Search

Funding for refugees has long been politicized − punitive action against UNRWA and Palestinians fits that pattern

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/nicholas-r-micinski-207353">Nicholas R. Micinski</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-maine-2120">University of Maine</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/kelsey-norman-862895">Kelsey Norman</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rice-university-931">Rice University</a> At least a dozen countries, including the U.S., have <a href="https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/01/1145987">suspended funding to the UNRWA</a>, the United Nations agency responsible for delivering aid to Palestinian refugees. This follows allegations made by Israel that <a href="https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/at-least-12-u-n-agency-employees-involved-in-oct-7-attacks-intelligence-reports-say-a7de8f36">12 UNRWA employees participated</a> in the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack. The UNRWA responded by <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/un-palestinian-refugee-agency-investigates-staff-suspected-role-israel-attacks-2024-01-26/">dismissing all accused employees</a> and opening an investigation. While the seriousness of the accusations is clear to all, and the U.S. has been keen to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/30/us/politics/aid-gaza-israel.html">downplay the significance</a> of its pause in funding, the action is not in keeping with precedent. Western donors did not, for example, defund other U.N. agencies or peacekeeping operations amid accusations of <a href="https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/01/11/un-peacekeeping-has-sexual-abuse-problem">sexual assault</a>, <a href="https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/former-un-general-assembly-president-and-five-others-charged-13-million-bribery-scheme">corruption</a> or <a href="https://www.hrw.org/legacy/summaries/s.bosnia9510.html">complicity in war crimes</a>. In real terms, the funding cuts to the UNRWA will affect <a href="https://www.unrwa.org/where-we-work/gaza-strip">1.7 million Palestinian refugees in Gaza</a> along with an additional 400,000 Palestinians without refugee status, many of whom benefit from the UNRWA’s infrastructure. Some critics have gone further and said depriving the agency of funds <a href="https://jacobin.com/2024/01/unrwa-defunding-gaza-israel">amounts to collective punishment</a> against Palestinians. Refugee aid, and humanitarian aid more generally, is theoretically meant to be neutral and impartial. But as experts in <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/reluctant-reception/558E2A93FF99B8F295347A8FA2053698">migration</a> <a href="https://www.routledge.com/UN-Global-Compacts-Governing-Migrants-and-Refugees/Micinski/p/book/9780367218836">and</a> <a href="https://press.umich.edu/Books/D/Delegating-Responsibility">international relations</a>, we know funding is often used as a foreign policy tool, whereby allies are rewarded and enemies punished. In this context, we believe the cuts in funding for the UNRWA fit a wider pattern of the politicization of aid to refugees, particularly Palestinian refugees. <h2>What is the UNRWA?</h2> The UNRWA, short for the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, was established two years after about <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-nakba-at-75-palestinians-struggle-to-get-recognition-for-their-catastrophe-204782">750,000 Palestinians were expelled or fled from their homes</a> during the months leading up to the creation of the state of Israel in 1948 and the subsequent Arab-Israeli war. Prior to the UNRWA’s creation, international and local organizations, many of them religious, provided services to displaced Palestinians. But after <a href="https://cup.columbia.edu/book/refuge-and-resistance/9780231202855">surveying the extreme poverty</a> and dire situation pervasive across refugee camps, the U.N. General Assembly, including all Arab states and Israel, voted to create the UNRWA in 1949. Since that time, <a href="https://www.unrwa.org/what-we-do">the UNRWA has been the primary aid organization</a> providing food, medical care, schooling and, in some cases, housing for the 6 million Palestinians living across its five fields: Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, as well as the areas that make up the occupied Palestinian territories: the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The mass displacement of Palestinians – known as the <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-nakba-at-75-palestinians-struggle-to-get-recognition-for-their-catastrophe-204782">Nakba, or “catastrophe</a>” – occurred prior to the <a href="https://www.unhcr.org/about-unhcr/who-we-are/1951-refugee-convention">1951 Refugee Convention</a>, which defined refugees as anyone with a well-founded fear of persecution owing to “events occurring in Europe before 1 January 1951.” Despite a <a href="https://www.unhcr.org/sites/default/files/legacy-pdf/4ec262df9.pdf">1967 protocol extending the definition</a> worldwide, Palestinians are still excluded from the primary international system protecting refugees. While the UNRWA is responsible for providing services to Palestinian refugees, the United Nations also created the U.N. Conciliation Commission for Palestine in 1948 to seek a <a href="https://www.refworld.org/docid/4fe2e5672.html">long-term political solution</a> and “to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of the refugees and the payment of compensation.” As a result, the UNRWA does not have a mandate to push for the traditional durable solutions available in other refugee situations. As it happened, the conciliation commission was active only for a few years and has since been sidelined in favor of the U.S.-brokered peace processes. <h2>Is the UNRWA political?</h2> The UNRWA has been <a href="https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/palestinian-refugees-dispossession">subject</a> to political headwinds since its inception and especially during periods of heightened tension between Palestinians and Israelis. While it is a U.N. organization and thus ostensibly apolitical, it has <a href="https://cup.columbia.edu/book/refuge-and-resistance/9780231202855">frequently been criticized</a> by Palestinians, Israelis as well as donor countries, including the United States, for acting politically. The UNRWA performs statelike functions across its five fields – including education, health and infrastructure – but it is restricted in its mandate from performing political or security activities. Initial Palestinian objections to the UNRWA stemmed from the organization’s early focus on economic integration of refugees into host states. Although the UNRWA officially adhered to the U.N. General Assembly’s <a href="https://www.unrwa.org/content/resolution-194">Resolution 194</a> that called for the return of Palestine refugees to their homes, U.N., U.K. and U.S. <a href="https://cup.columbia.edu/book/refuge-and-resistance/9780231202855">officials searched</a> for means by which to resettle and integrate Palestinians into host states, viewing this as the favorable political solution to the Palestinian refugee situation and the broader Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In this sense, Palestinians perceived the UNRWA to be both highly political and actively working against their interests. In later decades, the UNRWA <a href="https://cup.columbia.edu/book/refuge-and-resistance/9780231202855">switched its primary focus</a> from jobs to education at the urging of Palestinian refugees. But the UNRWA’s education materials were <a href="https://cup.columbia.edu/book/refuge-and-resistance/9780231202855">viewed</a> by Israel as further feeding Palestinian militancy, and the Israeli government insisted on checking and approving all materials in Gaza and the West Bank, which it has occupied since 1967. While Israel has <a href="https://cup.columbia.edu/book/refuge-and-resistance/9780231202855">long been suspicious</a> of the UNRWA’s role in refugee camps and in providing education, the organization’s operation, which is internationally funded, <a href="https://www.crisisgroup.org/middle-east-north-africa/east-mediterranean-mena/israelpalestine/242-unrwas-reckoning-preserving-un-agency-serving-palestinian-refugees">also saves</a> Israel millions of dollars each year in services it would be obliged to deliver as the occupying power. Since the 1960s, the U.S. – UNRWA’s primary donor – and other Western countries have <a href="https://cup.columbia.edu/book/refuge-and-resistance/9780231202855">repeatedly expressed their desire</a> to use aid to prevent radicalization among refugees. In response to the increased presence of armed opposition groups, the <a href="https://cup.columbia.edu/book/refuge-and-resistance/9780231202855">U.S. attached a provision</a> to its UNRWA aid in 1970, requiring that the “UNRWA take all possible measures to assure that no part of the United States contribution shall be used to furnish assistance to any refugee who is receiving military training as a member of the so-called Palestine Liberation Army (PLA) or any other guerrilla-type organization.” The UNRWA adheres to this requirement, even publishing an annual list of its employees so that host governments can vet them, but it also <a href="https://www.crisisgroup.org/middle-east-north-africa/east-mediterranean-mena/israelpalestine/242-unrwas-reckoning-preserving-un-agency-serving-palestinian-refugees">employs 30,000 individuals</a>, the vast majority of whom are Palestinian. Questions over the links of the UNRWA to any militancy has led to the rise of Israeli and international <a href="https://cufi.org/issue/unrwa-teachers-continue-to-support-antisemitism-terrorism-on-social-media-un-watch/">watch groups</a> that document the social media activity of the organization’s large Palestinian staff. <h2>Repeated cuts in funding</h2> The United States has used its money and power within the U.N. to block criticism of Israel, vetoing at least <a href="https://www.un.org/depts/dhl/resguide/scact_veto_table_en.htm">45 U.N. resolutions</a> critical of Israel. And the latest freeze is not the first time the U.S. has cut funding to the UNRWA or other U.N. agencies in response to issues pertaining to the status of Palestinians. In 2011, the <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE79U5ED/#:%7E:text=WASHINGTON%20(Reuters)%20%2D%20The%20United,grant%20the%20Palestinians%20full%20membership.">U.S. cut all funding to UNESCO</a>, the U.N. agency that provides educational and cultural programs around the world, after the agency voted to admit the state of Palestine as a full member. The Obama administration defended the move, claiming it was required by a 1990s law to defund any U.N. body that admitted Palestine as a full member. But the impact of the action was nonetheless severe. Within just four years, UNESCO was <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1758-5899.12459">forced to cut its staff in half</a> and roll back its operations. President Donald Trump later <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/u-s-and-israel-officially-withdraw-from-unesco">withdrew the U.S. completely from UNESCO</a>. In 2018, the Trump administration paused its <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/31/us/politics/trump-unrwa-palestinians.html">US$60 million contribution to the UNRWA</a>. Trump claimed the pause would create political pressure for Palestinians to negotiate. President Joe Biden restarted U.S. contributions to the UNRWA in 2021. <h2>Politicization of refugee aid</h2> Palestinian are not the only group to suffer from the politicization of refugee funding. After World War II, states established different international organizations to help refugees but strategically excluded some groups from the refugee definition. For example, the U.S. funded the <a href="https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/last-million-eastern-european-displaced-persons-postwar-germany">U.N. Relief and Rehabilitation Administration to help resettle displaced persons after World War II</a> but resisted Soviet pressure to forcibly repatriate Soviet citizens. The U.S. also created a separate organization, <a href="https://academic.oup.com/ijrl/article-abstract/1/4/501/1598187">the precursor to the International Organization for Migration</a>, to circumvent Soviet influence. In many ways, the UNRWA’s existence and the exclusion of Palestinian refugees from the wider refugee regime parallels this dynamic. Funding for refugees has also been politicized through the earmarking of voluntary contributions to U.N. agencies. Some agencies receive funding from U.N. dues; but the UNRWA, alongside the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees and the International Organization for Migration, receive the majority of their funding from voluntary contributions from member states. These contributions can be earmarked for specific activities or locations, leading to donors such as the <a href="https://www.peio.me/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/PEIO12_paper_107.pdf">U.S. or European Union dictating which refugees get aid and which do not</a>. Earmarked contributions amounted to nearly <a href="https://unsceb.org/fs-revenue-agency">96% of the UNHCR’s budget, 96% of the IOM’s budget and 74% of UNRWA funding in 2022</a>. As a result, any cuts to UNRWA funding will affect its ability to service Palestinian refugees in Gaza – especially at a time when so many are <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/30/middleeast/famine-looms-in-gaza-israel-war-intl/index.html">facing hunger, disease and displacement</a> as a result of war.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/222263/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/nicholas-r-micinski-207353">Nicholas R. Micinski</a>, Assistant Professor of Political Science and International Affairs, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-maine-2120">University of Maine</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/kelsey-norman-862895">Kelsey Norman</a>, Fellow for the Middle East, Rice University's Baker Institute for Public Policy, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rice-university-931">Rice University</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/funding-for-refugees-has-long-been-politicized-punitive-action-against-unrwa-and-palestinians-fits-that-pattern-222263">original article</a>.

Money & Banking

Couple who found love in chemotherapy raise funds for final trip

Ainslie Plumb, 22, and Joe Fan, 29, found love in an unexpected place, at the Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital. The couple met in 2022 while they were both undergoing leukaemia treatment. “We met at an event for young people with cancer and became friends following that,” Plumb told 7News. “(We) would hang out during our hospital stays, I asked him out in October 2022 and (we) have been together ever since.” While Plumb successfully entered remission, last October, Fan was told that he was now terminal, as doctors had run out of options to treat his Philadelphia chromosome positive acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. With only months left to live, Fan, who has actively given back to the hospital and cancer community by playing his violin for patients and staff and worked with the Queensland Youth Cancer Service, has one final wish - to travel. The couple have set a <a href="https://www.gofundme.com/f/help-joe-live-his-dreams" target="_blank" rel="noopener">GoFundMe</a>, to help raise funds which cover flights, accommodation and specialised travel insurance, for Fan's final trip. “I go through my cancer treatments and observe the toll that takes on my physical and mental wellbeing,” Fan said. “The end of a trip can hopefully mark the start of another — and I have held onto hope, looked forward and dreamed for one more trip, more time, one more experience with that someone I love.” Their first destination will be Taiwan and Hong Kong, where Fan's parents are from and where he spent a majority of his childhood. They also intend to travel to New Zealand and Western Australia to swim with whale sharks at Ningaloo in the state’s north. “We’re aiming at going at the end of February to give us time to co-ordinate with his doctors around his appointments and infusions, which are all booked in advance,” Plumb said. “We recently reached 75 per cent on the fundraiser and are hoping to hit 100 per cent perhaps by the end of January.” As of today, the couple have successfully raised over $21,000 from their $20,000 goal, and have thanked everyone in their community and strangers for their support. “Truly, words do not suffice,” the couple said. Images: 7News

Relationships

Return and Earn is a great way to recycle

When you recycle your eligible bottles and cans through Return and Earn, the material that is used to make the bottles and cans stay in use for as long as possible and are turned into new products, rather than ending up in landfill or polluting waterways. The scheme has already more than halved the number of drink containers littering our parks, waterways, or ending up in landfill compared to before the scheme was launched in December 2017. What happens to containers returned through Return and Earn? Have you ever wondered what happens to the containers once they are returned through the scheme? All containers returned through Return and Earn are recycled. The containers are picked up from the return points and trucked to a sorting facility where the containers are processed depending on the material type. Cans are crushed and baled into a giant cube, glass bottles are crushed into small particles called cullet; and plastic bottles are sorted by type and colour and shredded into smaller flakes before being turned into pellets. <img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-68727" src="https://www.readersdigest.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/crushed-cans-770.jpg" alt="" width="770" height="500" /> The giant cubes of Aluminium cans are melted, rolled into sheets, and sent to manufacturers to be turned into new cans or other products – some even go to make up aeroplane parts! Glass cullet is melted and mixed with raw materials before being blown into a new glass bottle and sent to drink companies. The plastic pellets are melted down, moulded and blown into new plastic bottles, ready to be bought be retailers. The new bottles and cans made from the recycled materials are filled by the beverage companies, labelled, capped, and ready to be consumed. By using the recycled material from Return and Earn, we save water, energy, and landfill, as well as reducing the carbon emissions that would be used if new raw materials were used instead. This conservation contributes to a more sustainable and efficient economy. Keeping materials in Australia The purity and quality of the material from Return and Earn plays a crucial role in establishing local recycling facilities so most of the key materials stay in Australia. A key milestone was the opening of the Circular Plastics Australia plant in Albury, NSW, in March 2022. This state-of-the-art PET plastic recycling facility is a joint venture between waste industry and beverage industry partners and is the largest of its kind in Australia. The facility reprocesses 100% of the PET (one of the materials that make up plastic containers) collected through the Return and Earn network of over 600 return points and uses the materials to remake new bottles and other food-grade plastic packaging. All glass collected through the Return and Earn network is also being reprocessed in Australia and contributes to the growing demand of locally sourced glass to use in making new bottles and other products. Having facilities in Australia means that the cycle of making a new container from the recycled material is fast. Plastic bottles can be back on the shelf in as little as six weeks and glass bottles in four weeks. Now that’s recycling at its best. <img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-68725" src="https://www.readersdigest.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/what-happens-when-you-return-and-earn-journey-image_770.jpg" alt="" width="770" height="846" /> Do you recycle? It’s easier than ever to recycle your empty containers through Return and Earn. We have over 600 return points across Australia, and we continue to work with businesses and local councils to identify more sites. Every container counts – recycling is an important way to reduce the load on our natural resources and keep valuable waste on the path to being remade into new products and used again. These small acts can make a big impact. If you’re not interested in returning the containers, consider leaving them out for others in your neighbourhood that are collecting them, or donate them to a charity or community group who is fundraising through the scheme. If you are unable to give them away, place your empty drink containers in your yellow lid recycle bin. For more information about Return and Earn, and to find your nearest return point visit <a href="https://returnandearn.org.au/">returnandearn.org.au</a> Case Study: Sharing the dignity through recycling Semi-retiree Wendy Pluckrose from the far north NSW coast has supported Share the Dignity for years, so when she discovered Return and Earn it seemed an obvious way to raise some extra funds as well as protect the environment. Share the Dignity is a women's charity in Australia, that works to make a real difference in the lives of those experiencing homelessness, fleeing domestic violence, or doing it tough. Wendy has installed bins at home and at local shops and restaurants to collect eligible drink containers. Most days she collects between 100 – 500 containers, and in the last year has raised nearly $3,500 from around 35,000 containers recycled through Return and Earn. “Return and Earn is just free money!” Wendy said. “It’s a little bit of effort, but it makes a big difference.” <img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-68728" src="https://www.readersdigest.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/share-the-dignity-photo-article-770.jpg" alt="" width="770" height="733" /> With the containers collected so far, not only is the refund going towards buying women’s sanitary products to women experiencing hardships, but it has also contributed to protecting the environment. By recycling 35,000 containers to be remade into new containers rather than using virgin materials, the environmental savings calculated by the <a href="https://returnandearn.org.au/impact-calculator/">Impact Calculator</a> include 206,000 litres of water; 46 gigajoules of energy that equates to six months of energy consumption for a household; and 2,100 kilograms of material entering landfill. The carbon emissions avoided equates to keeping two cars off the road for 18 months. To learn more about Return and Earn, <a href="https://returnandearn.org.au/">head to their website</a>. Images: Return and Earn. This is a sponsored article produced in partnership with Return and Earn.

Retirement Income

Medical Research Future Fund has $20 billion to spend. Here’s how we prioritise who gets what

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/adrian-barnett-853">Adrian Barnett</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/queensland-university-of-technology-847">Queensland University of Technology</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/philip-clarke-1149967">Philip Clarke</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-oxford-1260">University of Oxford</a> The <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/our-work/medical-research-future-fund">Medical Research Future Fund</a> (MRFF) is a A$20 billion fund to support Australian health and medical research. It was set up in 2015 to deliver practical benefits from medical research and innovation to as many Australians as possible. Unlike the other research funding agencies, such the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), most of the MRFF funding is priority-driven. It seeks to fund research in particular areas or topics rather than using open calls when researchers propose their own ideas for funding. As the <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/not-how-you-run-a-1b-scheme-science-fund-backers-lead-chorus-for-reform-20230619-p5dhni.html">Nine newspapers</a> outlined this week, researchers have criticised the previous Coalition government’s allocation of MRFF funds. There is widespread consensus the former health minister had <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/a-centre-never-built-and-a-hospital-that-missed-out-the-coalition-s-unusual-20b-research-fund-20230619-p5dhng.html">too much influence</a> in the allocation of funds, and there was limited and sometimes no competition when funding was directly allocated to one research group. The current Health Minister, Mark Butler, has instituted a <a href="https://www.innovationaus.com/billion-dollar-medical-research-grants-process-under-review/">review</a>. So how should the big decisions about how to spend the MRFF be made in the future to maximise its value and achieve its aims? <h2>Assess gaps in evidence</h2> Research priorities for the MRFF are set by the <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/committees-and-groups/australian-medical-research-advisory-board-amrab?language=und">Australian Medical Research Advisory Board</a>, which widely consults with the research sector. However, most researchers and institutions will simply argue more funding is needed for their own research. If the board seeks to satisfy such lobbying, it will produce fragmented funding that aligns poorly with the health needs of Australians. A better approach would be to systematically assemble evidence about what is known and the key evidence gaps. Here, the board would benefit from what is known as a “<a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15484602/">value of information</a>” framework for decision-making. This framework systematically attempts to quantify the most valuable information that will reduce the uncertainty for health and medical decision-making. In other words, it would pinpoint which information we need to allow us to better make health and medical decisions. There have been <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30288400/">attempts</a> to use this method in Australia to help inform how we prioritise hospital-based research. However, we now need to apply such an approach more broadly. <h2>Seek public input</h2> A structured framework for engaging with the public is also missing in Australia. The public’s perspective on research prioritisation has often been overlooked, but as the ultimate consumers of research, they need to be heard. Research is a highly complex and specialised endeavour, so we can’t expect the public to create sensible priorities alone. One approach used overseas has been developed by the <a href="https://www.jla.nihr.ac.uk/">James Lind Alliance</a>, a group in the United Kingdom that combines the public’s views with researchers to create agreed-on priorities for research. This is done using an intensive process of question setting and discussion. Priorities are checked for feasibility and novelty, so there is no funding for research that’s impossible or already done. The priorities from the James Lind Alliance process can be surprising. The top priority in the area of <a href="https://www.jla.nihr.ac.uk/priority-setting-partnerships/irritable-bowel-syndrome/top-10-priorities.htm">irritable bowel syndrome</a>, for example, is to discover if it’s one condition or many, while the second priority is to work on bowel urgency (a sudden urgent need to go to the toilet). While such everyday questions can struggle to get funding in traditional systems that often focus on novelty, funding research in these two priority areas could lead to the most benefits for people with irritable bowel syndrome. <h2>Consider our comparative advantages</h2> Australia is a relatively small player globally. To date, the MRFF has allocated around <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/resources/publications/medical-research-future-fund-mrff-grant-recipients?language=und">$2.6 billion</a>, just over 5% of what the United States allocates through the National Institute of Health funding in a <a href="https://www.who.int/observatories/global-observatory-on-health-research-and-development/monitoring/investments-on-grants-for-biomedical-research-by-funder-type-of-grant-health-category-and-recipient">single year</a>. A single research grant, even if it involves a few million dollars of funding, is unlikely to lead to a medical breakthrough. Instead, the MRFF should prioritise areas where Australia has a comparative advantage. This could involve building on past success (such as the research that led to the HPV, or human papillomavirus, vaccine to prevent cervical cancer), or where Australian researchers can play a critical role globally. However, there is an area where Australian researchers have an absolute advantage: using research to improve our own health system. A prime example would be finding ways to improve dental care access in Australia. For example, a randomised trial of different ways of providing insurance and dental services, similar to the <a href="https://www.rand.org/health-care/projects/hie.html">RAND Health Insurance Experiment</a> conducted in the United States in the 1970s. This could provide the evidence needed to design a sustainable dental scheme to complement Medicare. Now that is something the MRFF should consider as a funding priority.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/209977/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/adrian-barnett-853">Adrian Barnett</a>, Professor of Statistics, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/queensland-university-of-technology-847">Queensland University of Technology</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/philip-clarke-1149967">Philip Clarke</a>, Professor of Health Economics, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-oxford-1260">University of Oxford</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/medical-research-future-fund-has-20-billion-to-spend-heres-how-we-prioritise-who-gets-what-209977">original article</a>.

Money & Banking

Returning and Earning for your community

Charities and community groups across NSW are cashing in empty drink containers to support their important work in the community, all with the added benefit of helping the environment. It’s an easy win-win to fundraise through Return and Earn, and it makes donating to a local charity or community group very easy. Return and Earn is the incredibly successful container deposit scheme in NSW, where 10 cents is refunded for every eligible drink container returned for recycling through the network of 600+ return points across the state. Since launching over five years ago, <a href="https://returnandearn.org.au" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Return and Earn</a> has become an important and well used channel for charities and community groups fundraising to support a range of local and broader causes. Groups such as Rotary and Lions Clubs, animal rescue organisations, and fire and rescue services are just a few of the many different cohorts that have partnered with Return and Earn and relied on the generosity of NSW citizens to help them do vital work in their communities. “We’ve seen many groups really embrace the scheme, showing a humbling passion for giving back to the community – whether it’s to help fund an event for a local club, or to donate to a charity,” said Danielle Smalley, CEO of scheme coordinator, Exchange for Change. “Some of these groups have raised a lot of money from recycling drink containers through Return and Earn. Often local residents and businesses are handing over their containers or donating their refunds to support the cause, proving there is enormous goodwill in the community.” The Gerringong Lions Club recently celebrated one million containers collected, raising $100,000 that was donated to a variety of causes including medical research, local sporting facilities, as well as helping both Australian and oversees Lions Clubs provide relief during catastrophes. <img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-67811" src="https://www.readersdigest.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Gerringong-Lions-Club-image-2-for-article-2_RD.jpg" alt="" width="770" height="500" /> The Gerringong Lions Club are now raising around $20,000 each year. The COVID shutdowns and restrictions put a halt to the activities that would normally bring funds to the club. Return and Earn was the only means for the club to generate an income to help the community during this time. As routine users of the scheme, the Gerringong Lions Club are now raising around $20,000 each year, all the while making positive impacts to the environment. Bruce Ray is a past president and active member of the club, and says he gets a sense of satisfaction knowing they are helping the community while also looking out for the environment. “We have the bins at the hotel, the bowling club, and campgrounds. The club also provides the container collection bins for events such as weddings and uses them at local New Years’ Eve events,” said Mr Ray. In Cobar, the local Rotary Club is also using Return and Earn to support the work in their community. They partnered with the local Girl Guides who help the club sort through any drink containers collected. They’ve now raised more than $25,000 since they began in early 2020. Club Secretary Gordon Hill said that one of the benefits for the Girl Guides is the real-world experience in seeing how much locally created waste can be recycled. “It also provides a healthy opportunity for a challenge to see which girls can pack the most containers during a 1.5 to 2 hour session. The record currently stands at 3,080, but the challenge continues,” Gordon added. <img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-67813" src="https://www.readersdigest.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Cobar-Rotary-Club-image-for-article-2_RD.jpg" alt="" width="770" height="500" /> In Cobar, the local Rotary Club has partnered with the Girl Guides to help with sorting! Since Return and Earn launched in December 2017, over $42 million has been raised through donations and return point hosting fees. The funds have made a significant difference to individuals and groups who have received the support. “There are a lot more collection drives in the community that we don’t track, so the total fundraising amount is in fact even higher,” Ms Smalley said. “We encourage all our Return and Earn users to consider donating containers to a local charity or community group either at the nearest Return and Earn machine or using the Return and Earn app. “And if you’re a member of a group looking for an easy and effective way to fundraise, consider Return and Earn where you can double the benefit by raising funds while also helping the environment.” Every Return and Earn machine features a local donation partner, to whom users can donate part or all of their refunds to. The charity listed changes every six months to give as many groups as possible the opportunity. Charities and groups can also elect to be listed on the Return and Earn app, allowing anyone using the app at a machine or automated depot to donate direct to their favourite charity. There are currently over 170 charities featured on the app. When using a Return and Earn machine, select donate, then select which of the charities listed you want the funds to go. If you’re using the Return and Earn app, simply select donation as your payout option and then select the charity or group you would like to donate your refund to. “Contributions don’t need to be big to make a difference. It can be as easy as collecting a few eligible drink containers and donating them to a charity, helping local communities thrive while looking after the environment.” said Ms Smalley. For more information on donating through Return and Earn visit <a href="https://returnandearn.org.au/donate/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">returnandearn.org.au/donate/</a> Images: Supplied This is a sponsored article produced in partnership with Return and Earn.

Money & Banking

Are bigger super funds better? Actually no, despite what the industry is doing

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/geoff-warren-3657">Geoff Warren</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/australian-national-university-877">Australian National University</a> Australia’s superannuation funds are getting bigger – and fewer. There were <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/aug/29/australian-superannuation-mergers-cut-number-of-funds-by-half-in-a-decade">close to 400</a> funds in 2010. With mergers, it’s now <a href="https://www.investordaily.com.au/superannuation/53144-are-mega-funds-poised-to-dominate-the-super-industry">closer to 120</a>. By 2025, according to industry executives surveyed last year, there will be <a href="https://www.investordaily.com.au/superannuation/50971-rise-of-mega-funds-set-to-intensify-erasing-100-funds-by-2025">fewer than 50</a>. The portfolios of the two biggest super funds, AustralianSuper and Australian Retirement Trust, are bigger than even the federal government’s Future Fund Management Agency, which oversees the A$194 billion <a href="https://yearinreviewfy22.futurefund.gov.au/performance-results.html">Future Fund</a> and several other funds worth a total $242 billion. <hr /> <iframe id="0wOBb" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/0wOBb/5/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> Underpinning this consolidation is the idea that larger scale is beneficial for superannuation fund members. But that’s not necessarily true. A bigger fund is no guarantee of better returns. I’ve examined the issue of fund scale with Scott Lawrence, an investment manager with 35 year’s industry experience. Together we’ve written <a href="https://theconexusinstitute.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Does-Size-Benefit-Super-Fund-Members-24-March-2023.pdf">a report</a> for the Conexus Institute, an independent research centre focused on superannuation issues. Our conclusion: funds, large and small alike, succeed or fail depending on how well they formulate and execute their strategies. <h2>Managing assets in-house</h2> The first potential benefit of bigger size is that funds can manage assets using their own dedicated investment professionals, rather than outsourcing everything to external investment managers to invest on their behalf. For example, UniSuper (the higher education industry fund) manages <a href="https://www.unisuper.com.au/investments/how-we-invest/investment-managers">70% of assets in-house</a>. AustralianSuper, with more than double UniSuper’s assets, manages <a href="https://www.australiansuper.com/-/media/australian-super/files/about-us/annual-reports/2022-annual-report.pdf">53% of assets</a> in-house. This can be cheaper than paying fees as a percentage of assets to these external providers. It offers more control as the super fund can decide the assets in which they invest, rather than leaving the decision to someone else. But fund members will only benefit if the internal team makes investment decisions that are as good as the service they are replacing. For this reason, there is no reliable correlation between performance and degree of in-house management. <h2>Investing in big-ticket items</h2> The second potential benefit is it becomes more possible to become successful direct investors in “big ticket” assets such as infrastructure and property, instead of just focusing on shares and other assets traded on stock exchanges. For example, AustralianSuper owns <a href="https://www.australiansuper.com/-/media/australian-super/files/about-us/media-releases/australiansuper-increases-investment-in-westconnex.pdf">20.5% of WestConnex</a>, Australia’s biggest infracture project, having contributed $4.2 billion to the consortium that is building the mostly underground toll-road system linking western Sydney motorways. Opportunities like this are easier to access by large funds, and can help to diversify their portfolios. But such direct investment is costlier than buying shares and bonds. This limits the potential for fee reductions. For members to benefit, these investments must deliver attractive returns. This requires a fund developing capability in what are specialised markets. Size alone won’t deliver on its own. <h2>Economies of scale and scope</h2> The third potential benefit is that size brings economies of scale and scope. Scale can reduce fees, by spreading the fund’s fixed costs over a larger member base. Our review of the research literature confirms there are solid reasons to expect administration costs to reduce with size, as well as in-house management reducing investment costs. <hr /> <iframe id="26cxr" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/26cxr/3/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> Economies of scope involve an organisation being able to improve or increase services, say by investing in better systems and more staff. But investing in better systems also brings potential pitfalls. Big visionary projects tend to run over time and over budget, and sometimes fail. An example is the disastrous attempts of five industry funds (AustralianSuper, Cbus Super, HESTA, Hostplus and MTAA Super) to develop a shared administration platform, called Superpartners. It was meant to cost $70 million, but development costs blew out to $250 million before <a href="https://www.investmentmagazine.com.au/2016/12/link-group-completes-superpartners-integration/">they gave up</a>. <h2>Size brings its own challenges</h2> Large funds also face some unique challenges. Because they have more money to invest, they have more work to do in finding sufficient attractive assets to buy. The risk is they need to accept some assets offering low returns to do so. They can also outgrow some market segments, such as owning shares in smaller companies. Large organisations are typically more complex, more bureaucratic and less flexible. They can find it difficult to coordinate staff to work towards a common purpose. These elements may create dysfunction if not managed. This may explain why, despite the potential increased scope of their offerings, surveys suggest large funds tend to deliver <a href="https://www.investmentmagazine.com.au/2022/08/members-willing-to-pay-for-better-service-post-retirement/">less personalised service</a>. So the idea “bigger is better” is not necessarily true. Large size is not an automatic win. Whether the advantages outweigh the disadvantages and challenges ultimately depends on fund trustees and management doing their jobs well so that members benefit.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/203417/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/geoff-warren-3657">Geoff Warren</a>, Associate Professor, College of Business and Economics, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/australian-national-university-877">Australian National University</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/are-bigger-super-funds-better-actually-no-despite-what-the-industry-is-doing-203417">original article</a>.

Retirement Income

Super has become a taxpayer-funded inheritance scheme for the rich. Here’s how to fix it – and save billions

Australia’s A$3.3 trillion superannuation system is supposed to boost people’s retirement incomes. The government says as much in its <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-02/c2023-361383.pdf">proposed leglislated objective</a> for superannuation. The system is supported by billions of dollars of tax breaks each year, ostensibly to that end. But there’s just one problem – increasingly, much of what is saved is never spent. Our new report, <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/report/super-savings-practical-policies-for-fairer-superannuation-and-a-stronger-budget">Super savings: Practical policies for fairer superannuation and a stronger budget</a>, points out that without an overhaul, super tax breaks are set to do little more than boost the inheritances of Australians with well-off parents. Super contributions and super earnings are both taxed more lightly than other income. These tax breaks cost the budget about $45 billion (2% of Australia’s gross domestic product, or GDP) each year. Treasury predicts that figure will hit 3% of GDP by 2060, and that the cost of super tax breaks will overtake the cost of the age pension by as soon as 2036. Super tax breaks are also unfair: about two-thirds go to the top 20% of earners. This means the tax breaks provide the biggest boost to the super accounts of high earners, who will almost all have a comfortable retirement regardless, and who tend to save the same regardless of the tax rate imposed. The wealthiest 10% of Australians get a bigger boost to their retirement savings from super tax breaks than poorer Australians get from the age pension. But much of what is saved for retirement never actually gets spent in retirement. Earlier research by <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/news/balancing-act/">Grattan Institute</a> and the <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-02/p2020-100554-udcomplete-report.pdf">2020 Retirement Income Review</a> found that, for a variety of reasons, spending falls substantially during retirement. Retirees often end up leaving much of their nest egg untouched, bequeathing it to their children. This means billions of dollars in super tax breaks simply end up boosting the inheritances received by the children of well-off parents. It makes super a taxpayer-funded inheritance scheme. This problem is set to get worse. With the rate of compulsory superannuation legislated to rise from 10.5% of wages to 12% by 2025, future generations of retirees are set to retire with even larger nest eggs that they will never spend. Treasury projects that by 2059, one in every three dollars paid out of the super system will be a bequest, up from one in every five today. Big inheritances boost the jackpot from the birth lottery. They help richer children get richer. Among the Australians who received an inheritance over the past decade, the wealthiest fifth received on average <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/news/the-great-australian-nightmare/">three times</a> as much as the poorest fifth. To help reverse this, the government needs to rein in the super tax breaks. <h2>How to make super fairer</h2> The government’s policy, <a href="https://ministers.treasury.gov.au/ministers/jim-chalmers-2022/media-releases/superannuation-tax-breaks">announced in February</a>, of taxing the earnings on balances bigger than $3 million at 30%, instead of 15%, will help. But the threshold ought to be lowered to $2 million. Balances between $2 million and $3 million are very unlikely to be spent in retirement, so winding back tax breaks on earnings on balances bigger than $2 million would further wind back taxpayer-funded bequests. And there’s more. Currently, many wealthier Australians receive a larger tax break per dollar contributed to super than many low income earners. Yet low earners have more to be compensated for. Putting money into their super cuts their age pension in retirement, and they live shorter lives, meaning less time to enjoy their super in retirement. The pre-tax contributions of people earning more than $220,000 a year should be taxed at 35%, instead of the 30% charged to those earning more than $250,000 currently. That would still offer a 10% tax break on super contributions for high earners (given the top marginal rate of 45%) and at least a 15% break on the contributions of low and middle earners. And the annual pre-tax contributions cap should be lowered from $27,500 to $20,000. Contributions above this level tend to be made by people close to retirement with already-high balances. <h2>Tax earnings in retirement the same as while working</h2> On the earnings side, the tax-free earnings enjoyed by retirees on their first $1.7 million ($1.9 million from 1 July this year) of their super should go. Superannuation earnings in retirement should be taxed at 15%, the same as superannuation earnings before retirement. This would save the budget at least $5.3 billion a year, and much more in future, and make taxing super more simple. More than 70% of this revenue would come from the top 20% of retirees. The top 10% would pay an extra $7,000 to $7,500 a year on average, whereas the poorest half would no more than $200 more each. Both sides of politics say they agree that super shouldn’t be a taxpayer-funded inheritance scheme. But there’s a long way to go before that vision is reality. Image credits: Getty Images This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/super-has-become-a-taxpayer-funded-inheritance-scheme-for-the-rich-heres-how-to-fix-it-and-save-billions-202948" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>.

Retirement Income

What does your health fund know about living costs? Because health cover premiums are on the rise this year too!

Have you noticed more scary headlines about ballooning inflation and climbing interest rates out there lately? While the media love their dramatic headlines, there’s more truth than usual in their scary stats. It’s no secret that a lot of us are feeling squeezed financially at the moment. The cost of living has shot up in recent months - from interest rates, to groceries, and new energy and fuel price hikes, it’s getting harder to make ends meet. Health cover is no exception. In fact, in 2023, health insurance premiums are set to rise by an average of 2.9%... …but did you know that your fund can put your premium up by a lot more than that? It’s true. Don't be fooled by any ‘average’ messaging. An ‘average increase’ is just that - an average. Your premium may be going up by a lot more. OverSixty has partnered with Compare Club, Australia’s most trusted team of health insurance experts,* who spend every day talking to Aussie families – and they’ve recently shared with us two examples: 1. Kevin's policy has gone up by 20% in 2 years - that’s a LOT more than the current rate of inflation it’s being blamed on. 2. Cassie's family combined cover policy is going up by 13.67% or $33.60 a month - that’s over $400 a year on top of her current premium. We know how much households are hurting right now, so Compare Club talked to us about three smart ways to keep your health insurance premiums in check - without compromising your cover: 1. Downsize your policy - only pay for what you need: Are you on a top tier policy you’re not fully using? You might find you can get a Silver Plus or Bronze Plus tier policy with a lower premium, and stay covered for what you need. 2. Split policies - health funds’ best kept secret: If you and your partner have different health needs, splitting your cover across two different policies - or even two different funds - could save your family several hundred dollars in annual premiums. 3. Pay in advance - before your premium rises: You may have noticed that a lot of health funds have delayed their premium increase this year. If yours is one of these, and you can afford to pay your full annual premium before the date of increase, you’ll lock in a full year’s worth of savings for yourself. Know your options: “Health funds are a competitive bunch, so you don’t have to take what your fund dishes out. If you've not reviewed your health cover recently, you could be paying an average of $785^ more than you need.” – Compare Club CEO, Andrew Davis. OverSixty has partnered with Compare Club’s experts who have saved over 136,500 customers an average of $300 on health cover premiums over the last five years^. We’re quite sure you have better things to do with your money than overpaying for health cover. Compare Club have been helping Aussies switch and save on health cover since 2010#, so get in touch and see how much their experts could save you. <h4 style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; font-family: -apple-system, 'system-ui', 'Segoe UI', Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, sans-serif, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji'; line-height: 1.2; color: #212529; font-size: 1.5rem; background-color: #ffffff;">Call 1300 863 204 now, or visit <a style="box-sizing: border-box; color: #258440; text-decoration-line: none; background-color: transparent; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s;" href="https://lp.compareclub.com.au/over60/?utm_medium=partner&utm_source=over60&utm_campaign=raterise&utm_content=nativearticle&category=health" target="_blank" rel="noopener">compare.oversixty.com.au</a> to save today!</h4> <p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; color: #212529; font-family: -apple-system, 'system-ui', 'Segoe UI', Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, sans-serif, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji'; font-size: 16px; background-color: #ffffff;"> <p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; color: #212529; font-family: -apple-system, 'system-ui', 'Segoe UI', Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, sans-serif, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji'; font-size: 16px; background-color: #ffffff;"> <p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; color: #212529; font-family: -apple-system, 'system-ui', 'Segoe UI', Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, sans-serif, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji'; font-size: 16px; background-color: #ffffff;"> <p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; color: #212529; font-family: -apple-system, 'system-ui', 'Segoe UI', Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, sans-serif, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji'; font-size: 16px; background-color: #ffffff;">*Based on Trustpilot reviews, correct as of 04/01/23 ^Savings based on 136,746 customers between 1 Jan 2018 - 23 December 2022. #Compare Club compares selected products from a panel of trusted insurers. We do not compare all products in the market.

Caring

Losing the natural world comes with major risks for your super fund and bank

As the economist Herman Daly pithily said, the economy is a wholly owned subsidiary of the environment – not the reverse. Nature makes our lives possible through what scientists call <a href="https://theconversation.com/do-humans-really-need-other-species-185171">ecosystem services</a>. Think healthy food, clean water, feed for livestock, building materials, medicine, flood and storm control, recreation, and attractions for tourists. Despite this, Australian businesses and financial institutions have so far failed to track how their activities both rely on and affect nature. This means our investments and superannuation could be exposed to <a href="https://post.parliament.uk/research-briefings/post-pn-0667/">hidden financial risks</a>because of nature loss – and may also contribute to the destruction of nature. That’s set to change. The private sector is <a href="https://theconversation.com/taking-care-of-business-the-private-sector-is-waking-up-to-natures-value-153786">waking up</a> to nature’s value (and the risks of losing it). The world’s biodiversity rescue plan <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-historic-cop15-outcome-is-an-imperfect-game-changer-for-saving-nature-heres-why-australia-did-us-proud-196731">agreed to last year</a> could help motivate governments and businesses to clean up their investments by directing more money to protect nature and less towards <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/oct/28/banks-lent-1-9tn-linked-to-ecosystem-and-wildlife-destruction-in-2019-report-aoe">bankrolling extinction</a>. There’s one crucial plank we’re missing though – mandatory reporting of how businesses both depend on and impact nature. <h2>Nature and financial health are inextricably linked</h2> Fully half of the world’s total economic activity – <a href="https://www.weforum.org/press/2020/01/half-of-world-s-gdp-moderately-or-highly-dependent-on-nature-says-new-report/">around A$61 trillion</a> – is moderately or highly dependent on nature and its services. In Australia, that figure is very similar: <a href="https://www.acf.org.au/the-nature-based-economy-how-australias-prosperity-depends-on-nature">around half</a> of our GDP – $896 billion – has a moderate to very high direct dependence on ecosystem services provided by nature. What happens when we breach nature’s limits? Ecosystem services seize up or collapse, eventually disrupting these sectors. The tireless pollination work of honeybees, for instance, is <a href="https://www.wheenbeefoundation.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Karasinski-JM-2018_The-Economic-Valuation-of-Australian-Managed-and-Wild-Honey-Bee-Pollinators-in-2014-2015.pd">valued at</a> $14 billion a year. Or take Australia’s wheatbelt, where poor soil health is <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ldr.3130">now costing</a> farmers almost $2 billion a year in lost income. Ecosystem services are not hypothetical. They have real value – and we will absolutely notice if they are gone. <h2>What does this have to do with my super?</h2> Australia’s super sector is responsible for the retirement savings of around <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/about-ato/research-and-statistics/in-detail/super-statistics/super-accounts-data/multiple-super-accounts-data/">12 million Australians</a>. Super funds are directly exposed to <a href="https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/sustainability/our-insights/sustainability-blog/nature-risk-is-the-next-challenge-that-demands-a-global-solution">financial risk</a> from nature loss through their investment portfolios. Just as farmers can’t grow crops without healthy soils or pollinators, developers can’t build apartments without timber or environmental permits. In turn, that has implications for their value as investments. And because so many sectors are exposed, classic investment strategies such as <a href="https://moneysmart.gov.au/how-to-invest/diversification">diversification</a> may no longer protect your super from losses. So what are our super funds and banks doing about it? To find out, we <a href="https://www.acf.org.au/risky-business-report">surveyed</a> ten super funds and ten retail banks about their responses to nature-related risks. The survey – commissioned by the Australian Conservation Foundation – is the first time this has been done in Australia. The findings? Not ideal. Every participating super fund and bank agreed the loss of nature now presented a serious risk to investment returns. They all agreed it was part of their responsibility to members and customers to measure and manage these risks. But only 20% of super funds and 10% of banks had attempted to assess how exposed they were. Again, this is not abstract. Super funds often have large holdings in the big four banks. Together, these banks have $170 billion in exposure to agriculture, mining, fisheries, and forestry – sectors directly reliant on a functioning natural world. So why isn’t it a higher priority? One issue may be that many financial institutions are currently focused on climate change, given how rapidly impacts are mounting. But climate change and the breakdown of natural systems are twin crises. Nature offers far and away the largest method of taking carbon back out of the atmosphere, for instance. But that only works if salt marshes and wetlands and forests are intact. Net zero targets for our banks and super funds are not fully credible unless there is a commitment to end the <a href="https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/high-level-expert-group">financing of deforestation</a>. Only one organisation, Australian Ethical, had made such a commitment. You would think Australia’s super funds and banks would be interested to find out how exposed their investments were to this growing risk. Tools to do this such as <a href="https://www.ibat-alliance.org/">IBAT</a> and <a href="https://encore.naturalcapital.finance/en">ENCORE</a> are readily available. But to date, our survey findings don’t indicate banks and funds will do this <a href="https://www.greenbiz.com/article/why-more-firms-think-mandatory-biodiversity-risk-reporting-needed">voluntarily</a>. <h2>Banks and super funds may soon have to report these risks</h2> The biodiversity rescue plan agreed to last year – known as the <a href="https://www.cbd.int/doc/decisions/cop-15/cop-15-dec-04-en.pdf">Kunming-Montreal agreement</a> – is intended to set expectations for responsible finance and business globally, as the Paris Agreement did for climate change. That means Australia will be expected to introduce disclosure requirements. If this comes to pass, banks, super funds, and the businesses they invest our savings in will have to measure and publicly report their impact on nature – as well as how much they rely on nature to make a profit. First, though, the Australian government must introduce mandatory nature risk reporting. It’s already moving ahead with plans to make climate risk disclosures <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/consultation/c2022-314397">mandatory</a>. Treasurer Jim Chalmers has indicated nature is <a href="https://ministers.treasury.gov.au/ministers/jim-chalmers-2022/speeches/address-australian-sustainable-finance-institute-sydney">also on his radar</a>. The question then will be whether making this information public will actually do what we hope it will and use money to help natural systems rather than extract from them. <h2>What happens next?</h2> Since taking office, the Labor government has pledged to take action on the perilous decline of the natural world with plans such as bringing the value of nature into our <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/dec/16/cop15-australia-us-commit-to-measuring-value-of-nature-and-reflecting-it-in-national-accounts">national accounts</a>. While positive, the real action won’t happen until nature risk reporting is mandatory, <a href="https://theconversation.com/complete-elation-greeted-pliberseks-big-plans-to-protect-nature-but-hurdles-litter-the-path-196287">environment laws with teeth</a> are introduced, and until both governments and private industry direct <a href="https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/conl.12682">serious money</a> into helping nature, not harming it. Risky <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-government-hopes-private-investors-will-help-save-nature-heres-how-its-scheme-could-fail-193010">nature credit markets</a> aren’t going to cut the mustard. You don’t have to sit back and wait. Why not ask your super fund and bank what nature-related risks they are exposing your money to? Image credits: Getty Images This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/losing-the-natural-world-comes-with-major-risks-for-your-super-fund-and-bank-198669" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>.

Retirement Income

Meghan and Kate’s fiery text exchange revealed

An explosive text exchange between Kate Middleton and Meghan Markle has been aired by Prince Harry, detailing how the women clashed over Princess Charlotte’s dress for Harry and Meghan’s wedding. In the Duke of Sussex’s memoir Spare, he shared exactly what was said between Kate and Meghan which led to him finding his wife “on the floor sobbing”. Harry wrote that the week of his 2018 wedding to Meghan, Kate texted his soon-to-be wife about a “problem” with Princess Charlotte’s bridesmaid dress. “The French haute couture dresses had been hand-sewn based solely on [the bridesmaids’] measurements, so it was not surprising that they needed alterations,” Harry explained of the dresses, which were custom-made by Givenchy’s then-creative director Clare Waight Keller, who also created Meghan’s wedding dress. “Meg didn’t reply to Kate straight away. Yes, she had endless wedding-related texts, but mostly she was dealing with the chaos surrounding her father. So the next morning she texted Kate that our tailor was standing by,” Harry wrote. Meghan added that the tailor’s name was “Ajay” and he was “at the Palace”. But Harry claims “this wasn’t sufficient”. He explained that Kate wrote back, complaining, “Charlotte’s dress is too big, too long, too baggy. She cried when she tried it on at home.” According to Harry, Meghan replied, “Right, and I told you the tailor has been standing by since 8am. Here. At KP. Can you take Charlotte to have it altered, as the other mums are doing?” Harry claimed Kate rejected the offer, demanding that “all the dresses need to be remade,” and that her own wedding dress designer, Sarah Burton, had agreed with her. “Meg asked if Kate was aware of what was going on right now. With her father. Kate said she was well aware, but the dresses. And the wedding is in four days!” Harry wrote, to which his wife reportedly replied sharply, “Yes, Kate, I know.” Harry went on to explain that his wife eventually replied to Kate with, “I’m not sure what else to say. If the dress doesn’t fit, then please take Charlotte to see Ajay. He’s been waiting all day.” “Fine,” he says Kate responded. In his memoir, Harry says that while he came home to find Meghan “on the floor sobbing”, he hadn’t considered Kate’s behaviour to be malicious, telling his bride that she “hadn’t meant any harm.” Image credits: Getty Images

Beauty & Style

Russia finally frees Olympic basketballer

Russia has freed WNBA star Brittney Griner in a dramatic high-level prisoner swap with the US for notorious Russian arms dealer Viktor Bout. The swap was a major goal for President Joe Biden, but carried a hefty price. The deal, which was the second such exchange in eight months with Russia, procured the release of the most prominent American detained abroad. Brittney Griner is a two-time Olympic gold medalist whose months-long imprisonment on drug charges brought unprecedented attention to the population of wrongful detainees abroad. Biden's authorisation to release a Russian felon once nicknamed "the Merchant of Death" highlighted the escalating pressure that his government faced to bring Griner home. This follows the recent resolution of her criminal case. "Today my family is whole," Cherelle Griner said in a press conference at the White House. She also called for Paul Whelan's release. Biden says US has "not forgotten about Paul Whelan", will "never give up" trying to secure his release from Russia. "We've never forgotten about Brittney and we've not forgotten about Paul Whelan, who's been unjustly detained in Russia for years," the US President said. "This was not a choice of which American to bring home. We brought home Trevor Reed when we had a chance earlier this year. Sadly, for totally illegitimate reasons, Russia is treating Paul's case differently than Brittney's, and while we have not yet succeeded in securing Paul's release, we are not giving up.” Russian and US officials had conveyed cautious optimism in recent weeks after months of strained negotiations. Biden announced in November that he was hopeful that Russia would engage in a deal now that the midterm elections were complete. The Biden administration was ultimately willing to exchange Viktor Bout if it meant Griner's freedom. The detention of one of the greatest players in WNBA history contributed to a swirl of unprecedented public attention for an individual detainee case — not to mention intense pressure on the White House. Griner's arrest in February made her the most high-profile American jailed abroad. Images: Wikimedia / Twitter

Legal

Super funds should use their substantial holdings for public good

Last month Federal Treasurer Jim Chalmers unveiled the <a href="https://theconversation.com/albanese-governments-first-budget-delivers-election-promises-but-forecasts-soaring-power-prices-192844">National Housing Accord</a>, intended to build a million new homes in Australia. Part of the plan is to encourage superannuation funds to invest in social and affordable housing. The proposal was met with <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/money/super-and-retirement/only-if-the-return-stacks-up-super-funds-will-demand-sweeteners-to-back-labor-housing-plan-20221028-p5btsq.html">criticism</a> from some quarters, with <a href="https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2022/09/hey-labor-hands-off-our-superannuation-savings/">critics arguing</a>Australia’s superannuation savings belongs to its members, "it is their money, not Labor’s play money." These critics are forgetting it was not so long ago people’s taxes (which can also be seen as “their” money) paid everyone’s pensions. And while in consolidated revenue on their way to keeping us in comfort in our old age, these taxes helped build extensive public and social infrastructure. The transfer of retirement funding from the national government to non-government super funds is just one example of the shift from public provision of social goods towards individual accumulation that has defined Australian politics for four decades. This shift, along with associated income tax cuts, has contributed directly to the housing affordability crisis via the emphasis on property as an investment. Australia’s super funds now control <a href="https://www.superannuation.asn.au/resources/superannuation-statistics">$3.3 trillion</a> – the <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/publication/p2020-super">fourth-largest pool</a> of retirement savings in the world. Most of them invest in <a href="https://www.marketforces.org.au/superfunds/">fossil fuels</a> and some, directly or indirectly, in <a href="https://novowealth.com.au/the-dirty-dozen-part-3/">armaments</a>, exploited labour and old-growth logging. All of them invest <a href="https://www.investordaily.com.au/superannuation/50298-super-funds-continue-shift-to-international-investments">internationally</a>where, if they are not doing actual harm, they are still not doing any good for their members in Australia beyond delivering financial returns. Super funds are regulated by federal legislation which originally stipulated they must act in the “<a href="https://theconversation.com/labor-is-winding-back-reforms-meant-to-hold-super-funds-accountable-to-their-members-187594">best interests of their members</a>”. This was changed by the Coalition government in 2020 to read “<a href="https://archive.budget.gov.au/2020-21/factsheets/download/your_future_your_super_factsheet.pdf">best financial interests</a>”. It is this requirement that has the critics of Chalmers’ plan <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/news/super-funds-cant-solve-our-affordable-housing-problem/">baulking</a>: how can it be in members’ best financial interests to invest in social housing? <h2>Why super funds should invest in social housing</h2> If even 1% of the $3 trillion – $30 billion – were invested in social housing, rental pressures in the private housing market would be massively reduced as tens of thousands of households currently in the private rental market vacated those dwellings for new social housing. The flow-on effects of decent secure housing, including improvements in physical and mental health, and general social welfare are <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/08854122211012911">well</a> <a href="https://www.ahuri.edu.au/sites/default/files/migration/documents/Final-Report-Trajectories-the-interplay-between-housing-and-mental-health-pathways.pdf">documented</a>. The Albanese government could re-amend the regulations to their earlier form, and could require all super funds to invest a proportion of their portfolios in socially and ethically beneficial activities. Super fund members are workers and members of society too, making up most of the adult population. They would all benefit from a more equal society. <h2>Investing for social good is already happening</h2> Some local funds and other financial institutions are already investing in social goods. Various super funds like <a href="https://www.cbussuper.com.au/super/my-investment-options/investing-in-australia#:%7E:text=Cbus%20Super%27s%20social%20and%20affordable%20housing%20investment&text=The%20Fund%20has%20been%20a,more%20social%20and%20affordable%20housing.">CBus</a> and community banks like <a href="https://bankaust.com.au/impact-finance/inclusive-and-accessible-housing">Bank Australia</a>invest in or give low-interest loans to community housing associations. Australian Super has a 25% stake in <a href="https://assemblecommunities.com/australiansuper-makes-cornerstone-investment-in-assemble-communities/">Assemble</a>, an affordable housing developer – bought before the 2020 amendment. They are taking small steps in a direction that is well-established in many European countries, where the notion of corporate responsibility has much greater resonance. This can be seen in the German constitution, which stipulates property ownership entails obligations, and “<a href="https://www.deutschland.de/en/topic/politics/the-german-basic-law-article-14-property-and-the-right-of-inheritance-shall-be">its use shall also serve the public good</a>.” European funds are finding low-yielding, slow-returning investments in social and co-operative housing complement their diverse portfolios well. Germany’s <a href="https://www.umweltbank.de/_Resources/Persistent/3/8/c/c/38ccacb3aabab0e602c8da17624d59d40b4b385f/20220705_UmweltBank_Anno_engl.pdf">UmweltBank</a> supports various housing initiatives including the famous <a href="https://www.umweltbank.de/2019/sauber-finanziert/wohnprojekt-spreefeld">Spreefeld co-op</a> in Berlin, which provides a steady, low-risk return. Investments in social housing are regarded as the lowest risk of all, as rents are mostly paid from financial assistance guaranteed by the state. Pension funds and community banks can commit to the long term, unlike <a href="https://overland.org.au/2021/12/vulture-landlords-and-the-justice-washing-of-housing-struggle/comment-page-1/#comment-1060442">corporate investors</a> that purchase social housing for a limited period before selling it on the private market. Oversight of these initiatives must be careful and regulated, but there is no reason why they should not be implemented. Chalmers’ plan should be applauded, and could go much further. Image credits: Getty Images This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/super-funds-should-use-their-substantial-holdings-for-public-good-194443" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>.

Retirement Income

Retiree shocked to find super account drained of funds

A retired couple have received the shock of their life after finding out their super was drained to next to nothing after years of hard work. Stephen Lockwood worked his entire life but was forced to retire after having open-heart surgery, a plate placed in his neck for sciatic nerve, and two hip replacements. At 65 years old, Stephen believed that he had enough in his super account for him and his wife Denise. But when Denise went to take a look at the account, she was horrified to find only $48,863.80 of the expected $200,000 that was meant to be in there. It is understood that in 2010, Stephen took advice from MBA Financial Strategists to merge all his super accounts into one. Based on life insurance cover, all three accounts were merged into AXA's Summit Personal Super Plan before merging into AMP the following year. Five years later, Stephen had a record of $79,613.71 in his super but things took a turn despite the couple contributing $800 each month. This was caused by multiple fees each month, particularly for his life insurance and total permanent disability cover, which almost quadrupled from $509 per month in 2013 to $1960 a month this year. He was also being charged for a financial advisor. "They were taking $24,000 a year," Stephen told <a href="https://9now.nine.com.au/a-current-affair/adelaide-couple-call-out-superannuation-fees/3bf0e217-3d45-4dd2-b155-7842490d0205?ocid=Social-9News&fbclid=IwAR0r0e5KfoEOrTIjSGaa_K70Cf7fGheE6E6HeLrsWbGFxDBx6y_pyGX5iv4" target="_blank" rel="noopener">A Current Affair</a>. Stephen admitted he wasn’t keeping tabs on his account and assumed that being charged for an advisor from MBA Financial Strategist was okay. MBA Financial Strategists told the publication that they attempted to reach out to Stephen in 2017 but heard no response. "At his most recent review in 2017, we alerted Mr Lockwood that his life insurer was increasing his premiums and it would be prudent to review his level of cover," a spokesperson told A Current Affair. "We made multiple attempts to contact Mr Lockwood over a number of years to assist with his annual review, however due to lack of contact we ceased charging his annual fee for advice in 2020.” Stephen’s account has since been referred to the Australian Financial Complaints Authority with AMP cooperating to receive the best possible solution. Image: ACA

Retirement Life

How do I find out what my superannuation fund invests in? A finance expert explains

You want your superannuation savings to be invested in things that also serve the planet’s long-term interests. But how can you be sure your fund’s values align with yours – or even its own claims? This question has become increasingly pertinent as demand for environmentally and socially sustainable investments <a href="https://asic.gov.au/about-asic/news-centre/find-a-media-release/2022-releases/22-141mr-how-to-avoid-greenwashing-for-superannuation-and-managed-funds/">grows</a> – and with it incentives for financial institutions to put the best spin on their offerings. One consultancy specialising in “responsible investment” reckons <a href="https://thenewdaily.com.au/finance/superannuation/2021/08/16/greenwashing-super-funds/">10% of the funds</a> it has examined do not have the sustainability orientation they claim. Among those <a href="https://www.edo.org.au/2022/08/10/hestas-fossil-fuel-investments-may-amount-to-a-breach-of-the-law/">accused of greenwashing</a> in recent months is one of Australia’s biggest super funds, HESTA (the industry fund for health and community service workers), which has promoting its “clean energy” credentials while still holding shares in fossil-fuel companies <a href="https://www.ai-cio.com/news/australias-hesta-accused-of-greenwashing/">Woodside and Santos</a>. So how can you check what your superannuation fund invests in? Super funds are legally obliged to disclose how they invest your money in two different disclosure documents – a Product Disclosure Statement and a Portfolio Holdings Disclosure. Both will be available on a super fund’s website, though how easily you can find them will vary. The rest of this article is going to explain what information these documents provide, how useful this information is likely to be, and your best bet to ensure your super fund reflects your values. <h2>The Product Disclosure Statement</h2> Product disclosure statements are required by the financial regulator (the Australian Securities and Investments Commission) for all financial products. This document outlines the most basic but important information of an investment product’s features, benefits, risks and costs, including fees and taxes. The format is standardised, with one section (Section 5) covering with “How we invest your money”. The information it contains is broad. At best you’ll learn how the fund splits its investments between safe and riskier assets, and between different asset classes – Australian shares, international shares, property trusts, infrastructure trust, cash and so on. <h2>Portfolio Holding Disclosure</h2> For a comprehensive look at where your money is invested in, you can consider the Portfolio Holdings Disclosure. This document lists a fund’s complete holdings – including the percentage and value of every single company stock held. Portfolio holdings disclosures are relatively new, being obligatory only since March 2022 under <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2021L01531">legislation</a> meant to improve transparency in the sector. However, super funds aren’t obliged to provide this information in a consistent, easily understandable way. For a non-expert who doesn’t know what to look for, the level of detail can be mind-boggling. You may find yourself scrutinising a spreadsheet listing thousands of items. The Australian Retirement Trust’s Portfolio Holdings Disclosure for its “Lifecycle Balanced Pool”, for example, has more than <a href="https://www.australianretirementtrust.com.au/investments/what-we-invest-in/superannuation-investments">8,000</a> line items. Some super funds have made the effort to provide this information in a more user-friendly format. An example is Future Super, which allows you to <a href="https://www.futuresuper.com.au/everything-we-invest-in/?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=1757241588&utm_content=68234193065&utm_term=future%20super&campaigntype=SearchNetwork-1757241588&device=c&campaignid=1757241588&adgroup=68234193065&keyword=future%20super&matchtype=p&placement=&adposition=&location=9069039&gclid=CjwKCAjwmJeYBhAwEiwAXlg0AYOEe2tJViZiZBgUk3bt1h9LNuHx1jWnGy6VzqGaNjBzOEi60852JRoCel8QAvD_BwE">search and filter</a> portfolio holdings by asset class and country of origin. But if your concern is to avoid investing in some specific activity such as in mining fossil fuels or gambling, you’ll need to know the companies and other assets you want to avoid for this to be helpful. <h2>Your best options</h2> This is not to say portfolio holding disclosure obligations are useless. They are incredibly useful – a huge leap forward in the sector’s accountability. They just aren’t designed for consumers. So there is still much work to be done to make the sector truly transparent. What would really help is independent certification and ratings of super products, similar to government websites and programs that certify energy efficiency and allow comparison of electricity plans. In the meantime, I can offer you one big tip. Choose a specific superannuation product that markets itself on its environmental or social sustainability credentials. Most super funds now provide these choices alongside their more traditional investment options. There is a variety of “screening” approaches to ethical investments. Some exclude entire sectors. Others include the best environmental and social performers even among “sinful” industries such as tobacco or weapons. So just because a super product is marketed as “ethical” or “sustainable” doesn’t guarantee you will agree with all its investments. But there is a much higher likelihood of it living up to its claims due to greater scrutiny by third parties such as environmental groups as well as the financial regulator. The Australian Securities and Investments Commission put super funds on notice earlier this year with a “<a href="https://asic.gov.au/regulatory-resources/financial-services/how-to-avoid-greenwashing-when-offering-or-promoting-sustainability-related-products/">guidance note</a>” about the growing risk of greenwashing in sustainability-related financial products. It reminded funds that “making statements (or disseminating information) that are false or misleading, or engaging in dishonest, misleading or deceptive conduct in relation to a financial product or financial service” is against the law. So super funds know their portfolios are being scrutinised. Switching your investment option or fund is simpler than you think. You only need to fill out and lodge a form. Just be sure to compare fees and performance, and seek a second opinion from trustworthy adviser before “voting with your wallet”. Image credits: Getty Images This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-do-i-find-out-what-my-superannuation-fund-invests-in-a-finance-expert-explains-188802" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>.

Retirement Income

"You just asked me": Albo and Ally's tense exchange

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has snapped back at Ally Langdon during a tense moment while he was being interviewed on the Today show. Mr Albanese appeared on the Channel 9 morning show to discuss several topics, one including the fallout from the recent revelations that former PM Scott Morrison had secretly appointed himself to five ministries. Ally broached the topic by asking the Prime Minister Albanese whether he would call a Royal Commission into how all levels of government handled the recent Covid-19 pandemic. She then raised John Howard's comments from earlier in the week, which Mr Albanese quickly dismissed as being those of a “loyal Liberal” and said when asked about Mr Morrison he will give an answer. Ally Langdon went on to question whether “the bloke you beat” should be the Prime Minister’s top priority, considering Australia's energy crisis and homelessness issues. The PM immediately took the issue with Langdon's line of questioning, declaring that he was only talking about the controversy because Langdon had asked about it. “You just asked me the question, Ally, about Scott Morrison and I gave you the answer. If you ask me a question about inflation or about the economy, I‘ll give you an answer about that as well. “This isn’t an issue that I chose to raise.” Ally quickly switched topics to something a little more light-hearted, discussing whether the NRL Grand Final would remain in NSW this year. Image: Sunrise

Manu Feildel and Kyle Sandilands pop off in tense exchange

Kyle Sandilands and Manu Feildel went head-to-head in a tense exchange about new My Kitchen Rules judge, Nigella Lawson. The shock jock questioned Manu as to why Nigella wouldn’t agree to doing an interview with him and help promote the show. “What’s her problem? Apparently I hear, correct me if I’m wrong producers, the network is upset because Nigella’s said ‘no way, you’re not going on that filthy show’. Our show. How does that happen?” Kyle asked. A confused Manu was shocked to hear the claims and told Kyle he was not sure as to why Nigella would not agree to an interview, explaining this is the first time he’s heard of it. “I have no idea, that’s news to me buddy. I will make sure she talks to you next time,” he responded. But that was not a good enough excuse for Kyle who continued his rampage against the wrong person. “How am I meant to support you when the woman besides you loathes the thought of me?” he asked. “I think she’s amazing, she’s the queen but when you find out someone doesn’t like you, you can’t help but not like someone back.” Manu’s voice changed and he made it clear that he was uncomfortable about the subject, requesting that they speak about My Kitchen Rules. “I think you’re just being upset for no reason. Let’s not get upset guys.” “I think he’s embarrassed that his co-worker let him down,” Kyle told Jackie O. Jackie O did not want anything to do with the conversation and said “maybe he [Manu] was sick of talking about it [Nigella]”. “Who gives a s**t what he's sick and tired of talking about!” Kyle shot back. “I like Manu, I like the show, he can come on but I am very shocked about the Nigella thing. That’s a real slap to the face.” Kyle then asked Manu to “sort out” Nigella’s management before the conversation slowly ended. My Kitchen Rules airs on Channel 7 on Sunday August 7 at 7pm. Images: Instagram

Princess Beatrice praised for sublime grace in awkward exchange

Princess Beatrice has received praise, following her interaction with a royal fan who didn't know who she was. During the Queen's Platinum Jubilee celebrations last weekend, the 33-year-old princess had a sweet interaction with an elderly women who asked who she was. In a video shared to TikTok, the royal was filmed as she graciously explained that the Queen was her grandmother. <blockquote class="tiktok-embed" style="max-width: 605px; min-width: 325px;" cite="https://www.tiktok.com/@royalfamilyfanpage5/video/7106299885028216069" data-video-id="7106299885028216069"> <section><a title="@royalfamilyfanpage5" href="https://www.tiktok.com/@royalfamilyfanpage5" target="_blank" rel="noopener">@royalfamilyfanpage5</a> <a title="princessbeatrice" href="https://www.tiktok.com/tag/princessbeatrice" target="_blank" rel="noopener">#princessbeatrice</a> <a title="queenelizabeth" href="https://www.tiktok.com/tag/queenelizabeth" target="_blank" rel="noopener">#queenelizabeth</a> <a title="princesseugenie" href="https://www.tiktok.com/tag/princesseugenie" target="_blank" rel="noopener">#Princesseugenie</a> <a title="princeharry" href="https://www.tiktok.com/tag/princeharry" target="_blank" rel="noopener">#princeharry</a> <a title="meghanmarkle" href="https://www.tiktok.com/tag/meghanmarkle" target="_blank" rel="noopener">#meghanmarkle</a> <a title="princessdiana" href="https://www.tiktok.com/tag/princessdiana" target="_blank" rel="noopener">#princessdiana</a> <a title="princecharles" href="https://www.tiktok.com/tag/princecharles" target="_blank" rel="noopener">#princecharles</a> <a title="britishroyalfamily" href="https://www.tiktok.com/tag/britishroyalfamily" target="_blank" rel="noopener">#britishroyalfamily</a> <a title="royalfamily" href="https://www.tiktok.com/tag/royalfamily" target="_blank" rel="noopener">#royalfamily</a> <a title="lilibetdiana" href="https://www.tiktok.com/tag/lilibetdiana" target="_blank" rel="noopener">#lilibetdiana</a> <a title="fy" href="https://www.tiktok.com/tag/fy" target="_blank" rel="noopener">#fy</a> <a title="viral" href="https://www.tiktok.com/tag/viral" target="_blank" rel="noopener">#viral</a> <a title="♬ πρωτότυπος ήχος - NADIA" href="https://www.tiktok.com/music/πρωτότυπος-ήχος-7106299864224484101" target="_blank" rel="noopener">♬ πρωτότυπος ήχος - NADIA</a></section> </blockquote> The woman began by touching Beatrice's arm and asking, "Who are you?" "My name is Beatrice," she told the woman. "And the Queen is my granny." The woman responded, "You're one of the royalties?" The princess held the woman's hand and explained, "Yes, she's my granny. I'm very, very lucky." The video gained a lot of attention, amassing over 2.9 million views and thousands of comments from users commending Beatrice on how she handled the interaction. One user wrote, "She is soo underrated [to be honest]! But I love how she is doing her duty even [though] she is not part of the senior royals she's still doing her duties." Princess Beatrice has previously opened up about her admiration for her grandmother previous interviews. "I have two role models, my mother and my grandmother," she told the publication. "They are both formidable women. I think having female role models is incredibly important and I am very lucky that I happen to be related to these two incredible women." She continued, "I find my grandmother inspiring every day because her overwhelming sense of duty is linked with an overwhelming curiosity." Beatrice and her sister, Princess Eugenie, took part in the celebrations for the Queen's 70 years on the throne earlier this week and were photographed watching the Platinum Jubilee pageant from the royal box. "Every day she's curious to learn something new, to do something new, and I think that at 91 years old, she goes out into the community with a genuine curiosity as to how she can be a force for good in the world."

Beauty & Style

Couple tackle the Nullabor to raise funds for polio charity

A Tasmanian couple are jumping on their bicycles ahead of their 2750-kilometre journey - and they’re doing it to raise funds for a good cause. Phil and Joyce Ogden, who have been members of Rotary for over a decade, are undertaking the trek from Perth to Adelaide as part of an epic fundraiser for Rotary’s END POLIO campaign. The campaign, which was started over 30 years ago by Rotary, UNICEF and the World Health Organisation, has been driving towards the goal of completely eradicating Polio, beginning with a project to vaccinate children in the Philippines against the disease in 1979. Now, Polio is believed to only be naturally spreading in Afghanistan and Pakistan, but according to the <a href="https://apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/wha65/A65_20-en.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">World Health Assembly</a>, failing to eradicate the disease would be a “global health emergency”. “We feel the enormous effort which has gone into turning the tide of the disease will be lost if pressure, and fundraising, is not maintained until the final handful of cases is consigned to history,” the Ogdens said in a message to all Rotarians. With the support of their South Launceston Rotary Club, the Odgens have planned to begin their trip in mid-May and hope to raise awareness of the cause along the way. “If we take our collective eyes off the ball, the disease will re-establish,” the couple said. “So, we are still committed to making our personal donations every year but felt we might harness another of our passions, cycling, to push things along - once again with the assistance of Rotary.” With limited sources of water and no shops to buy food from along the Nullarbor, the couple will carry a week’s worth of food and two days of water at a time, and they’re relying on dehydrated food which will be mailed ahead of them. Their upcoming journey isn’t a first for the Ogdens, who have covered more than 100,000 kilometres from crossing the European Alps, the Pyrenees and the Rockies. Heather Chong, the Tasmanian District Governor, praised the pair and described them as “adventurous philanthropists”. The couple have started an <a href="https://raise.rotary.org/phil-ogden/fundraiser" target="_blank" rel="noopener">online fundraiser</a> with a goal of raising $40,000. As of publication, the fundraiser has already collected $10,000 in donations, with every $1 donated prompting the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to contribute $2. Image: Supplied

Caring

Scomo enters fierce exchange with 14-year-old journo

Scott Morrison’s latest interview became heated after the 14-year-old journalist interviewing him came in with hard-hitting questions on some touchy subjects. The prime minister appeared in an interview with independent media outlet <a href="https://www.6newsau.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">6News</a>, hosted by <a href="https://twitter.com/Leo_Puglisi6/media" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Leonardo Puglisi</a> and reporter Roman Mackinnon, who caught Mr Morrison off-guard with well-researched questions spanning topics such as the election and the truth behind past claims. When asked about trust, particularly relating to Mr Morrison claiming he never referred to former NSW senator Sam Dastyari as ‘Shanghai Sam’ and claims relating to never visiting Hillsong, the PM accused “the media” of lying. “They’ve completely taken out of context what I’ve said,” Mr Morrison said. “I didn’t say I haven’t been to Hillsong Church, I said I don’t go to the Hillsong Church, that’s not my home church.” “Again, bunkum on what was being put around.” Puglisi doubled down on the claims, bringing up Crikey’'s ‘Dossier of Lies and Falsehoods’, which detailed 50 times where Mr Morrison lied in public office, and fact-checking by the ABC, which seemed to escalate the situation. “If you’re talking about credibility it’s not a good start.. It’s a gossip column,” Mr Morrison said. “The ABC, and Crikey, let’s add a few more then, the Australian Institute is probably going to be the next one, I suspect.” After quickly diffusing the situation, the exchange became heated for a second time after Pugilisi mentioned that direct quotes were used by the ABC and Crikey and after Mr Morrison began questioning where Labor leader Anthony Albanese’s economic plan was. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> PM Scott Morrison: "Where's <a href="https://twitter.com/AlboMP?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@AlboMP</a>'s economic plan...do you know?"<a href="https://twitter.com/Leo_Puglisi6?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@Leo_Puglisi6</a>: "We're trying to speak to (him) & we'd love if his media team gave us a call" 📞 FULL INTERVIEW: <a href="https://t.co/uX3U2sb194">https://t.co/uX3U2sb194</a><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/6NewsAU?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#6NewsAU</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/AusPol?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#AusPol</a> | <a href="https://t.co/eU0kSSqhk6">https://t.co/eU0kSSqhk6</a> <a href="https://t.co/Hb70BnVUxn">pic.twitter.com/Hb70BnVUxn</a> — 6 News Australia (@6NewsAU) <a href="https://twitter.com/6NewsAU/status/1511901584053129218?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 7, 2022</a></blockquote> “I think the heated moments showed the PM was actually paying attention to our questions, but I didn’t back down as I needed to make sure the truth got out there and the questions were actually answers,” Pugilisi told OverSixty via email. He added that it was difficult to keep the interview going when it became heated, but that he ensured Mr Morrison was ‘pulled up’. “It was a bit hard, especially when the PM’s answers kept requiring follow-up - but with only around 15 minutes allocated to the interview it was necessary to move on,” Puglisi said. “That being said, I didn’t wanna let him get away with a falsehood and I made sure to pull him up.” The interview comes a day after Mr Morrison cancelled his interview with ABC’s 7.30, which was rescheduled for the following week and aired the day before the full, uncensored interview with 6News. Watch the full interview below: <iframe title="YouTube video player" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/YnPRQwKPEKM" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe> Image: SIX News Australia (YouTube)

Running low on your rainy day fund?

More than $100 million is sitting with Victoria’s revenue office and is ready to be claimed by thousands of people. The State Revenue Office (SRO) is currently holding $111 million in unclaimed cash and the sum includes money from utility companies, local councils, real estate agents and even lottery tickets. There are more than 740,000 entitlements waiting to be claimed across Victoria. The forgotten cash belongs to people of all ages across the state and data revealed the local government areas that had the most potential claims. The City of Melbourne tops the list with 57,000 potential claims totalling $15.2 million, which means there is an average of $266 per person who is yet to take their money. Monash comes in second place with a total of $7 million in unclaimed funds, followed by Boroondara at $6.7 million and Whitehorse at $4.8 million. There are 24,700 potential claims in the Greater Geelong area and the average they can claim is $120. There is also unclaimed Tattersalls, Intralot and Tabcorp prizes that have been unclaimed for six months. The highest unclaimed gaming ticket is $2,136,327 from Tattersalls, which was received in March 2016. So, how do you search and claim forgotten cash? Anyone who wants to search and claim forgotten cash can do so for free via the <a href="https://www.sro.vic.gov.au/unclaimed-money">SRO website.</a> To search the register, Victorians need to provide their name or company name, the address they believe unclaimed money would have been linked to at the time and the postcode. Anyone claiming lottery or TAB winnings must supply the original ticket. Image: Getty

Retirement Income

Our Partners

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Newspaper

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Compare

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

Funding for refugees has long been politicized − punitive action against UNRWA and Palestinians fits that pattern

Couple who found love in chemotherapy raise funds for final trip

Return and Earn is a great way to recycle