructuring councils in this way would lead to higher voter turnout in local elections. Given New Zealand voters routinely navigate the complexities of MMP, it is unconvincing to attribute low turnout to voter confusion.

A more plausible explanation lies in the growing centralisation of policy making by successive governments – a trend that won’t change under this proposal.

Lastly, by removing regional constituencies, the proposal effectively eliminates the possibility of Māori constituencies at the regional level. Given the likely outcome of more centralised local government, this change would remove an important mechanism for Māori representation and participation as treaty partners.

Retaining the option of Māori wards and constituencies is crucial to reflecting local aspirations, supporting reconciliation and ensuring meaningful involvement in regional decision making.

With changes of this scale on the table, the consultation now underway deserves careful scrutiny of what might be simplified, but also what could be lost.

Guy C. Charlton does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. A major overhaul of NZ’s local government is underway – will it really fix what’s broken? – https://theconversation.com/a-major-overhaul-of-nzs-local-government-is-underway-will-it-really-fix-whats-broken-272424

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/01/26/a-major-overhaul-of-nzs-local-government-is-underway-will-it-really-fix-whats-broken-272424/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Serena Love, Honorary Research Fellow in Archaeology, The University of Queensland

In ancient Egypt, what was the Sphinx all about? – Effie, age 8, New Plymouth, New Zealand.

One of the most mysterious and iconic monuments of ancient Egypt is the Great Sphinx of Giza.

You’ve probably seen pictures of it — a huge statue with a lion’s body and a human head, sitting proudly near the Great Pyramids.

But what is the Sphinx? Why was it built? And what does it mean?

What is the Sphinx?

The Great Sphinx is a giant stone statue carved from the limestone bedrock.

It lies on the Giza plateau, on the west bank of the Nile River, near Cairo in Egypt.

The Sphinx is enormous — about 73 metres long (that’s longer than a football field!) and 20 metres tall, roughly the height of a five-story building.

It was carved around 4,500 years ago during the time of the Old Kingdom, the earliest days of ancient Egyptian civilisation.

The word “sphinx” itself comes from ancient Greek, but the Egyptians had another name for it.

They called it “shesep-ankh”, which means “living image”.

This name gives us a clue to what the statue meant to the people who built it. They saw the Sphinx as a living symbol of something powerful and divine.

The face of a pharaoh

If you look closely at the Sphinx, you’ll notice its face looks human.

Most Egyptian experts believe the face was carved to look like a real person — a pharaoh named Khafre. But there is some strong evidence to suggest it might have been started by his father, Khufu.

Pharaohs were the rulers of Egypt, considered half-human and half-god. They built great monuments to show their power and to help their souls live forever in the afterlife.

Pharaoh Khafre built the second of the three pyramids at Giza.

The Sphinx sits right next to his pyramid complex, which makes many historians think it was built to watch over his tomb.

The Sphinx, then, may show the pharaoh as a guardian — strong like a lion, but wise and godlike like a human.

The body of a lion

The body of the Sphinx is that of a lion, an animal the Egyptians admired for its strength and courage.

Lions were seen as protectors and symbols of power. They watched over sacred places, palaces, and tombs. So, when the ancient sculptors shaped the Sphinx from bedrock, they combined the mind of a pharaoh with the strength and power of a lion.

This mixture created a super powerful guardian creature — one that could protect Egypt and its kings for eternity.

Guardian of the horizon

Some ancient texts call the Sphinx “Hor-em-akhet”, which means “Horus of the Horizon”.

Horus was one of the most important gods in Egypt, often shown as a falcon who ruled the sky. Calling the Sphinx “Horus of the Horizon” suggests it was seen as an image of the rising sun — a divine protector connected to light, kingship, and rebirth.

If you stand in front of the Sphinx at sunrise, you can see how it faces directly east, toward the rising sun. This was likely no accident.

Ancient Egyptians carefully aligned their temples and monuments with the stars and the sun because they believed these heavenly bodies connected their world to the gods.

The Sphinx was part of a sacred plan linking earth, sky, and eternity.

The changing Sphinx

Over thousands of years, wind and sand have changed the way the Sphinx looks.

Its nose and beard are missing, parts of its headdress are damaged, and its body has been worn down by the desert.

But pieces of the Sphinx’s beard have been found and are now in museums. Some even say the statue was once brightly painted — red on the face, blue and yellow on the headdress.

Many Egyptians and travellers continued to visit and protect the Sphinx long after it was built. Pharaohs and priests repaired it many times.

One famous story tells how a young prince named Thutmose IV took a nap in front of the buried Sphinx, which had been buried up to the neck by drifting desert sands. In a dream, the Sphinx spoke to him, promising that if he cleared away the sand and restored the statue, he would one day be king.

The prince did as he was told — and he did become pharaoh! To honour the Sphinx, he placed a large stone tablet, or “stela”, between its paws. That inscription still stands there today.

A symbol of mystery

Even after all this time, the Sphinx keeps many secrets. We still don’t know exactly how long it took to carve, why its features were chosen, or if we have interpreted the symbolism correctly.

Some legends say the Sphinx guards a hidden chamber or treasures buried beneath it. Archaeologists haven’t found a treasure room, but modern scans have revealed small cavities and tunnels inside the bedrock — proof that the Sphinx still has more stories to tell.

Today, people travel from all over the world to see the Sphinx. It teaches a powerful lesson: even thousands of years ago, people were dreamers, builders, and artists. They asked big questions about life, death, and eternity — just like we do today.

Serena Love does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Curious Kids: in ancient Egypt, what was the Sphinx all about? – https://theconversation.com/curious-kids-in-ancient-egypt-what-was-the-sphinx-all-about-268182

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/01/26/curious-kids-in-ancient-egypt-what-was-the-sphinx-all-about-268182/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Wendy Scaife, Adjunct Associate Professor and Director, Australian Centre for Philanthropy and Nonprofit Studies, Queensland University of Technology

Few people globally have influenced business, sport, the environment and philanthropy like Patagonia founder Yvon Chouinard.

Chouinard’s inventive approach across these spheres makes the recent biography Dirtbag Billionaire by The New York Times journalist David Gelles an intriguing read.

---

Review: Dirtbag Billionaire: How Yvon Chouinard Built Patagonia, Made a Fortune, and Gave It All Away – David Gelles (Text Publishing)

---

The anti-authoritarian entrepreneur started out making basic rock-climbing equipment. He then built a business reputation based on ethical commerce, and eventually gave away his company, promising all profits to fighting the climate crisis.

From an Australian perspective, there are lessons to learn given growing environmental and climate concerns, while both corporate giving and corporate distrust have surged in the past decade.

The wild early years

Chouinard prefers the “dirtbag” label to that of businessman or billionaire. It’s a reference from his 1960s lifestyle, a term for someone who sleeps rough, roams widely and disdains material possessions.

As a young climber chasing adventures with friends on rock faces, rivers and waves, Chouinard lived frugally. He ate cat food, squirrels and porcupines.

In these years, inventive Chouinard revolutionised climbing. Using a junkyard forge, he hand-crafted innovative, reusable, softer metal spikes to drive into rock faces. At first selling from his car boot, he built up a US and international customer base.

But, faithful to his environmental values, Chouinard then risked the company by ditching his original top-selling metal spike that damaged rock faces for one that did less harm to the cliff face.

Along the way he employed many fellow climbing, surfing and kayaking enthusiasts, prioritising employee wellbeing and engagement in the business. This was decades before employees were seen as a stakeholder, or internal culture was considered important in a business.

A clash of values

However, with the success of his Patagonia clothing business formed in 1973, Chouinard the conservationist had entered a highly capitalistic sector. The retail market was based on trend-driven overconsumption and exploitative labour and environmental practices.

His quest to do capitalism differently is instructive.

Despite higher costs, Chouinard moved the company into organic cotton use and encouraged regenerative topsoil practices. The principled actions built customer trust and loyalty.

His approach also inspired others who saw decisions that put environmental considerations above profit were good business all round.

As Patagonia grew into a billion-dollar company, he maintained a policy of donating 1% of sales (not just profit) to the environment, no matter how tight the times.

Chouinard co-established 1% for the Planet in 2001 as an accrediting body to encourage companies worldwide to donate 1% of their sales to environmental organisations. Since founding, over 11,000 companies in 110 countries have donated a total of US$823 million (A$1.2 billion).

Chouinard also actively called out corporate greenwashing, and Patagonia was a corporate activist on multiple issues. This included suing US President Donald Trump in 2017 to keep wilderness reserves safe from oil and gas exploration and land development.

One of the first B Corps

In another leadership move, Patagonia in 2012 became the first California company to become a certified Benefit Corporation, better known as a B Corp.

This is a legally binding, transparently measured commitment to act sustainably, live up to independent performance standards and consider worker, society and environmental interests.

Then, aged 83 in 2022, Chouinard established a pioneering succession trust structure and nonprofit collective for the business. This would see Patagonia continue as an independent, environment-led activist company rather than be floated or sold and have its values and foundations diluted.

This organisational restructure supercharged Chouinard’s philanthropy.

The family retains a voice, while giving away 100% of their estimated US$3 billion and all of Patagonia’s future profits that are not reinvested in the business. (US$100 million in 2022).

Even the legendary industrialist and philanthropist Andrew Carnegie only gave away 90% of his fortune.

Lessons for future philanthropists

My previous research records the top five motivations for Australian philanthropists as:

• making a difference
• giving back to the community
• personal satisfaction
• aligning with moral or philosophical beliefs, and
• setting an example.

Chouinard’s philanthropy touches on all of these.

US philanthropy researcher Paul Schervish uses the phrase “hyperagency” to capture the character and capacity that some individuals have to achieve the outcomes they deem important for society.

Schervish suggests such changemakers build their own world rather than staying within the constraints of traditional approaches.

Chouinard built his own version of capitalism. He continues to argue the Earth is the only resource base for business, and is therefore the prime business stakeholder. Without it, there are no customers, shareholders, employees or business.

Patagonia’s core mission became: “We’re in business to save our home planet”. The company established Earth as its major shareholder.

A message in Dirtbag Billionaire for givers small and large, individual and corporate, is that authentic giving is about values.

Such authentic giving across a lifetime using money, time, voice, networks, workplaces and ethical principles is rarely so well on display as in the life of Yvon Chouinard.

Wendy Scaife does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. How this ‘dirtbag’ billionaire chose to do capitalism differently – https://theconversation.com/how-this-dirtbag-billionaire-chose-to-do-capitalism-differently-272271

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/01/26/how-this-dirtbag-billionaire-chose-to-do-capitalism-differently-272271/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Fiona Boylan, Senior Lecturer, School of Education, Edith Cowan University

Starting school is a big moment in a child’s life. It is a time filled with new routines, new people and new places. These changes can also mean it is sometimes a stressful time. But it doesn’t have to be.

Our recent research explored what helps children’s confidence as they begin formal schooling. More than 100 children aged three to six and 21 teachers participated in our study, which included interviews, observations and children’s drawings.

We found there are many simple, everyday things families can do to help children feel calm and ready for their first day.

Practise new skills

Our research shows children are often expected to be more independent at school than they are at home. They’ll need to open their own bag and lunchbox, organise their belongings and use the toilet without help.

Families can make the transition smoother by practising one or two of these skills each day in the lead‑up to school.

Encourage your child to pack and carry their bag, open and close their lunchbox, and manage any food packaging they’ll encounter, like zip-lock bags or containers.

Try packing their lunchbox during the holidays so they can practise opening items and learn what’s for morning tea and lunch. This also helps you spot packaging that’s too tricky (something teachers are always grateful for).

Set up routines

Young children need repeated practice to learn new tasks such as packing their bag, getting dressed, or organising what they need for the day.

In the schools we worked with, children transitioned more smoothly when parents practised getting-ready routines with them beforehand. Rehearsing the morning routine gives children a sense of what to expect, without the pressure of rushing out the door.

A simple visual chart on the fridge can help. For example, you might include three steps – “eat breakfast”, “brush teeth and hair”, “pack your bag”. This is usually enough for young children to manage at the start.

Get to know school’s places and spaces

Help your child feel familiar with their new setting before the first day by attending any orientation sessions or arranging a visit. Even walking around the school, driving past, or exploring the playground can make the environment feel safe.

Talk about what the day might involve for example,

you will meet your teacher at the classroom door and they will take you into the classroom. You’ll have a break where you can play on the equipment. I’ll be at the tree to pick you up in the afternoon.

Use any stories or short videos the school provides to build familiarity. The more children know what to expect, the more confident they’ll feel when they get to school.

Watch out for big feelings

Starting school is exciting but also tiring. Young children are adjusting to new routines, people and expectations. It’s normal for them to come home exhausted or irritable.

Keep afternoons calm and avoid extra activities so they have time to rest, play and recharge. Offer a snack and water as many children forget to drink during the day.

Once they’ve had downtime, gentle questions like “What was your favourite part of today?” work better than pressing for details. This means you are not pressuring kids to go over things when they are tired and helps avoid emotional outbursts. Don’t worry if they can’t remember names yet.

Remember, this transition can be tiring for parents too – so keeping after-school time simple helps everyone to manage their emotions.

Get to know the teachers and school

It’s not just children who prepare for starting school – schools prepare too. Teachers want to get to know your child and family because strong relationships help them support children more effectively.

Share things like the language you speak at home, your family culture, and your child’s routines.

Feel free to ask questions about the daily schedule. Research shows us when families and schools exchange information, a child’s transition to school is smoother.

---

Leonie Barblett and Amelia Ruscoe from Edith Cowan University were co-researchers on the research mentioned in this article.

Fiona Boylan received funding from the Association of Independent Schools Western Australia for this research.

– ref. Practise using bags and lunchboxes: how to build your child’s confidence as they start school – https://theconversation.com/practise-using-bags-and-lunchboxes-how-to-build-your-childs-confidence-as-they-start-school-273800

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/01/26/practise-using-bags-and-lunchboxes-how-to-build-your-childs-confidence-as-they-start-school-273800/