Search

“The spirit of Australia”: Rival airlines' actions praised after Bonza collapse

Thousands of passengers were left stranded across the country when budget airline Bonza cancelled all their flights and announced that they have entered into voluntary administration. “Bonza has temporarily suspended services due to be operated today, as discussions are currently underway regarding the ongoing viability of the business,” CEO Tim Jordan said. “We apologise to our customers who are impacted by this and we are working as quickly as possible to determine a way forward that ensures there is ongoing competition in the Australian aviation market," he later told news.com.au. Rival airlines, including Jetstar, Qantas and Virgin have all stepped in to help passengers and staff affected by Bonza's sudden collapse. Jetstar and Virgin Australia sprung into action when one passenger, <a href="https://www.oversixty.com.au/travel/travel-trouble/not-good-enough-karl-takes-aim-at-airline-cancellation" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Tracy Hilbert</a>, revealed her devastation after her morning flight to Melbourne got cancelled on the day that she was planning to be with her family following her father's passing on Monday. The two airlines helped her get to her destination without charging her for a ticket. Jetstar, which is owned by Qantas, also released a statement on Tuesday and said: “We understand today’s news about Bonza will have a significant impact on many people’s travel plans.” “For Bonza customers who are due to travel today or who are stuck away from home, Jetstar and Qantas will assist by providing flights at no cost where there are seats available.” Qantas also released a statement offering employment support to staff affected by the budget airline's collapse. “We extend our thoughts to our aviation industry colleagues and their families – from pilots and cabin crew to flight planners and operations controllers,” it read. “If Bonza employees would like to discuss recruitment opportunities within Jetstar and Qantas, particularly in specialised fields which are unique to aviation, we’ve set up a dedicated page on the Jetstar careers website. “For any customers with a cancelled Bonza flight on a route we operate, to make sure you’re not further out of pocket, you can fly with us at no cost where we have seats available.” Virgin Australia also extended its hand to staff seeking employment, and offered support to any passengers stranded mid-journey with complimentary seats, where available. “When Bonza started in Australia, we welcomed its launch because competition makes us all better and benefits consumers. We are saddened to hear of Bonza’s current situation and the impacts on its people, customers and partners,” the statement read. “We will do what we can to support Bonza’s employees by prioritising them for any current and future roles at Virgin Australia, and encourage them to contact our careers team at recruitmentteam@virginaustralia.com if they wish.” The three airlines' responses have been applauded by the aviation industry and Aussies alike with many branding it “the spirit of Australia”. Image: Lachie Millard/ news.com.au

Domestic Travel

Elephant tourism often involves cruelty – here are steps toward more humane, animal-friendly excursions

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/michelle-szydlowski-1495781">Michelle Szydlowski</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/miami-university-1934">Miami University</a> Suju Kali is a 50-year-old elephant in Nepal who has been carrying tourists for over 30 years. Like many elephants I encounter through my <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/10888705.2022.2028628">research</a>, Suju Kali exhibits anxiety and can be aggressive toward strangers. She suffers from emotional trauma as a result of prolonged, commercial human contact. Like Suju Kali, many animals are trapped within the tourism industry. Some venues have no oversight and little concern for animal or tourist safety. Between 120,000 and 340,000 animals are used globally in a variety of wildlife tourism attractions, including <a href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0138939">endangered species</a> like elephants. Over a quarter of the world’s <a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/7140/45818198">endangered elephants</a> reside in captivity with little oversight. Wildlife tourism – which involves viewing wildlife such as primates or birds in conservation areas, feeding or touching captive or “rehabilitated” wildlife in facilities, and bathing or riding animals like elephants – is <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/14724049.2022.2156523">tricky business</a>. I know this because I am <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=YbweA2MAAAAJ&hl=en">a researcher studying human relationships with elephants</a> in both tourism and conservation settings within Southeast Asia. These types of experiences have long been an <a href="https://kathmandupost.com/money/2021/06/17/tourism-is-nepal-s-fourth-largest-industry-by-employment-study">extremely popular and profitable</a> part of the <a href="https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1002074">tourism market</a>. But now, many travel-related organizations are urging people not to participate in, or <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/destinations/2018/04/27/animal-welfare-travelers-how-enjoy-wildlife-without-harming/544938002/">calling for an outright ban on, interactive wildlife experiences</a>. Tourism vendors have started marketing more “ethical options” for consumers. Some are attempting to truly improve the health and welfare of wildlife, and some are transitioning captive wildlife into touch-free, non-riding or lower-stress environments. In other places, organizations are attempting to <a href="https://www.fao.org/documents/card/es/c/b2c5dad0-b9b9-5a3d-a720-20bf3b9f0dc2/">implement standards of care</a> or create manuals that outline good practices for animal husbandry. This marketing, academics argue, is often simply “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2017.11.007">greenwashing</a>,” <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2023.2280704">applying marketing labels to make consumers feel better</a> about their choices without making any real changes. Worse, research shows that some programs marketing themselves as ethical tourism may instead be widening economic gaps and harming both humans and other species that they are meant to protect. <h2>No quick fix</h2> For example, rather than tourist dollars trickling down to local struggling families as intended by local governments, many tourism venues are owned by nonresidents, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/japfcsc.v2i1.26746">meaning the profits do not stay in the area</a>. Likewise, only a small number of residents can afford to own tourism venues, and venues do not provide employment for locals from lower income groups. This economic gap is especially obvious in Nepalese elephant stables: Venue owners continue to make money off elephants, while elephant caregivers continue to work 17 hours a day for about US$21 a month; tourists are led to believe they are “<a href="https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/book/10.1079/9781800624498.0000">promoting sustainability</a>.” Yet, there are no easy answers, especially for elephants working in tourism. Moving them to sanctuaries is difficult because with no governmental or global welfare oversight, elephants may end up in worse conditions. Many kindhearted souls who want to “help” elephants know little about their biology and mental health needs, or what it takes to keep them healthy. Also, feeding large animals like Suju Kali is pricey, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14010171">costing around $19,000 yearly</a>. So without profits from riding or other income, owners – or would-be rescuers – can’t maintain elephants. Releasing captive elephants to the jungle is not a choice – many have never learned to live in the wild, so they cannot survive on their own. <h2>Hurting local people</h2> Part of the problem lies with governments, as many have marketed tourism as a way to fund conservation projects. For example in Nepal, a percentage of ticket sales from elephant rides are given to community groups to use for forest preservation and support for local families. Increasing demand for <a href="https://www.routledge.com/Tourism-and-Animal-Ethics/Fennell/p/book/9781032431826">wildlife-based tourism</a> may increase traffic in the area and thus put pressure on local governments to further limit local people’s access to forest resources. This may also lead to <a href="https://www.worldanimalprotection.org/latest/news/un-world-tourism-organisation-urged-create-better-future-animals/">increased demands on local communities</a>, as was the case in Nepal. In the 1970s, the Nepalese government removed local people from their lands in what is now Chitwan National Park as part of increasing “conservation efforts” and changed the protected area’s boundaries. Indigenous “Tharu,” or people of the forest, were forced to abandon their villages and land. While some were offered access to “buffer zones” in the 1990s, many remain poor and landless today. In addition, more and more desirable land surrounding conservation areas in Nepal is being developed for tourist-based businesses such as hotels, restaurants and shops, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/japfcsc.v2i1.26746">pushing local poor people farther away</a> from central village areas and the associated tourism income. Some activists would like humans to simply release all wildlife back into the wild, but <a href="https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/book/10.1079/9781800624498.0000">there are multiple issues</a> with that. Elephant habitats throughout Southeast Asia have been transformed into croplands, cities or train tracks for human use. Other problems arise from the fact that tourism elephants have <a href="https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315457413">never learned</a> how to be elephants in their natural elements, as they were <a href="https://www.pugetsound.edu/sites/default/files/file/8342_Journal%20of%20Tourism%20%282009%29_0.pdf">separated from their herds</a> at an early age. So tourism may be vital to providing food, care and shelter to captive elephants for the rest of their lives and providing jobs for those who really need them. Because elephants can live beyond 60 years, this can be a large commitment. <h2>How to be an ethical tourist</h2> To protect elephants, tourists should check out reviews and photos from any venue they want to visit, and look for clues that animal welfare might be impacted, such as tourists allowed to feed, hold or ride captive wildlife animals. Look for healthy animals, which means doing research on what “healthy” animals of that species should look like. If a venue lists no-touch demonstrations – “unnatural” behaviors that don’t mimic what an elephant might do of their own accord, such as sitting on a ball or riding a bike, or other performances – remember that the behind-the-scenes training used to achieve these behaviors can be <a href="https://doi.org/10.21832/9781845415051-014">violent, traumatic or coercive</a>. Another way to help people and elephant is to to use small, local companies to book your adventures in your area of interest, rather than paying large, international tourism agencies. Look for locally owned hotels, and wait to book excursions until you arrive so you can use local service providers. Book homestay programs and attend cultural events led by community members; talk to tourists and locals you meet in the target town to get their opinions, and use local guides who provide wildlife viewing opportunities <a href="https://nepaldynamicecotours.com/">while maintaining distance from animals</a>. Or tourists can ask to visit <a href="https://www.americanhumane.org/press-release/global-humane-launches-humane-tourism-certification-program/">venues that are certified</a> by international humane animal organizations and that <a href="https://www.su4e.org/">do not allow contact</a> with wildlife. Or they can opt for guided hikes, canoe or kayak experiences, and other environmentally friendly options. While these suggestions will not guarantee that your excursion is animal-friendly, they will help decrease your impact on wildlife, support local families and encourage venues to stop using elephants as entertainment. Those are good first steps.<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/219792/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/michelle-szydlowski-1495781">Michelle Szydlowski</a>, Visiting Assistant Professor, Department of Biology, Project Dragonfly, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/miami-university-1934">Miami 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/elephant-tourism-often-involves-cruelty-here-are-steps-toward-more-humane-animal-friendly-excursions-219792">original article</a>. </div>

Travel Tips

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

5 ways to make Christmas lunch more ethical this year

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/rebecca-reynolds-141045">Rebecca Reynolds</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/unsw-sydney-1414">UNSW Sydney</a> What we eat matters - not just for our health, but for the planet and other living things too. Most of us know meat consumption <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s43016-021-00358-x.epdf">contributes to global warming</a> and many of us are aware of animal cruelty and human exploitation in global food supply chains. So what are some ways we can use our “fork power” to make our Christmas lunch more ethical this year? <h2>1. Replace your turkey or ham with a vegetarian dish</h2> Vegetarian options are not boring or tasteless — just look at this <a href="https://annajones.co.uk/recipe/squash-chestnut-roast">festive squash and chestnut roast</a>. A plant-focused diet has strong <a href="https://eatforum.org/eat-lancet-commission/the-planetary-health-diet-and-you/">environmental benefits</a>. Livestock not only <a href="https://theconversation.com/cop28-begins-4-issues-that-will-determine-if-the-un-climate-summit-is-a-success-from-methane-to-money-218869">produce greenhouse gas</a> when they burp, they take up huge amounts of <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9024616/">land and fresh water</a>. Reducing the number of animal products on your plate also reduces the likelihood you are contributing to the suffering of animals. Even though many countries have <a href="https://www.agriculture.gov.au/agriculture-land/animal/welfare/standards-guidelines">ethical standards</a> for the treatment of farm animals, these are not always followed, and many of the practices considered legal <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2023-03-28/pig-slaughter-methods-defended-by-pork-industry/102153822">still cause pain and suffering to animals</a>. While cutting out all animal products can be difficult, any reduction in consumption makes a difference. For example, consider swapping out the brie on your Christmas platter for hummus this year. <h2>2. Choose ‘good fish’</h2> Many of us don’t realise fish and other seafood is often sourced unsustainably, negatively impacting ocean ecosystems and wildlife. An Australian organisation called GoodFish produces a <a href="https://goodfish.org.au/">Sustainable Seafood Guide</a>, where you can find out how ethical the fish you buy is. Unfortunately, many salmon products are <a href="https://goodfish.org.au/sustainable-seafood-guide/?q=salmon">not as sustainable</a> as companies claim them to be. In comparison, farmed Australian barramundi, Murray cod, prawns, oysters and mussels, and wild-caught Australian Eastern and Western rock lobsters are classified as better choices. Additionally, an international not-for-profit organisation called the <a href="https://www.msc.org/en-au">Marine Stewardship Council</a> has an “MSC blue fish tick label” certification scheme, which endorses products from well-managed and sustainable fisheries. Have a look for MSC-certified frozen crumbed fish in your next shop. <h2>3. Choose at least one organic item, such as your roast potatoes</h2> <a href="https://www.fao.org/organicag/oa-faq/oa-faq6/en/">Organic agriculture</a> aims to produce food while establishing an ecological balance to prevent soil infertility or pest problems over the longer term. It strengthens the dynamics and carbon storage of soil, stops freshwater pollution with synthetic fertilisers and pesticides, reduces the use of fossil fuels needed to produce these chemicals, and promotes biodiversity. Yes, organic products are more expensive, but you will hopefully now feel they are worth it (you could also look out for organic produce that is reduced in price during “on special” promotions). <h2>4. Choose Fairtrade chocolate</h2> Of course, humans are heavily involved in the production, packaging and transport of the food we eat every day. Organisations such as <a href="https://fairtradeanz.org/">Fairtrade Australia and New Zealand</a> and <a href="https://www.rainforest-alliance.org/">Rainforest Alliance</a> aim to improve the lives of rural farmers and workers in developing countries – who otherwise might get unfair deals for their produce and work (these organisations also target environmental issues). You can buy Fairtrade- and Rainforest Alliance-certified products in supermarkets (and elsewhere), such as chocolate, coffee, tea – and even ice cream. Similarly, there are companies called <a href="https://bcorporation.com.au/find-b-corps/">B Corps</a>, or Certified B Corporations. These are organisations that also care about social and environmental issues. B Corp food products can also be found in supermarkets (and elsewhere), and include things like peanut butter and seaweed snacks. <h2>5. Make friends with your freezer</h2> When we waste food, we are wasting the energy, land, water and chemicals that were used during the <a href="https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/science/climate-issues/food">long process</a> of getting it into your home. Lots of us worry at Christmas about “having enough food for everyone”, and consequently buy too much. Why not talk through your menu plan with someone else before you go shopping, to check that you are not anxiety-buying to feed 50 people (instead of your extended family of ten). But even with calm planning, you may still have leftover food. If this happens, you can get creative with using leftovers on Boxing Day (OzHarvest has some recipes online, including <a href="https://www.ozharvest.org/use-it-up/tips/">Christmas rockyroad</a>), or you can preserve food to eat at a later date using your cool friend, the freezer.<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/218351/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/rebecca-reynolds-141045">Rebecca Reynolds</a>, Adjunct lecturer and nutritionist, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/unsw-sydney-1414">UNSW Sydney</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/5-ways-to-make-christmas-lunch-more-ethical-this-year-218351">original article</a>.

Food & Wine

"Impunity for macho actions is over": Why the entire Spanish World Cup team has quit

Luis Rubiales, the head of Spanish soccer, has rejected calls for his resignation despite facing widespread backlash for his actions following Spain's Women's World Cup victory. Rubiales came under fire after he was seen grabbing star player Jenni Hermoso's head and kissing her on the lips during the medal ceremony. The incident has led to a revolt among 56 national team members and condemnation from the government for what they deemed to be "macho actions". A collective statement, issued through their union, was signed by all 23 members of the winning squad, including Hermoso, as well as 32 other team members. In the statement, they declared their refusal to participate in international matches as long as Rubiales remains at the helm of the Royal Spanish Football Federation (RFEF). Within the same statement, Hermoso refuted Rubiales' assertion that the kiss was consensual (see below for the statement in full). The controversial kiss occurred at the medal ceremony after Spain's victory over England in the World Cup final in Sydney. Rubiales' elderly mother, Angeles Bejar, has now taken an extreme stance in support of her son, initiating a hunger strike and seeking refuge in a church, citing a perceived "inhumane witch-hunt" against him. In parallel, the regional presidents of the Spanish football federation have called for Rubiales' resignation. This series of events coincided with Spanish prosecutors' announcement of a preliminary investigation into Rubiales' conduct during the World Cup final, focusing on the kiss with Hermoso. The Spanish national court stated that the investigation would explore whether Rubiales' actions could be considered sexual assault. Despite facing pressure to step down, Rubiales has resisted these calls and maintained that the kiss was just a “little peck” that was “spontaneous, mutual, euphoric and consensual”. He also claimed that he asked Hermoso if he could kiss her and that she said “OK”. The Spanish government, lacking the authority to directly remove Rubiales from his position, has sought legal avenues to suspend him using a sports tribunal. Victor Francos, the head of the state-run sports council, emphasised the government's determination to ensure accountability in this matter, comparing it to a Spanish soccer "Me Too" movement. Criticism of Rubiales' behavior has escalated since Spain's victory, with Acting Labour Minister Yolanda Diaz condemning his actions as "unacceptable." The government has been urged to take swift action against such behaviour and ensure that those responsible are held accountable. “The government must act and take urgent measures: impunity for macho actions is over. Rubiales cannot continue in office,” Diaz wrote on social media. In response, FIFA initiated disciplinary proceedings against Rubiales, prompted by Hermoso's statement expressing her union's commitment to defending her rights and condemning acts like the one she experienced. The situation remains tense as Rubiales continues to face demands for his resignation, while he remains defiant and resolute in his position as the head of Spanish soccer. Hermoso’s full statement: “After achieving one of the most desired successes of my sports career and after a few days of reflection, I want to wholeheartedly thank my teammates, fans, followers, the media and all of you who have made this dream come true; Your work and unconditional support have been a fundamental part of winning the World Cup. “In reference to what happened today. Although it is true that for my part I do not want to interfere with the multiple legal processes in progress, I feel compelled to denounce that the words of Mr. Luis Rubiales explaining the unfortunate incident are categorically false and part of the manipulative culture that he himself has generated. “I clarify that at no time did the conversation to which Mr. Luis Rubiales referred to take place and that, far from it, his kiss was consented. In the same way I want to reiterate as I did at the time that this fact had not been to my liking. “The situation caused me a shock due to the context of the celebration, and with the passage of time and after delving a little deeper into those first feelings, I feel the need to denounce this fact since I consider that no person, in any area work, sports or social should be a victim of this type of non-consensual behaviour. “I felt vulnerable and the victim of aggression, an impulsive, sexist, out of place act and without any kind of consent on my part. I just wasn’t respected. I was asked to make a joint statement to take the pressure off the president, but at that moment in my head I only had the idea of enjoying the historic milestone reached together with my teammates. “For this reason, at all times I informed the RFEF and its different interlocutors, as well as the media and people I trust that I would not make any type of individual or joint statement on this matter, since I understood that, if I did, I would still remove more prominence to such a special moment for my colleagues and me. “Despite my decision, I have to state that I have been under continuous pressure to come up with a statement that could justify the act of Mr. Luis Rubiales. Not only that, but in different ways and through different people, the RFEF has pressured my environment (family, friends, colleagues, etc.) to give testimony that had little or nothing to do with my feelings. “It is not up to me to evaluate communication and integrity practices, but I am sure that as the World Champion National Team we do not deserve such a manipulative, hostile and controlling culture. This type of incident joins a long list of situations that we players have been denouncing in recent years, so this fact, in which I have been involved, is just the straw that breaks the camel’s back and what everyone has been able to see, but attitudes like this have been part of the day-to-day life of our team for years. “For all these reasons, I want to reinforce the position I took from the beginning, considering that I do not have to support the person who has committed this action against my will, without respecting me, at a historic moment for me and for women’s sport. from this country. “In no case can it be my responsibility to assume the consequences of transmitting something in which I do not believe, which is why I have refused the pressures received. ZERO TOLERANCE with these behaviors. I want to close by making it very clear that although I am the one expressing these words, it is all the players in Spain and the world who have given me the strength to come out with this statement. “Faced with such a show of disrespect and inability to recognise one’s own mistakes and assume the consequences, I have made the decision not to play for the National Team again as long as the current leaders continue. Thank you all for the messages of support and words of encouragement received. I know I am not alone and thanks to all of you we will get ahead more united. I leave this issue to the people I trust TMJ and FUTPRO and they will continue working on the next steps based on recent events.” Image: Channel 7

Legal

Qantas slapped with class action lawsuit

Qantas is staring down the barrel of a class action lawsuit, after being accused of prioritising its financial interests over its contractual commitments to customers during the COVID-19 pandemic. The legal action was initiated on Monday August 21 in response to the airline's failure to provide refunds totalling more than a billion dollars to its customers. Echo Law, the plaintiff firm, contends that Qantas deceived customers and essentially held their funds, effectively treating them as interest-free loans. Andrew Paull, a partner at Echo Law, asserts that Qantas acted unlawfully by introducing a flight credit program in response to border closures caused by the pandemic. Instead of promptly refunding customers for cancelled flights, the airline, in numerous instances, retained the funds for an extended period to bolster its financial performance. Paull notes that Qantas' own terms and conditions stipulate refunds when cancellations occur outside their control. He points out that the magnitude of the claim has grown due to Qantas' prolonged inaction in addressing these issues. The class action is not only aiming to secure redress for pending refunds but also seeks compensation for delayed reimbursements. Paull alleges that Qantas has been "unjustly enriched" by withholding money owed to its customers. He equates the interest accrued on these retained funds over the past three years to a substantial sum. This legal action marks the latest episode in a series of challenges faced by Australia's largest airline due to the pandemic's far-reaching repercussions, which severely disrupted its operations. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has expressed concern and pressured the company to simplify the refund process following a surge in customer complaints. Consumer advocates have also criticised Qantas for delays in refunding customers. Choice, a consumer advocacy group, even bestowed a "shonky award" upon Qantas due to reports of customers using credits being required to pay extra. Paull estimates that approximately $400 million in refunds remains outstanding to date. He asserts that Qantas prioritised safeguarding its financial position over honouring its commitments to customers during the pandemic, potentially misleading customers by presenting the travel credits as acts of goodwill rather than a fulfilment of contractual obligations. Responding to the lawsuit, a Qantas spokesperson stated on Monday that the airline had not yet received the lawsuit. The spokesperson categorically rejected the allegations, asserting that Qantas had already processed over $1 billion in refunds arising from COVID-19-related credits for customers impacted by lockdowns and border closures. Moreover, the spokesperson refuted claims that Qantas derived financial gains from delaying refund disbursements, highlighting the substantial revenue loss of $25 billion and $7 billion in losses due to the pandemic. (Qantas has subsequently repaid significant portions of its pandemic debts and recently reported substantial profits after receiving substantial financial support from taxpayers during the pandemic period.) Qantas also dismissed allegations of delayed refund payments to affected customers. The spokesperson emphasised that the airline has consistently communicated the refund process to customers when flights were canceled. However, Paull contends that Qantas has created formidable barriers for customers seeking to exercise their consumer rights, including unfulfilled promises of callbacks and refunds that were granted but never processed.

Legal

If the world were coming to an end, what would be the most ethical way to rebuild humanity ‘off planet’?

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/evie-kendal-734653">Evie Kendal</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/swinburne-university-of-technology-767">Swinburne University of Technology</a> Last week, scientists announced that for the first time on record, Antarctic ice has failed to “substantially recover” over winter, in a “once in 7.5-million-year event”. Climate change is the <a href="https://theconversation.com/antarctica-is-missing-a-chunk-of-sea-ice-bigger-than-greenland-whats-going-on-210665">most likely culprit</a>. Petra Heil, a sea ice physicist from the Australian Antarctic Division, <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-07-24/antarctic-sea-ice-levels-nosedive-five-sigma-event/102635204">told the ABC</a> it could tip the world into a new state. “That would be quite concerning to the sustainability of human conditions on Earth, I suspect.” And in March, a senior United Nations disarmament official <a href="https://press.un.org/en/2023/sc15250.doc.htm">told the Security Council</a> the risk of nuclear weapons being used today is higher than at any time since the end of the Cold War. Both warnings speak to concerns about Earth’s security. Will our planet be able to support human life in the future? And if not, will humanity have another chance at survival in space? <h2>‘Billionauts’ and how to choose who goes</h2> Over the past few years, we’ve witnessed the rise of the “billionaut”. The ultra-wealthy are engaged in a <a href="https://theconversation.com/billionaire-space-race-the-ultimate-symbol-of-capitalisms-flawed-obsession-with-growth-164511">private space race</a> costing billions of dollars, while <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/oliverwilliams1/2021/12/21/billionaire-space-race-turns-into-a-publicity-disaster/?sh=79056f7e5e4d">regular citizens often condemn</a> the wasted resources and contribution to global carbon emissions. Space – described in the <a href="https://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/ourwork/spacelaw/treaties/introouterspacetreaty.html">Outer Space Treaty</a> as being the “province of all mankind” – risks instead becoming the playground of the elite few, as they try to escape the consequences of environmental destruction. But if we have to select humans to send into space for a species survival mission, how do we choose who gets to go? In Montreal last month, the <a href="https://irg.space/irg-2023/">Interstellar Research Group</a> explored the question: how would you select a crew for the first interstellar mission? A panel led by <a href="https://www.erikanesvold.com/">Erika Nesvold</a>, a co-editor of the new book <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/reclaiming-space-9780197604793?cc=au&lang=en&">Reclaiming Space</a>, discussed the perspectives of gender minorities, people with disabilities and First Nations groups regarding the ideal composition for an off-world crew. I was on the panel to discuss my contribution to the book, which explores how we can promote procreation in our new off-world society, without diminishing the reproductive liberty of survivors. <h2>The ultra-wealthy and reproductive slavery</h2> The first step in deciding how to allocate limited spaces on our “lifeboat” is identifying and rejecting options that are practically or ethically unacceptable. The first option I rejected was a user-pay system, whereby the wealthy can purchase a seat on the lifeboat. A 2022 Oxfam report showed the investments of just 125 billionaires collectively contribute 393 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent per year: <a href="https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/billionaire-emits-million-times-more-greenhouse-gases-average-person#:%7E:text=Recent%20data%20from%20Oxfam's%20research,%C2%B0C%20goal%20of%20the">a million times more</a> than the average for most global citizens. If the ultra-wealthy are the only ones to survive an environmental apocalypse, there’s a risk they would just create another one, on another planet. This would undermine the species survival project. The second option I rejected was allowing a reproductive slave class to develop, with some survivors compelled to populate the new community. This would disproportionately impact cis-gender women of reproductive capacity, demanding their gestational labour in exchange for a chance at survival. Neither a user-pay system nor reproductive slave labour would achieve the goal of “saving humanity” in any meaningful way. Many would argue preserving human values - including equality, reproductive liberty, and respect for diversity - is more important than saving human biology. If we lose what makes us unique as a species, that would be a kind of extinction anyway. But if we want humanity to survive, we still need to build our population in our new home. So what other options do we have? <h2>Reproduction and diversity</h2> How can we avoid discrimination on the basis of reproductive capacity – including age, sexuality, <a href="https://theconversation.com/infertility-through-the-ages-and-how-ivf-changed-the-way-we-think-about-it-87128">fertility status</a> or personal preference? We could avoid any questions about family planning when selecting our crew. This would align with <a href="https://www.seek.com.au/career-advice/article/illegal-interview-questions-what-employers-have-no-right-to-ask">equal opportunity policies</a> in other areas, like employment. But we would then have to hope enough candidates selected on other merits happen to be willing and able to procreate. Alternatively, we could reserve a certain number of places for those who agree to contribute to population growth. Fertility would then become an inherent job requirement. This might be similar to taking on a role as a <a href="https://theconversation.com/surrogacy-laws-why-a-global-approach-is-needed-to-stop-exploitation-of-women-98966">surrogate</a>, in which reproductive capacity is essential. But what if, after accepting such a position on the mission, someone changed their mind about wanting children? Would they be expected to provide some sort of compensation? Would they be vulnerable to retaliation? The more we focus on procreation, the less diversity we will preserve in the species as a whole – especially if we deliberately select against diverse sexualities, disabilities and older people. A lack of diversity would also threaten the long-term viability of the new society. For example, even if we exclude all physiologically or socially infertile people from the initial crew, these traits will reappear in future generations. The difference is: these children would be born into a less accepting community. Cooperation will be essential for the new human society – so promoting hostility would be counterproductive. So, what options are left? Using a random global sample to select travellers might alleviate concerns about equity and fairness. But the ability of a random sample to maximise our survival as a species would depend on how large the sample can be. A global sample would minimise bias. But there’s a risk it might yield a crew without doctors, engineers, farmers or other essential personnel. <h2>Random selection versus a points-based system</h2> The best balance between competing needs might be a stratified random sampling method, involving randomly selecting survivors from predetermined categories. Reproductive potential might be one category. Others might focus on other elements of practical usefulness or contribution to human diversity. Another option is a points-based system, whereby different skills and characteristics are ranked in terms of their desirability. In this system, an elderly person who speaks multiple languages may score higher than a physiologically fertile young person, due to their ability to substantially contribute to language preservation and education. This does not entirely eliminate the potential for discrimination, of course. Someone would need to decide which traits are most desirable and valuable to the new human society. However we determine our lifeboat candidates, it should be carefully considered. In our attempt to “save humanity”, we must avoid sacrificing the very things that make us human. <hr /> Evie Kendal is a contributor to <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/reclaiming-space-9780197604793?cc=au&lang=en&">Reclaiming Space: Progressive and Multicultural Visions of Space Exploration</a> (Oxford University Press)<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/210647/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/evie-kendal-734653">Evie Kendal</a>, Senior lecturer of health promotion, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/swinburne-university-of-technology-767">Swinburne University of Technology</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/if-the-world-were-coming-to-an-end-what-would-be-the-most-ethical-way-to-rebuild-humanity-off-planet-210647">original article</a>.

Travel Trouble

ABC threatened with legal action over coronation coverage

The Australian Monarchist League have threatened to take legal action against the ABC over their coronation coverage, specifically the comments made on their hour-long special The Coronation: A discussion about the Monarchy in 2023. The programme, focussed on the monarchy’s relevance to Australia, featured The Drum’s Julia Baird and Jeremy Fernandez as hosts, with a panel that included the likes of Q&A host Stan Grant and Australian Republic Movement co-chair Craig Foster. Julian Leeser - a Liberal MP and monarchist - and Teela Reid - a Wiradjuri and Wailwan woman - were also involved. The coverage, which broadcast in Australia three hours before King Charles III’s coronation, faced a wave of criticism from the Australian Monarchist League, as well as 3AW radio host Neil Mitchell, ABC audiences, and Liberal MPs. And now, the AML have announced their intention to take their complaints further, with a statement from AML national chair Philip Benwell declaring that their “legal advisers are preparing a formal complaint to the board of the ABC in regard to the production and airing of Saturday's extremely biased pre-Coronation programme specifically designed to attack the Constitution and the Crown. Our Executive and others are meeting this week to formalise our approach. “So vitriolic are their attacks on the King, the monarchy, the British settlement and everything that came thereafter that they forget that they are the very people who want our vote for their Voice to the Parliament.” Brenwell noted that they were inviting “pertinent comments” regarding the broadcast to help compile their formal complaint, specifying that these should “include specific comments made during the programme by interviewers and panellists”. Neil Mitchell, radio host for 3AW, had a lot to say about the coverage too, noting his opinion that it had “misread the mood”, as well as his desire for the ABC to see the broadcaster held accountable. “Somebody in the ABC needs to be accountable for this,” he declared, “as the national broadcaster it should have been the place you go to see the coverage of the coronation, instead you see all this bitterness about our Indigenous history.” He also took the opportunity to point out that the panel had featured four individuals, with “three of them republicans”. The fourth - and only monarchist - Julian Leeser agreed that the broadcast had gotten “the balance wrong” when it came to their panel compilation. As Mitchell added, “to have only one of four panellists as supporters of our existing constitutional arrangements meant there was little opportunity for a panel discussion that reflected the warmth and respect Australians have for King Charles.” Images: Q&A

Ethical non-monogamy: what to know about these often misunderstood relationships

Imagine Sarah and John have been in a <a href="https://www.queerlit.co.uk/products/rewriting-the-rules?_pos=1&_sid=0287cd7c7&_ss=r">monogamous relationship</a> for five years. Although they love each other, Sarah, who is bisexual, has recently started feeling an attraction to her coworker, Andrea. This has led to several sexual encounters, leaving Sarah feeling guilty. However, she has not talked to John about her feelings or experiences with Andrea. No matter how much you love your partner, it’s common to feel attracted to someone outside of a relationship. Some couples may even want sexual encounters with other people. It can be difficult to navigate these feelings, especially when they conflict with the commitment and promises made in the relationship. While the sex between Sarah and Andrea was consensual, Sarah engaged in non-consensual sex by stepping outside of her monogamous relationship without John’s consent. There is growing curiosity about ethical or consensual <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2022.101468">non-monogamous relationships</a>, particularly among young people. YouGov data found that 43% of millennial Americans say their <a href="https://today.yougov.com/topics/society/articles-reports/2020/01/31/millennials-monogamy-poly-poll-survey-data">ideal relationship</a> is non-monogamous, even if few are in such a relationship. And a survey commissioned by sex toy brand <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/love-sex/throuples-restaurants-valentines-day-b2010151.html">Lelo</a>, found that 28% of aged 18 to 24 would consider an open relationship. What makes non-monogamy “ethical” is an emphasis on <a href="https://bettymartin.org/videos/">agreed, ongoing consent</a> and mutual respect. All parties involved are fully aware of the situation and voluntarily agree to participate. Partners are free to change their minds at any time and (re)negotiate boundaries that work for everyone involved. Ethical non-monogamy can take many forms, including <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8321986/">polyamory</a>, open relationships and <a href="https://bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1348/014466606X143153">swinging</a>. These relationships are often <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/epub/10.1177/01461672221139086">stigmatised</a> and misunderstood. They challenge the traditional notion of monogamy, which is commonly viewed in most western and religious societies as the only acceptable way of engaging in romantic relationships. Yet <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1948550619897157">research has shown</a> that consensual non-monogamy can have positive effects on relationships and the people in them. People in consensual non-monogamous relationships have <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1088868312467087?casa_token=We5Fp9hOPjQAAAAA:LI0m000j1SwvqGMbCVWekUcZ5z9DfqzuMmUtdIi59-OJiEZJ0_EjxlYq3pU6xcUZr5jIG9vlvXxztA">reported</a> higher levels of sexual and relationship satisfaction and greater <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19419899.2011.631571">relational intimacy</a> than people in monogamous relationships. <h2>Misconceptions and stigma</h2> One <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13178-021-00667-7">stigmatising view</a> is that people in non-monogamous relationships pose a greater risk to their partners’ sexual health. This is based on the assumption that having multiple sexual partners increases the likelihood of <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282130422_A_Comparison_of_Sexual_Health_History_and_Practices_among_Monogamous_and_Consensually_Nonmonogamous_Sexual_Partners">sexually transmitted infections</a> (STIs). However, research shows that people in open and non-monogamous relationships have <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S174360951534008X?via%3Dihub">safer sex practices</a> than monogamous, but unfaithful partners. Ethical non-monogamy can be a safer outlet for sexual expression compared with monogamous relationships that have led to <a href="https://academic.oup.com/jsm/article-abstract/12/10/2022/6966715">cheating</a> where someone ends up passing an STI to their partner. In healthy relationships, partners recognise that each person has their own unique sexual preferences and <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13178-021-00667-7">diverse needs</a>. For consensually non-monogamous partners, this means understanding that their primary relationship may not always fulfil all their sexual desires. Although jealousy can still exist within non-monogamous relationships, <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1041794X.2018.1531916">research</a> has found that it can be more <a href="https://nsuworks.nova.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3297&context=tqr">manageable</a> than in monogamous ones. This is because, in secure non-monogamous partnerships, there are open discussions about sexual attraction and setting boundaries, where partners can address jealousy anxiety. <h2>Exploring non-monogamy</h2> Ethical non-monogamy is not for everyone. You should only explore this type of relationship if it feels comfortable, you seek appropriate consent and the existing relationship is solid. Outsiders often hold the <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33990929/">stereotypical</a> view that people only engage in ENM if their current relationship is unstable. If you decide that it’s right for you, keep the following in mind. 1. Communicate openly Communication is important in any relationship, but especially critical in ENM relationships. Partners must be transparent and honest about their intentions, feelings, expectations and boundaries. People in non-monogamous relationships need to be aware of their emotional boundaries and be prepared to navigate feelings of <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-018-1286-4">jealousy</a>. 2. Practice safe sex Sexual health is key regardless of your relationship status or style. Get tested regularly for STIs and to use protection during sexual encounters to minimise the risk of transmission. 3. Stop shame Managing stigma is one of the most difficult parts of an ENM relationship. When people are socialised to believe that having multiple partners is wrong or immoral, this can lead to feelings of shame and self-doubt. It is important to recognise that consensually non-monogamous and multipartnered relationships are a valid lifestyle choice. You can seek support from like-minded people or talk to a sex and relationship therapist if necessary. While non-monogamy is not everyone’s cup of tea, these tips can be helpful for any relationship. Ultimately, it is essential to keep communication, consent and respect at the heart of your partnership. Image credit: Shutterstock This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/ethical-non-monogamy-what-to-know-about-these-often-misunderstood-relationships-200785" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>.

Relationships

The rich are pouring millions into life extension research – but does it have any ethical value?

Sam Altman, the chief executive of OpenAI, <a href="https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/03/08/1069523/sam-altman-investment-180-million-retro-biosciences-longevity-death/">recently invested</a> US$180 million into Retro Biosciences – a company seeking to extend human lifespans by <a href="https://retro.bio/announcement/">ten healthy years</a>. One way it plans to achieve this is by “rejuvenating” blood. This idea is based on studies that found old mice <a href="https://www.science.org/content/article/young-blood-renews-old-mice">showed signs of reversed ageing</a> when given the blood of young mice. Altman isn’t the only Silicon Valley entrepreneur supporting life extension efforts. PayPal cofounder Peter Thiel, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos and Google cofounder Larry Page have <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/science/2022/feb/17/if-they-could-turn-back-time-how-tech-billionaires-are-trying-to-reverse-the-ageing-process">poured millions</a> into projects that could profoundly affect how we live our lives. The first question raised is scientific: could these technologies work? On this front the jury is still out, and there are grounds for both <a href="https://newseu.cgtn.com/news/2021-01-14/How-close-are-we-to-radical-life-extension-and-is-it-a-good-idea--X03UFbnMWs/index.html">optimism</a> and scepticism. The second question is just as important: even if lifespan extension is feasible, would it be ethical? We explain why some common ethical arguments against lifespan extension aren’t as solid as they might seem – and put forth another, somewhat overlooked explanation for why trying to live forever might not be worth it. <h2>Is it worth it if you still die anyway?</h2> One might argue lifespan extension merely pushes back the inevitable: that we will die. However, the problem with this view is that any life saved will only be saved temporarily. A lifespan extension of ten years is akin to saving a drowning swimmer, only for them to die in a traffic accident ten years later. Although we might be sad about their eventual death, we’d still be glad we saved them. The same is true of conventional medicine. If a doctor cures my pneumonia, I will eventually die of something else, but that doesn’t mean the doctor or I will regret my being saved. It’s also worth taking a longer view of where lifespan extension research could lead us. In the <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC423155/">most optimistic scenarios</a> put forth by experts, even modest short-term gains could help people add centuries to their life, since the benefits of each intervention could cascade. For example, each extra year of life would increase the likelihood of surviving until the next big breakthrough. <h2>Is it worth it if immortality could get boring?</h2> <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0277953604004691">Many</a> <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0890406510000757">have argued</a> against lifespan extension on ethical grounds, saying they wouldn’t use these technologies. Why might somebody be opposed? One worry is that a very long life might be undesirable. Philosopher <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/problems-of-the-self/makropulos-case-reflections-on-the-tedium-of-immortality/9180185912980E017EE675254B2F4169">Bernard Williams</a> said life is made valuable through the satisfaction of what he calls “categorical desires”: desires that give us reason to want to live. Williams expects these desires relate to major life projects, such as raising a child, or writing a novel. He worries that, given a long enough life, we will run out of such projects. If so, immortality would become tedious. It’s unclear whether Williams is right. <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09672559.2012.713383">Some philosophers</a> point out human memories are fallible, and certain desires could resurface as we forget earlier experiences. <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10892-015-9203-8">Others</a> emphasise that our categorical desires evolve as our life experiences reshape our interests – and might continue to do so over the course of a very long life. In either case, our categorical desires, and hence our reason for living, would not be exhausted over a very long life. Even if immortality did get tedious, this wouldn’t count against modest lifespan extensions. Many would argue 80-something years isn’t enough time to explore one’s potential. Personally, we’d welcome another 20 or even 50 years to write a novel, or start a career as a DJ. <h2>Is it worth it if poor people miss out?</h2> Another worry regarding lifespan extension technologies is egalitarian. These technologies will be expensive; it seems unjust for Silicon Valley billionaires to celebrate their 150th birthdays while the rest of us mostly die in our 70s and 80s. This objection seems convincing. Most people welcome interventions that promote health equality, which is reflected in broader societal demands for universal healthcare. But there’s important nuance to consider here. Consider that universal healthcare systems promote equality by improving the situation of those who aren’t well off. On the other hand, preventing the development of lifespan extension technologies will worsen the situation of those who are well off. The ethical desirability of equality based on “<a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-9329.00041">levelling down</a>” is unclear. The poorest Australians are <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-poorest-australians-are-twice-as-likely-to-die-before-age-75-as-the-richest-and-the-gap-is-widening-139201">twice as likely</a> to die before age 75 than the richest. Yet few people would argue we should stop developing technologies to improve the health of those aged over 75. Moreover, the price of lifespan extension technologies would eventually likely come down. <h2>The real problem</h2> However, we think there’s one serious ethical objection that applies to extreme cases of life extension. If humans routinely lived very long lives, this could reduce how adaptable our populations are, and lead to social stagnation. Even modest increases in life expectancy would radically increase population size. To avoid overpopulation, we’d need to <a href="https://theconversation.com/thinking-of-having-a-baby-as-the-planet-collapses-first-ask-yourself-5-big-ethical-questions-196388">reduce birth rates</a>, which would drastically slow generational turnover. As one of us (Chris) has explored in previous <a href="https://academic.oup.com/jmp/article/40/6/696/2747126">research</a>, this could be incredibly harmful to societal progress, because it may: <ol> <li>increase our vulnerability to extinction threats</li> <li>jeopardise individual wellbeing, and</li> <li>impede moral advancement.</li> </ol> Many fields benefit from a regular influx of young minds coming in and building on the work of predecessors. Even if the brains of older scientists remained sharp, their “confirmation bias” – a tendency to seek and interpret information in ways that confirm one’s prior beliefs – could slow the uptake of new scientific theories. Moral beliefs are also prone to <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10670-020-00252-1">confirmation bias</a>. In a world of extended lifespans, individuals whose moral views were set in their youth (perhaps more than 100 years ago) will remain in positions of power. It seems likely our society’s moral code is <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10677-015-9567-7">badly mistaken</a> in at least some respects. After all, we think past societies were catastrophically mistaken in theirs, such as when they endorsed slavery, or rendered homosexuality illegal. Slowing generational turnover could delay the point at which we recognise and fix our own moral catastrophes, especially those we can’t yet see. Image credits: Getty Images This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-rich-are-pouring-millions-into-life-extension-research-but-does-it-have-any-ethical-value-201774" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>.

Caring

The ethics of home ownership in an age of growing inequality

For many Americans today, <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/03/23/key-facts-about-housing-affordability-in-the-u-s/">homeownership is an unattainable dream</a>. In 2022, the average <a href="https://apnews.com/article/inflation-business-economy-prices-mortgages-b3d20020ecddf7a13bd62fb7b5ed7c0c">long-term U.S. mortgage rate rose to 7%</a> for the first time in more than two decades. The median sales price of existing homes <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-home-sales-fell-again-in-june-economists-estimate-11658309401">climbed to a record US$416,000</a> while demand for mortgages dropped to a <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2022/10/19/mortgage-demand-drops-to-a-25-year-low-as-interest-rates-climb.html">25-year low</a>. Experts forecast a turnaround in 2023, predicting a fall in <a href="https://www.forbes.com/advisor/mortgages/real-estate/housing-market-predictions/">home prices</a> and <a href="https://www.forbes.com/advisor/mortgages/mortgage-interest-rates-forecast/">mortgage rates</a>. With the housing market likely to cool modestly, the prospect of a gradual return to affordability may sound like music to buyers’ ears. But should people be purchasing property at all? My <a href="https://hi.psu.edu/scholars/desiree-lim/">research examines</a> the negative impact of property ownership. Despite the current state of the housing market, property is <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/qai/2022/08/30/housing-prices-are-dropping---yes-a-house-is-still-a-good-investment/">still considered a sound investment</a> – at least for the limited group who can afford it. However, property ownership can have serious consequences on others’ lives. <h2>Buying to make a profit?</h2> There is a difference between the two main categories of property buyers: those purchasing property as a primary home versus property for investment. Purchasing property as a primary home is considered more ethical than acquiring property for investment, as housing is considered a basic necessity. Property for investment, however, is owned for personal profit, often without the owner’s intending to ever live there. Investors may purchase homes that can be “fixed and flipped” and sell them at a profit or lease them to renters. As of 2019, renters headed around <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/08/02/as-national-eviction-ban-expires-a-look-at-who-rents-and-who-owns-in-the-u-s/">36% of the nation’s 122.8 million households</a>. Census data shows that <a href="https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/files/currenthvspress.pdf">there are 48.2 million rental units</a> in the U.S., roughly 70% of which are owned by individual landlords. <h2>Landlordphobia?</h2> Landlords have often been <a href="https://jacobin.com/2021/07/abolish-landlords-cancel-rent-eviction-homelessness">criticized for being callous</a> and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/16/landlords-social-parasites-last-people-should-be-honouring-buy-to-let">greedy</a>. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-020-00502-1">COVID-19</a> exacerbated landlords’ poor reputations because the pandemic increased <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/10511482.2021.2020866">renter payment difficulties</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306353">triggered widespread evictions</a> and <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3613030">homelessness</a>. Some renters complained about uncaring landlords who were <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12555">accused of pressuring and threatening vulnerable tenants</a>. The federal and state governments stepped in to help people with such interventions as the <a href="https://nlihc.org/coronavirus-and-housing-homelessness/national-eviction-moratorium">federal eviction moratorium</a> and New York City’s <a href="https://www.nyc.gov/site/rentfreeze/index.page">rent freeze program</a>. Yet landlords also provide rental opportunities for those who prefer not to buy and for those who wish to buy their own home but cannot afford it. Furthermore, landlords can be seen as offering a <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/personal-finance/reasons-renting-a-house-is-better-than-buying-one-2019-8?r=US&IR=T">valuable service to those who are not seeking long-term occupancy</a>, such as university students who plan to leave upon graduation or temporary visitors to the U.S. The ethics of renting out property, then, seems to turn partly on whether renters need it for long-term basic shelter. Landlords are often blamed for the housing crisis. However, it is the responsibility of the government to ensure the <a href="https://www.ohchr.org/en/special-procedures/sr-housing/homelessness-and-human-rights">right to long-term shelter</a>. Individual landlords may contribute toward a poor housing system, but they act within the confines of the system. Only governments have the power to change the system, through investment in affordable housing. <h2>The ethics of owning a home</h2> Homebuyers also have ethical obligations to others. Choosing to own property in a <a href="https://bayareaequityatlas.org/indicators/gentrification-risk#/">gentrifying neighborhood, or one considered at risk of gentrifying</a>, may contribute to the forced displacement of <a href="https://www.law.georgetown.edu/poverty-journal/blog/examining-the-negative-impacts-of-gentrification/">existing long-term residents</a>. The harms of having to leave one’s former neighborhood include the severing of community networks or enduring the strain of <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/17/business/economy/san-francisco-commute.html">extraordinarily long work commutes</a>. Additionally, persons of color <a href="http://www.wipsociology.org/2021/05/20/how-gentrification-reproduces-racial-inequality">are disproportionately affected by gentrification</a>, which may create new patterns of racial segregation. Given these consequences, aspiring homeowners should perhaps avoid purchasing homes in neighbourhoods with vulnerable residents. But, with housing unaffordability writ large, first-time buyers may be able to afford properties only in neighborhoods at risk of gentrification. <h2>Mitigating risk</h2> How can governments mitigate risks like racial segregation while also providing affordable housing? One example is Singapore’s system of <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-07-08/behind-the-design-of-singapore-s-low-cost-housing">affordable public housing</a>. To prevent segregation, Singapore introduced racial quotas in public housing that require minimum levels of occupancy of each of its main ethnic groups – Chinese, Malay, Indian, and others, which includes all other ethnicities. Though intrusive and <a href="https://www.cigionline.org/static/documents/documents/PB%20no.128web.pdf">imperfect in its execution</a>, the Singaporean approach shows that a more proactive approach to housing is possible. Landlords may have moral duties, but the government’s role in recognising and protecting the right to stable long-term housing must not be ignored. Image credits: Getty Images This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-ethics-of-home-ownership-in-an-age-of-growing-inequality-196775" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>.

Real Estate

Resistance to mega-tourism is rising in the South Pacific – but will governments put words into action?

With COVID-19 travel restrictions largely a thing of the past for Australian and <a href="https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/travel/2022/12/fiji-more-popular-with-kiwi-tourists-than-it-was-pre-covid-19.html">New Zealand tourists</a>, Pacific destinations are enjoying the return of visitors – albeit at a <a href="https://devpolicy.org/the-pacific-emerging-from-covid-slowly-20221019/">slower pace</a> than in other parts of the world. Tourism in Fiji, Samoa, Vanuatu and the Cook Islands was <a href="https://www.imf.org/-/media/Files/Countries/ResRep/pis-region/small-states-monitor/pacific-islands-monitor-issue-17-october-2022.ashx">hit hard by the pandemic</a>, but <a href="https://www.massey.ac.nz/about/news/pacific-islands-resilient-as-covid-19-topples-tourism/">patience and resilience</a> are starting to pay off. Foreign dollars are once again circulating in those small economies. Recently, <a href="https://www.mvariety.com/business/kiribati-welcomes-first-cruise-ship-visit/article_30ca4be0-b0f7-11ed-9b9d-93619a4dfba6.html">Kiribati welcomed</a> its first international cruise ship since 2020. But this isn’t a simple case of returning to normal. The past three years have allowed time for reflection, leading to a rising awareness of <a href="https://southpacificislands.travel/pacific-sustainable-tourism-leadership-summit-calls-on-pacific-leaders-to-work-together-to-build-resilient-futures/">possible alternatives</a> to pre-pandemic tourism models. From senior levels within governments to grassroots tourism operators and citizens, there has been serious discussion about the resumption of business as usual, including several <a href="https://southpacificislands.travel/2021-ends-on-a-high-with-pacific-islands-tourism-research-symposium/">regional symposiums</a> hosted by the South Pacific Tourism Organisation. Issues of sovereignty and future resilience have been very much to the fore – quite untypical in a global tourism industry largely focused on <a href="https://etc-corporate.org/news/europes-tourism-rebound-predicted-to-continue-into-2023/">boosting numbers</a> as soon as possible. Questions remain, however, about the gap between rhetoric and reality. <h2>Flipping the narrative</h2> The <a href="https://southpacificislands.travel/2022-pacific-sustainable-tourism-leadership-summit/">Pacific Sustainable Tourism Leaders Summit</a> in November 2022 brought together tourism ministers and industry stakeholders to discuss the future of regional tourism. This led to a <a href="https://southpacificislands.travel/pacific-sustainable-tourism-leadership-summit-calls-on-pacific-leaders-to-work-together-to-build-resilient-futures/">regional commitment</a> signed by 11 countries focused on promoting sustainable tourism. Essentially, the aim is to flip the narrative: rather than Pacific nations being seen as dependent on tourism, regional tourism itself depends on the Pacific and its people surviving and thriving. Accordingly, Pacific countries are calling for fairer and more meaningful relationships with tourism partners. Cook Islands’ associate minister of foreign affairs and immigration, Tingika Elikana, urged other Pacific leaders at the summit to rebuild tourism in a way that was <a href="https://www.fijitimes.com/inclusive-pacific-summit-calls-on-regional-leaders-to-work-together/">equitable and inclusive</a>, "[it] is crucial that lessons are learned from recent crises and that steps are taken to embed long-term inclusivity, sustainability, and resilience into our tourism offering as it faces evolving challenges and risks." Vanuatu has been heading in this direction since early in the pandemic, when it made “destination wellbeing” <a href="https://www.traveldailymedia.com/vanuatu-tourism-adopts-well-being-approach-for-covid-19-recovery/">central to its tourism recovery</a>. The aim of “moving beyond solely measuring visitor arrivals and contribution to GDP” then fed into the country’s <a href="https://tourism.gov.vu/images/DoT-Documents/Presentations/Vanuatu_Sustainable_Tourism_Strategy_2020-2030-2020_.pdf">Sustainable Tourism Strategy</a>, launched at the height of the pandemic. <h2>Push-back on resorts and cruise ships</h2> This reappraisal of scale and priorities has perhaps been most evident in Fiji where there has been <a href="https://www.fijitimes.com/project-unoriginal/">strong opposition</a> to a US$300 million mega-project proposed by Chinese developers. The hotel, apartment and marina complex would be built in an area containing one of the last remaining remnants of mangrove forest near the capital, Suva. Conservationists and local residents have been critical of the <a href="https://www.rnz.co.nz/international/pacific-news/484141/conservationist-calls-on-fiji-govt-to-preserve-rare-mangrove">environmental</a> and <a href="https://www.fijitimes.com/how-can-fiji-supply-water-to-project/">infrastructural</a> impact of the proposed development, as well as the <a href="https://www.fijitimes.com/project-unoriginal/">authenticity of its design</a>. There is <a href="https://www.rnz.co.nz/international/pacific-news/484710/costly-development-of-suva-forest-may-now-not-happen">now doubt</a> about whether the government will renew the developer’s lease, due to expire in June. The minister for lands and mineral resources has said “there’s been a lack of transparency” from the developers, and that he “will continue to monitor the remaining conditions of the development lease”. A leading opponent of the project, Reverend James Bhagwan, <a href="https://www.rnz.co.nz/international/pacific-news/484710/costly-development-of-suva-forest-may-now-not-happen">told Radio New Zealand</a>, "we'’re not anti-development, but what we’re saying is we need to look at development from a perspective that places the environment at the centre, not at the periphery. There is a precedent here: approval for a multi-million-dollar resort and casino development on Malolo island was revoked in 2019 after another Chinese developer, Freesoul Investments, destroyed part of a reef, dumped waste and disrupted traditional fisheries. In 2022, the High Court fined the company <a href="https://www.newsroom.co.nz/resort-developers-found-guilty-over-fiji-island-disaster-1">FJD$1 million</a>. It was the first time a developer had been punished for an “environmental crime”. Environmental concerns are also causing other Pacific countries to resist a return to mass tourism. In Rarotonga, Cook Islands, annual visitor numbers before the pandemic were ten times the island’s local population. The ability to cope with that level of tourism has since been <a href="https://www.rnz.co.nz/international/pacific-news/443141/cook-islanders-considering-how-much-tourism-is-too-much">seriously questioned</a>. And in French Polynesia, the government has <a href="https://www.nzherald.co.nz/travel/french-polynesia-the-latest-country-to-ban-mega-cruise-ships/RXY2PDLCWPAIZRVNENLHJ6Z2N4/">banned port calls</a> for cruise ships with a capacity greater than 3,500 passengers. The decision was based on concerns about air pollution, stress on the marine environment and social impacts. Daily cruise arrivals to Bora Bora are now restricted to 1,200 passengers, much to the <a href="https://www.rnz.co.nz/international/pacific-news/407885/bora-bora-calls-for-ban-on-large-cruise-ships">relief of locals</a>. <h2>A new kind of tourism?</h2> In the face of uncertainties due to climate change and geopolitical tensions in the region, it’s encouraging to hear local voices being heard in debates about the future of Pacific tourism – and political leaders appearing to respond. The Pacific Island Forum leaders’ retreat in Fiji late last month discussed the tourism industry. The forum’s signature <a href="https://www.forumsec.org/2050strategy/">Blue Pacific Strategy</a> for regional co-operation recognises tourism is an important component of national development, and the need to balance economic pressures with environmental and cultural protection. But despite the apparent political will and regional focus on building resilience, tourism development will undoubtedly continue to challenge the desires and initiatives of Pacific peoples seeking more sustainable futures. While the policy rhetoric sounds good, it remains to be seen whether Pacific governments will remain steadfast and united under mounting pressures from major cruise operators, Chinese commercial interests and large hotels looking to maximise occupancy rates. Many Pacific people reported the natural environment – along with social, spiritual, physical and mental wellbeing – <a href="https://www.internationaljournalofwellbeing.org/index.php/ijow/article/view/2539">improved during the pandemic pause</a> in tourism. But the reality of putting local wellbeing ahead of profits and increased tax revenue is yet to be fully tested as tourism bounces back. Images: Getty <em style="box-sizing: border-box; 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;">This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/resistance-to-mega-tourism-is-rising-in-the-south-pacific-but-will-governments-put-words-into-action-201071" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>.

International Travel

"Mateship in action": NZ survivors of helicopter crash praise Aussie compassion

Two couples from New Zealand who survived the deadly helicopter collision on the Gold Coast have shared their condolences for those who died during the accident. Edward and Marle Swart along with Riaan and Elmarie Steenberg spoke of how the "fun five-minute joy ride on vacation to Australia turned into a nightmare" and said their "hearts are so heavy" for those who died in the other aircraft that fell to the ground. "Our deepest sympathies and sincere condolences to the injured and the deceased and their families," they said in a joint statement released on Wednesday night. "We are grateful and blessed to have been spared but very sad for the people who lost loved ones and the little ones and mum fighting for their lives in hospital. "Our hearts are so heavy for them." The couples also praised the 52-year-old pilot who managed to land their damaged helicopter safely "through all the chaos", while also commending the actions of witnesses who rushed to help on the scene. "Our gratitude goes out to every bystander who ran to help, every police officer and emergency services personnel who helped us with our immediate needs keeping us calm and making us comfortable," they said. "We saw mateship in action. Australians come together to help in time of need." "We would like to extend our great thanks to the hospital staff taking care of us for their kindness and compassion during this traumatic experience." The New Zealand couples, all in their 40s, were among the six people in the second helicopter who all survived the crash with minor injuries. <a href="https://oversixty.com.au/news/news/helicopter-crash-victims-identified" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Four people</a> on the first helicopter died while the remaining three survivors remain in hospital. Image credits: Nine News

Travel Trouble

There’s a serious ethical problem with some sunscreen testing methods – and you’re probably not aware of it

As summer approaches, we need to start remembering to slip on sun-protective clothing, slop on sunscreen, slap on a hat, seek shade where possible, and slide on sunglasses. When it comes to sunscreen, we all know we need to wear it to protect against the harmful effects of ultraviolet (UV) radiation, which can cause skin cancer. But what about the sun protection factor, known as the SPF rating, we see on our sunscreen bottles? It indicates the level of protection – but is it always what it says it is, and how is it actually tested? <h2>Risking human health for SPF testing</h2> While there have been some cases of <a href="https://www.tga.gov.au/news/news/sunscreen-testing-ama-laboratories-condition-listing">sunscreens not matching up to their SPF claims</a>, this is the exception and not the norm. In Australia, we can be comfortable knowing these products are tightly regulated to ensure they are safe and meet their claimed SPF rating, according to current SPF testing methods. However, problems arise when it comes to how sunscreens are tested for their SPF rating. Most people would not be aware that the SPF value on their sunscreen bottles is determined by testing on humans. Ultimately, this means we are risking people’s health to test how effective our sunscreens are – and we urgently need to change this. <h2>How is sunscreen SPF tested?</h2> Once a sunscreen formulation has been developed by a manufacturer it needs to go through testing to ensure it only contains approved ingredients, and ultimately, that it does what it says it does. All sunscreen products available in Australia are <a href="https://www.tga.gov.au/news/news/about-sunscreens">tested according to the Australian Standard to determine the SPF</a>. This is great and provides assurance of safety and quality for the consumer – but the problem is with how this testing is done. Currently, testing sunscreens on humans is the approved international standard to rate the UV protection level of a sunscreen. This testing involves volunteers wearing strictly defined amounts of sunscreen and being exposed to artificial solar <a href="https://www.arpansa.gov.au/understanding-radiation/what-is-radiation/non-ionising-radiation/ultraviolet-radiation">UV radiation</a>. Performance is measured by determining the time it takes for erythema or redness to occur. <a href="https://www.cancer.org.au/about-us/policy-and-advocacy/prevention-policy/national-cancer-prevention-policy/skin-cancer-statistics-and-issues/sunburn">This is, basically, sunburn</a>; based on this, an SPF rating is assigned. <h2>Why is human testing of SPF a problem?</h2> If sunscreens only contain approved ingredients we know are safe, is it really a problem they are tested on humans? Sadly, yes. Human testing involves exposing people to harmful UV radiation, which we know can cause skin and eye damage, <a href="https://www.arpansa.gov.au/understanding-radiation/radiation-sources/more-radiation-sources/sun-exposure">as well as being the leading cause of skin cancer</a>. This alone is <a href="https://www.phrp.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/PHRP3212205.pdf">unethical and unjustifiable</a>. There are also other issues associated with testing sunscreen on humans. For example, the <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/phpp.12095">use of erythema to determine sunscreen effectiveness is highly subjective</a>, and may differ from one person to another, even for those with the same <a href="https://www.arpansa.gov.au/sites/default/files/legacy/pubs/RadiationProtection/FitzpatrickSkinType.pdf">skin type</a>. This makes the reliability of such testing methods questionable. Further, testing is only done on a small number of people (a minimum of <a href="https://www.tga.gov.au/sites/default/files/australian-regulatory-guidelines-for-sunscreens.pdf">ten people is required in Australia</a>). This is great for exposing as few people as possible to harmful UV radiation to determine a product’s SPF rating – but not so great when it comes to inclusiveness. Testing such a small number of people is not representative. It does not include all skin types and leads to real <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ics.12333">challenges in achieving reproducible results</a> across different laboratories testing the same product. The testing itself is also very expensive. This adds to the already high cost of buying sunscreens, and potentially limits manufacturers from developing new and better products. These, along with many other issues, highlight the urgency for non-human (in vitro) testing methods of a sunscreen’s effectiveness to be developed. <h2>Human-free SPF testing technology is in development</h2> While efforts have been made to develop non-human testing methods, <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165993622002072">there remain several challenges</a>. <a href="https://www.karger.com/Article/Abstract/292777">These include</a> the materials used to simulate human skin (also known as substrates), difficulties in applying the sunscreen to these substrates, reproducibility of results, and ensuring that results are the same as what we see with human testing. However, scientists at <a href="https://www.rmit.edu.au/">RMIT University</a>, with support from the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (<a href="https://www.arpansa.gov.au/">ARPANSA</a>) and the <a href="https://www.cancervic.org.au/">Cancer Council Victoria</a>, are <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165993622002072">working on a solution to this problem</a>. So far, they have developed a prototype sensor that <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-06273-3">changes colour when exposed to UV radiation</a>. This <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-06273-3/figures/5">sensor</a> could be customised for human-free sunscreen testing, for example. Reliable in vitro testing methods will mean in the future, sunscreen manufacturers would be able to quickly make and test new and better sunscreens, without being limited by the time and cost constraints involved with human testing. So the next time you buy a bottle of sunscreen, look to purchase the highest-rated sunscreen of SPF 50+ – and know that work is underway on getting that rating classified in a more ethical way. Image credits: Getty Images This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/theres-a-serious-ethical-problem-with-some-sunscreen-testing-methods-and-youre-probably-not-aware-of-it-195359" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>.

Beauty & Style

"I can only do so much": we asked fast-fashion shoppers how ethical concerns shape their choices

You’ve found the perfect dress. You’ve tried it on before and you know it looks great. Now it’s on sale, a discount so large the store is practically giving it away. Should you buy it? For some of us it’s a no-brainer. For others it’s an ethical dilemma whenever we shop for clothes. <a href="https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JFMM-01-2019-0011/full/html">What matters more</a>? How the item was made or how much it costs? Is the most important information on the label or the price tag? Of the world’s industries that profit from worker exploitation, the <a href="https://www.globalslaveryindex.org/">fashion industry is notorious</a>, in part because of the sharp contrast between how fashion is made and how it is marketed. There are more people <a href="https://www.ilo.org/global/publications/books/WCMS_575479/lang--en/index.htm">working in exploitative conditions</a> than ever before. Globally, the garment industry employs millions of people, with <a href="https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---asia/---ro-bangkok/documents/briefingnote/wcms_758626.pdf">65 million garment sector workers in Asia alone</a>. The Clean Clothes Campaign estimates <a href="https://cleanclothes.org/poverty-wages">less than 1%</a> of what you pay for a typical garment goes to the workers who made it. <h2>How much does a worker make on a $30 shirt?</h2> Some work in conditions so exploitative they meet the definition of being <a href="https://www.commonobjective.co/article/modern-slavery-and-the-fashion-industry">modern slaves</a> – trapped in situations they can’t leave due to coercion and threats. But their plight is hidden by the distance between the worker and the buyer. Global supply chains have helped such exploitation to hide and thrive. Do we really care, and what can we do? We conducted <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/JFMM-06-2021-0158">in-depth interviews</a> with 21 women who buy “fast fashion” – “on-trend” clothing made and sold at very low cost – to find out how much they think about the conditions of the workers who make their clothes, and and what effort they take to avoid slave-free clothing. Well-known fast-fashion brands include H&M, Zara and Uniqlo. What they told us highlights the inadequacy of seeking to eradicate exploitation in the fashion industry by relying on consumers to do the heavy lifting. Struggling to seek reliable information on ethical practices, consumers are overwhelmed when trying to navigate ethical consumerism. <h2>Out of sight, out of mind</h2> The 21 participants in our research were women aged 18 to 55, from diverse backgrounds across Australia. We selected participants who were aware of exploitation in the fashion industry but had still bought fast fashion in the previous six months. This was not a survey but qualitative research involving in-depth interviews to understand the disconnect between awareness and action. Our <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/JFMM-06-2021-0158">key finding </a> is that clothing consumers’ physical and cultural distance from those who make the clothes makes it difficult to relate to their experience. Even if we’ve seen images of sweatshops, it’s still hard to comprehend what the working conditions are truly like. As Fiona*, a woman in her late 30s, put it: “I don’t think people care [but] it’s not in a nasty way. It’s like an out of sight, out of mind situation.” This problem of geographic and cultural distance between garment workers and fashion shoppers highlights the paucity of solutions premised on driving change in the industry through consumer activism. <h2>Who is responsible?</h2> Australia’s Modern Slavery Act, for example, tackles the problem only by requiring large companies to report to a <a href="https://modernslaveryregister.gov.au/">public register</a>on their efforts to identify risks of modern slavery in their supply chains and what they are doing to eliminate these risks. While greater transparency is certainly a big step forward for the industry, the legislation still presumes that the threat of reputational damage is enough to get industry players to change their ways. The success of the legislation falls largely on the ability of activist organisations to sift through and publicise the performance of companies in an effort to encourage consumers to hold companies accountable. All our interviewees told us they felt unfairly burdened with the responsibility to seek information on working conditions and ethical practices to hold retailers to account or to feel empowered to make the “correct” ethical choice. “It’s too hard sometimes to actually track down the line of whether something’s made ethically,” said Zoe*, a woman in her early 20s. Given that many retailers are themselves ignorant about <a href="https://www.afr.com/wealth/investing/companies-risk-litigation-over-modern-slavery-ignorance-20201215-p56nix">their own supply chains</a>, it is asking a lot to expect the average consumer to unravel the truth and make ethical shopping choices. <h2>Confusion + overwhelm = inaction</h2> “We have to shop according to what we care about, what is in line with our values, family values, budget,” said Sarah*, who is in her early 40s. She said she copes with feeling overwhelmed by ignoring some issues and focus on the ethical actions she knew would make a difference. “I’m doing so many other good things,” she said. “We can’t be perfect, and I can only do so much.” Other participants also talked about juggling considerations about environmental and social impacts. “It’s made in Bangladesh, but it’s 100% cotton, so, I don’t know, is it ethical?” is how Lauren*, a woman in her early 20s, put it. “It depends on what qualifies as ethical […] and what is just marketing.” Comparatively, participants felt their actions to mitigate environmental harm made a tangible difference. They could see the impact and felt rewarded and empowered to continue making positive change. This was not the case for modern slavery and worker rights more generally. Fast fashion is a lucrative market, with <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/the-billionaire-family-behind-fast-fashion-powerhouse-boohoo-2019-11?r=AU&IR=T">billions in profits made</a>thanks to the work of the lowest paid workers in the world. There is no denying consumers wield a lot of power, and we shouldn’t absolve consumers of their part in creating demand for the cheapest clothes humanly – or inhumanly – possible. But consumer choice alone is insufficient. We need a system where all our clothing choices are ethical, where we don’t need to make a choice between what is right and what is cheap. Image credits: Shutterstock This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/i-can-only-do-so-much-we-asked-fast-fashion-shoppers-how-ethical-concerns-shape-their-choices-172978" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>.

Beauty & Style

Saving for retirement gives you power, and ethical responsibilities

If you’re in a super fund, then, like it or not, you’ve got ethical decisions to make. More than <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/about-ato/research-and-statistics/in-detail/super-statistics/super-accounts-data/multiple-super-accounts-data/">10 million</a> Australians have a superannuation account. Which means, effectively, more than 10 million of us are mini-shareholders with the capacity to influence future business decisions. With that power, however small, comes responsibility. And nowhere more apparent than in relation to climate change. Last month, the world’s biggest asset manager, <a href="https://insidestory.org.au/putting-the-heat-on-polluting-businesses/">BlackRock</a>, surprised Australia’s biggest electricity producer and carbon dioxide emitter, AGL, by backing a <a href="https://www.blackrock.com/corporate/literature/press-release/blk-vote-bulletin-agl-oct-2020.pdf">motion</a> that would have forced it to close its coal-fired plants <a href="https://www.accr.org.au/news/investor-briefing-on-shareholder-resolutions-to-agl-energy-ltd-on-coal-closure-dates/">earlier than planned</a>. <div data-id="17"> </div> The resolution at AGL’s annual general meeting failed, but when a global firm managing more than US$7 trillion in investors’ savings says it’s time to accelerate the exit from coal, it’s wise sit up and take notice. Interestingly though, some of Australia’s biggest industry super funds, among them Cbus, Hesta and Aware, refused to support the motion, which was put forward by the <a href="https://www.accr.org.au/">Australasian Centre for Corporate Responsibility</a>. <h2>Work ‘behind the scenes’</h2> It’s been a pattern with industry super funds. Rather than using their overt voting power to try to change corporate behaviour, or divest from companies altogether, they say they prefer to exert influence behind the scenes, through conversations in board rooms and executive suites. Take, UniSuper, to which I contribute. It says it <a href="https://www.unisuper.com.au/about-us/news/2020/09/14/a-sustainable-path-to-2050">engages with companies</a> “to encourage rapid decarbonisation of their operations and supply chains”. UniSuper is one of only three industry funds to commit to achieving net zero carbon emissions across its portfolio by 2050 — the others are Cbus and HESTA. <h2>Yet doubling down on gas</h2> UniSuper has joined eight other funds in <a href="https://www.marketforces.org.au/super-funds-october-2020-update/">divesting</a> from companies that predominantly make their money from producing coal for electricity generation. Yet if your retirement savings are in UniSuper’ default <a href="https://www.unisuper.com.au/investments/investment-options-and-performance/super-performance-and-option-holdings/balanced">balanced option</a>, then they are partly <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/business/banking-and-finance/unisuper-new-climate-policy-signals-move-away-from-coal-20200915-p55vxn.html">invested in Woodside</a>, a company seeking to build a huge new gas hub on the Burrup Peninsula in Western Australia. Woodside says the hub, which will operate for “<a href="https://www.woodside.com.au/our-business/burrup-hub">decades into the future</a>”, could process more gas than the entire volume extracted so far from another of its resource projects, the <a href="https://www.woodside.com.au/our-business/north-west-shelf">North West Shelf</a> which began operations 36 years ago. If you’ve chosen UniSuper’s <a href="https://www.unisuper.com.au/investments/investment-options-and-performance/super-performance-and-option-holdings/conservative">conservative</a> option, then you are not only invested in Woodside, but also in Santos, which is behind the contested <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-09-30/santos-narrabri-coal-seam-gas-project-approved/12716350">Narrabri</a> coal seam gas project in NSW. UniSuper’s annual <a href="https://www.unisuper.com.au/%7E/media/files/forms%20and%20downloads/investment%20documents/climate-risk-and-our-investments.pdf?la=en">report</a> on climate risk also reveals smaller investments in gas producers Origin and Oil Search. Experts say worldwide gas use needs to <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-single-mega-project-exposes-the-morrison-governments-gas-plan-as-staggering-folly-133435">peak before 2030</a> in order to keep global warming below agreed levels. It means UniSuper, and other big funds, are investing our collective retirement savings in firms whose corporate strategies threaten our collective future. UniSuper cites <a href="https://www.unisuper.com.au/%7E/media/files/forms%20and%20downloads/investment%20documents/climate-risk-management-unisuper.pdf">AGL</a> as an example why it stays with polluting companies. While it runs power stations fuelled by coal and gas, it also invests in renewable technology. It says, if it were to divest, its AGL shares might be acquired by investors with less concern for the environment. "It can be in the best interests of the environment and society for the assets to be held by a responsible and reputable entity." It’s a justification that could equally be used to defend running a gambling venue — if I didn’t install poker machines, someone else would, and at least I care for my customers. (As it happens, UniSuper’s “balanced” option <a href="https://www.unisuper.com.au/investments/our-investment-options/balanced">includes</a> shares in Aristocrat Leisure, a leading maker of gaming machines.) <h2>Super funds have more power than they use</h2> The justification sidesteps the question of whether the investment itself is defensible. And it ignores the opposing argument — that divestment by a leading super fund can send a powerful signal to the market that a company is not properly addressing climate risk or developing an appropriate strategies for a carbon-constrained world. Any company not doing these things is putting our savings at risk. According to expert legal opinion, its directors might be <a href="https://cpd.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Legal-Opinion-on-Climate-Change-and-Directors-Duties.pdf">breaching their obligations</a> under the Corporations Act. <h2>We’ve got power ourselves</h2> There are legitimate arguments to be had about the best way for super funds to push businesses to act more urgently on climate change, but as fund members, and the ultimate owners of our money, we need to make up our own minds and act accordingly. To sit back and let others do it on our behalf is an abrogation of responsibility. Superannuation may be compulsory, but we still have choices. We can find out which companies our retirement savings are invested in, and swap to a more sustainable option in the same fund. This can take some digging around, but as with <a href="https://www.unisuper.com.au/investments/how-we-invest/responsible-and-sustainable-investing/responsible-investment-policies-statements-and-reports">UniSuper</a>, some the information is available on the fund’s website or can be obtained by asking questions. Or we can consider switching to a different fund altogether. There are websites that <a href="https://www.marketforces.org.au/super-funds-october-2020-update/">track and compare</a> superannuation investments in fossil fuels. For a range of reasons, it’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/unisuper-take-note-theres-no-retirement-on-a-dead-planet-132194">more difficult</a> to switch to a new fund for UniSuper members. But even where it isn’t possible, we can write to our funds, urging them to engage more actively on climate change. It’s easy to find the addresses. They are forever sending us emails. It’s what they say they do with fossil fuel companies — engage them in conversations. We can tell them where we want our savings invested and how we want them to use their clout to influence company decisions and vote at shareholder meetings. We can do this as individuals, and we can <a href="https://unisuperdivest.org/">band together</a> with like-minded fund members to speak with one voice. With a combined <a href="https://www.superannuation.asn.au/resources/superannuation-statistics">A$2.9 trillion</a> in assets, one fifth of which are invested in Australian companies listed on the stock exchange, super funds own a fair chunk of Australia’s most important companies. It would be wrong for them not to take that responsibly seriously, just as it would be wrong of us not to take seriously what our savings are being used for. Image credits: Getty Images This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/saving-for-retirement-gives-you-power-and-ethical-responsibilities-148349" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>.

Retirement Income

A class action against Optus could easily be Australia’s biggest

With the Optus data breach exposing almost 10 million current and former customers to identity theft, law firms are circling for what could end up being the biggest – and most valuable – class action case in Australian legal history. A settlement could well be worth billions, eclipsing the current record of <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-15/black-saturday-bushfire-survivors-secure-record-payout/5597062" target="_blank" rel="noopener">$494 million</a> paid to 10,000 victims of Victoria’s 2009 Black Saturday bushfires. Two class-action specialists, <a href="https://www.lawyersweekly.com.au/biglaw/35625-maurice-blackburn-investigates-action-against-optus" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Maurice Blackburn</a> and <a href="https://www.slatergordon.com.au/class-actions/current-class-actions/optus-data-breach" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Slater & Gordon</a>, are considering suing, and it’s possible others will follow. (Maurice Blackburn also has another case against Optus on its books over a 2019 data breach involving 50,000 customers.) To proceed they’ll need to sign up at least seven people – one of whom acts as the “representative” or lead plaintiff. This shouldn’t be hard. They’ll then need to file a statement of claim for financial, economic or other loss. Multiple class actions are possible if those claims pursue different issues. Or the firms could work together, as they have in the past. <h2>Things to know about class actions</h2> There have been about 700 class actions in Australia in the past 30 years. Class actions can be pursued through state or federal courts. Most go to the Federal Court, which has been empowered to hear class actions since 1992. Less <a href="https://www.alrc.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/alrc_report_134_webaccess_2.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">than 5%</a> of Federal Court actions have progressed to a judgement. About 60% have ended in a court-approved settlement, with the balance dismissed or discontinued. The most common type of class action is by shareholders for loss of earnings. These account for about a third of Federal Court class actions. The biggest shareholder settlement so far is $200 million, paid by Centro Property Group to almost 6,000 shareholders in 2012 over misleading and deceptive conduct by Centro’s board. This followed the Australian Securities and Investments Commission <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/business/asic-wins-case-against-centro-directors-20110627-1gmk5.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">successfully prosecuting</a> Centro (also in the Federal Court). Class actions account for less than 1% of claims lodged with the Federal Court, but their scale and complexity means they take a disproportionate amount of court time, as well as media attention. Because of their cost, many class actions are funded by third parties as a type of business venture. This enables the law firms running the action to sign up plaintiffs on a “no win, no fee”. The litigation funder then takes a share of the settlement (as does the law firm for its legal fees). According to <a href="https://www.alrc.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/alrc_report_134_webaccess_2.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Australian Law Reform Commission</a> data for settled cases, the median percentage of any settlement going to plaintiffs is 57%, with law firms taking 17% and funders taking 22%. <h2>What would a class action against Optus involve?</h2> Based on what is currently known, there are two main ways a class action (or class actions) could proceed against Optus. First, it could argue negligence, with the scope of liability outlined in state or territory legislation. Second, it could argue breach of privacy, in contravention of the federal <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2014C00076" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Privacy Act</a>, in the Federal Court. To succeed in negligence, a court would have to find Optus had a duty of care to its customers to protect their personal information, that it breached its duty, and that customers suffered damage or loss. To succeed on a breach of privacy, the Federal Court would have to find that personal information held by Optus was subject to unauthorised access or disclosure, or lost, and that the company failed to comply with the “privacy principles” enshrined in the Privacy Act. A second basis for a class action in the Federal Court could be to argue a breach of the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2018C00385" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Telecommunications Act</a>. This legislation says carriers and carriage service providers “must to do their best” to protect telecommunications networks and facilities from unauthorised interference or unauthorised access. <h2>What are the precedents?</h2> The closest precedent in Australia to a successful class action for a mass breach of privacy is a 2019 case in the NSW Supreme court. This involved a claim by 108 NSW ambulance service employees against the NSW Health Department. The employees, represented by the firm <a href="https://www.centenniallawyers.com.au/nsw-ambulance-class-action/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Centennial Lawyers</a>, had their personnel files sold to a personal injury law firm by a contractor (who was convicted of unlawfully disclosing information and carried out community service for the crime). The court ordered NSW Health to pay the sum of <a href="http://www8.austlii.edu.au.ezproxy.newcastle.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/nsw/NSWSC/2019/1781.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">$275,000 in compensation</a>) – $10,000 for the lead plaintiff and about $2,400 for the others. <h2>How much could the Optus case be worth?</h2> Given the Optus data leak is established, there’s a strong basis to believe a class action would be successful. If so, a court could award compensatory damages for the time and cost of replacing identification documents, as well as exemplary (or punitive) damages, to send a message to corporations handling citizens’ private information. In determining damages, a court will take into account what efforts Optus has made to remedy the leak, mitigate the potential impact on those affected and pay for the costs of replacing drivers’ licences, Medicare cards or passports. Though the economic loss per customer may be relatively small, multiplied by the potential class-action pool size – up to 10 million plaintiffs – compensatory damages could easily be billions of dollars, even without exemplary damages. That makes this a hugely attractive prospect for a law firm or class-action funder. This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-class-action-against-optus-could-easily-be-australias-biggest-heres-what-is-involved-191515" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>. Image: Shutterstock

Legal

Iran protest at enforced hijab sparks online debate and feminist calls for action across Arab world

Iranian authorities have cracked down on protests which erupted after the death in custody of a 22-year-old woman who was arrested by the morality police for not wearing the hijab appropriately. The <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-62986057" target="_blank" rel="noopener">death of Mahsa Amini</a> who was reportedly beaten after being arrested for wearing her hijab “improperly” sparked street protests. Unrest has spread across the country as women burned their headscarves to protest laws that force women to wear the hijab. Seven people are reported to have been killed, and the government has almost completely <a href="https://twitter.com/netblocks/status/1572651793355603972" target="_blank" rel="noopener">shut down</a> the internet. But in the Arab world – including in Iraq, where I was brought up – the protests have attracted attention and women are <a href="https://twitter.com/i/spaces/1RDGlaVekMMJL/peek" target="_blank" rel="noopener">gathering online</a> to <a href="https://twitter.com/EsraaMAA1/status/1572373663164538882?s=20&t=sP2kn4dJ7RZUSqWT6GDr6w" target="_blank" rel="noopener">offer solidarity</a> to Iranian women struggling under the country’s harsh theocratic regime. The enforcement of the hijab and, by extension, guardianship over women’s bodies and minds, are not exclusive to Iran. They manifest in different forms and degrees in many countries. In Iraq, and unlike the case of Iran, forced wearing of the hijab <a href="https://www.mei.edu/publications/constitutional-and-legal-rights-iraqi-women" target="_blank" rel="noopener">is unconstitutional</a>. However, the ambiguity and contradictions of much of the constitution, particularly <a href="https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Iraq_2005.pdf?lang=en" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Article 2</a> about Islam being the primary source of legislation, has enabled the condition of forced hijab. Since the 1990s, when Saddam Hussein launched his <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/jan/24/iraq.rorymccarthy1" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Faith Campaign</a> in response to economic sanctions imposed by the UN security council, pressure on women to wear the hijab has become widespread. Following the US-led invasion of the country, the situation worsened under the rule of Islamist parties, many of whom have close ties to Iran. Contrary to the claim in 2004 by US president <a href="https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2004/03/20040312-5.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">George W. Bush</a> that Iraqi people were “now learning the blessings of freedom”, women have been enduring the heavy hand of patriarchy perpetuated by Islamism, militarisation and tribalism, and exacerbated by the influence of Iran. Going out without a hijab in Baghdad became a daily struggle for me after 2003. I had to put on a headscarf to protect myself wherever I entered a conservative neighbourhood, especially during the years of sectarian violence. Flashbacks of pro-hijab posters and banners hanging around my university in central Baghdad have always haunted me. The situation has remained unchanged over two decades, with the hijab <a href="http://www.idu.net/modblank.php?mod=news&modfile=print&itemid=25626" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reportedly imposed</a> on children and little girls in primary and secondary schools. A <a href="https://www.bbc.com/arabic/trending-62985885" target="_blank" rel="noopener">new campaign</a> against the enforced wearing of the hijab in Iraqi public schools has surfaced on social media. Natheer Isaa, a leading activist in the <a href="https://twitter.com/Nathereisaa" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Women for Women</a> group, which is leading the campaign, told me that hijab is cherished by many conservative or tribal members of society and that backlashes are predictable. Similar campaigns were suspended due to threats and online attacks. Women posting on social media with the campaign hashtag #notocompulsoryhijab, have attracted <a href="https://twitter.com/am_m_zhs/status/1571931577491275782?s=20&t=Y9fneuMxJufMq7RgcRMsSg" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reactionary tweets</a> accusing them of being anti-Islam and anti-society. Similar accusations are levelled at Iranian women who defy the regime by taking off or burning their headscarves. Iraqi Shia cleric, Ayad Jamal al-Dinn <a href="https://twitter.com/hiba_alnnayib/status/1572696301363666944?s=20&t=n1UixEREr2gur81vBChBgA" target="_blank" rel="noopener">lashed out</a> against the protests on his Twitter account, labelling the protesting Iranian women “anti-hijab whores” who are seeking to destroy Islam and culture. <h2>Cyberfeminists and reactionary men</h2> In my <a href="https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/pais/research/projects/internationalrelationssecurity/cyberfeminisms/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">digital ethnographic work</a> on cyberfeminism in Iraq and other countries, I have encountered numerous similar reactions to women who question the hijab or decide to remove it. Women who use their social media accounts to reject the hijab are often met with sexist attacks and threats that attempt to shame and silence them. Those who openly speak about their decision to take off the hijab receive the harshest reaction. The hijab is linked to women’s honour and chastity, so removing it is seen as defiance. Women’s struggle with the forced hijab and the backlash against them challenges the prevailing cultural narrative that says wearing the hijab is a free choice. While many women freely decide whether to wear it or not, others are obliged to wear it. So academics need to revisit the discourse around the hijab and the conditions perpetuating the mandatory wearing of it. In doing so it is important to move away from the false dichotomies of culture versus religion, or the local versus the western, which obscure rather than illuminate the root causes of forced hijab. In her academic <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0141778919849525" target="_blank" rel="noopener">research</a> on gender-based violence in the context of the Middle East, feminist academic Nadje al-Ali emphasises the need to break away from these binaries and recognise the various complex power dynamics involved – both locally and internationally. The issue of forcing women to wear the hijab in conservative societies should be at the heart of any discussion about women’s broader fight for freedom and social justice. Iranian women’s rage against compulsory hijab wearing, despite the security crackdown, is part of a wider women’s struggle against autocratic conservative regimes and societies that deny them agency. The collective outrage in Iran and Iraq invites us to challenge the compulsory hijab and those imposing it on women or perpetuating the conditions enabling it. As one Iraqi female activist told me: “For many of us, hijab is like the gates of a jail, and we are the invisible prisoners.” It is important for the international media and activists to bring their struggle to light, without subscribing to the narrative that Muslim women need saving by the international community. This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/iran-protest-at-enforced-hijab-sparks-online-debate-and-feminist-calls-for-action-across-arab-world-191178" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>. Image: Twitter

Travel Trouble

4 alternatives to legal action

Legal action can be costly and time consuming. That being said, whenever you encounter legal problems there are some options around. We’ve taken a look at some of the alternatives to legal action that can see you achieve 1. Mediation This involves a trained mediator facilitating a negotiation, but not making binding decisions and is usually a good way of solving a dispute with lawyers present or not. Advantages: <ul> <li>Introduction of a third party to appraise the case and a reflective approach to disputes</li> <li>Focused on interests of parties rather than legal rights and conciliatory in nature</li> <li>It can be quick, cheap and confidential with scope for non-monetary remedies</li> </ul> Disadvantages: <ul> <li>No appropriate when a court remedy is necessary</li> <li>Rarely produces, and mediator has no power to impose binding decision</li> </ul> 2. Early neutral evaluation This is a non-binding process where a neutral party gives non-binding evaluations of the merits and flaw of a dispute in general, generally involving the opinion of a QC/retired judge. Advantages: <ul> <li>Can be useful and assist parties that need to break a deadlock.</li> </ul> Disadvantages: <ul> <li>Process is non-binding and parties can ignore an opinion they disagree with.</li> </ul> 3. Expert determination An independent third party with recognised expertise in the subject matter in dispute, assists the parties and helps them resolve the dispute. Advantages: <ul> <li>Quick, cheap and confidential and gives parties a greater knowledge of how the factual evidence is likely to be decided if the case goes to trial.</li> <li>Can be effective where the parties anticipate a specific type of technical dispute.</li> </ul> Disadvantages: <ul> <li>Expert has no power to force his findings on the parties.</li> <li>The parties may provide that the determination of the expert is final and binding upon them, but recourse to the Courts is still necessary to enforce any determination.</li> </ul> 4. Arbitration This is when the matter is determined by a professional arbitrator given power to impose a binding decision on both parties. Arbitration can, in that sense, be seen as a direct replacement for litigation. Advantages: <ul> <li>Avoids using the courts and is confidential.</li> <li>Speedier and more informal than litigation.</li> <li>Potential for limited discovery.</li> </ul> Disadvantages: <ul> <li>Costs with arbitrations potentially taking a similar amount of time to litigation.</li> <li>An arbitrator's award may only be appealed on the limited grounds of manifest error of law on the face of the award, where the question is one of the general public importance.</li> </ul> Related links: <a href="http://www.oversixty.co.nz/finance/legal/2016/01/10-celebrities-who-cut-their-kids-out-of-inheritances/">10 celebrities who cut their kids out of massive inheritances to give to charity</a> <a href="http://www.oversixty.co.nz/finance/legal/2015/08/3-places-to-safely-store-your-will/">3 places to safely store your will</a> <a href="http://www.oversixty.co.nz/finance/legal/2016/01/why-you-need-to-appoint-a-power-of-attorney-now/">Why you need to appoint a power of attorney now</a>

Legal

Kate Middleton to face Roger Federer in tennis

The Duchess of Cambridge will go head-to-head with Roger Federer in a tennis match for a special charity event. Kate Middleton will go against the Swiss 20-time Grand Slam tennis champion to help raise money for disadvantaged and vulnerable children. All funds raised will go toward two organisations backed by the Duchess, Action for Children and the Lawn Tennis Association. Children between the ages of 8-15 will have the opportunity to meet the professional tennis player and enjoy a game or two with him. The exciting match, which was reportedly suggested by Kate, will go ahead on September 22 as part of the Laver Cup which was co-founded by Federer. “Her Royal Highness is passionate about supporting grassroots tennis and encouraging young people from all backgrounds to become involved in the sport,” a statement from the Palace read. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> Excited to announce that Laver Cup is partnering with The Duchess of Cambridge this year to raise funds for two incredible charities – @actionforchildrenuk and the <a href="https://twitter.com/LTA?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@LTA</a> Tennis Foundation. Thank you for your support, and I look forward to seeing you in London! <a href="https://t.co/7B82Gkj5EE">https://t.co/7B82Gkj5EE</a> — Roger Federer (@rogerfederer) <a href="https://twitter.com/rogerfederer/status/1559843493610246145?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 17, 2022</a></blockquote> The Laver Cup is a three day tournament which sees six of the best tennis players across Europe go against six of the best tennis players from the rest of the world. Federer is no stranger to the royal family, having played tennis with Prince George, nine, and attended Pippa Middleton’s wedding. "Her Royal Highness is passionate about supporting grassroots tennis and encouraging young people from all backgrounds to become involved in the sport," the palace said in a statement. The Laver Cup will see Federer’s <a href="https://oversixty.com.au/health/caring/federer-sends-tennis-world-in-a-spin" target="_blank" rel="noopener">return to the court</a> after struggling with his right knee after undergoing three operations to help repair damage to his meniscus and cartilage. Images: Twitter/Getty

Beauty & Style

Our Partners

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Newspaper

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Compare

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

“The spirit of Australia”: Rival airlines' actions praised after Bonza collapse

Elephant tourism often involves cruelty – here are steps toward more humane, animal-friendly excursions

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

5 ways to make Christmas lunch more ethical this year