Search

"Lots of NDAs": Channel Nine could face class action

Channel Nine could face a class action over <a href="https://www.oversixty.com.au/finance/legal/damning-report-exposes-toxic-workplace-culture-at-channel-nine" target="_blank" rel="noopener">allegations of bullying</a>, sexual harassment and inappropriate conduct, according to one of Australia's leading employment lawyers Josh Bornstein. Bornstein told<a href="https://www.news.com.au/finance/business/media/channel-nine-could-face-class-action-over-allegations-of-bullying-sexual-harassment-and-inappropriate-conduct/news-story/7e7f5979007ae16ae81621e48e48acab" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> news.com.au</a> that a class action might be an option for men and women who were the victims of a "hostile workplace". “There is a provision of the Sex Discrimination Act that is relatively recent and was introduced as a result of the Respect At Work changes,” he said. “It is a new provision that says that it’s a breach of the Act for an employer to maintain a workplace that is hostile for women. “So in light of the report, which indicates widespread bullying, sexism, punishment, sexual harassment, and favouritism of male reporters over female reporters getting access to stories, there is at least the basis on which to start considering whether a class action could be brought.” Bornstein is the principal lawyer at Maurice Blackburn, a law firm that has won more than $4.3 billion in settlements for clients since their inception in 1998. “If the report is right, it’s systemic, which means many women have been impacted, and they’ve been subjected to an environment that’s hostile to them because of their gender, and if they’ve been harmed by that, a class action could give them some form of redress," he added. However, one of the complications would be the nondisclosure agreements some of the women may have signed before leaving the companies. “I’m aware there’s lots of NDA, particularly at Nine, and lots of releases as well. “A class action just requires a sufficiently large enough group of affected people who come together to lodge a case that says, ‘This is the sort of workplace environment we’ve been subjected to’. “They have to show that they’ve been subjected to the sorts of behaviours that are dealt with in the report and that or that adverse conduct was based on their gender, and then if they were able to show that the law had been breached, then compensation would be based on individual harm.” He added that in his opinion, while it might be better "for women to band together to pursue a collective case" it may be a bit more difficult as "there’s a fear that if you take on commercial networks, that’s the end of your career," which he said is a "well founded" fear. Image: FiledIMAGE / Shutterstock.com

Legal

Parents demand action after five-year-old son brutally attacked with golf club

William Brooks-Chiplin was playing in the front yard of his friend’s house in Tamworth, NSW on Thursday, when he was allegedly attacked with a golf club by another child. The five-year-old's face was extremely swollen and he was left dizzy and unable to move his jaw. “The people who came out and saw it thought he was gone. He didn’t make a sound, and he wasn’t moving,” his father, Kayleb Brooks, said. “My thought was he was going to die. No kid should ever experience that,” his mother, Marrisa Tisdell, added. His parents also said the young boy “is having nightmares, waking up and screaming in his sleep”. William is required to return to hospital for further scans to determine whether he has any hairline fractures or issues with his eyesight. NSW Police said they identified the 10-year-old accused of hitting William, and he had been given a warning under the Young Offenders Act, designed to provide an alternative process to court proceedings for children accused of crimes. For children aged between 10 and 14 years, the act is design in such way because, “a child cannot be held criminally responsible for their conduct because they don’t understand right or wrong”, according to Hugo Law Group’s Linday Stankovic. However, William's parents are calling for the government to change the age of criminal responsibility following the incident. “The kid pretty much just got a caution,” William's mum said. “(It’s) is unfair, because in the meantime he is suffering and nothing is being done about it,” his dad added. However, things aren't that simple as there are other concerns about the implication. Earlier this month, the Australian Human Rights Commissioner wrote to the NT government urging it to not lower the age of criminal responsibility from 12 to 10-years-old. “The younger a child comes into contact with the criminal justice system, the more likely they will go on to commit more serious and violent crimes," National Children’s Commissioner Anne Hollonds said. “Lowering the age of criminal responsibility to 10 years will not make communities safer, it will only see rates of child offending increase. “These are primary school age children, and harsh, punitive responses are not the answer. “ A recent report also found that more than three-quarters of children had mental health needs or cognitive disability, and 47 per cent had multiple diagnosed cognitive disabilities. Image: 7News

Legal

ACCC launches legal action against Coles and Woolworths

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has launched legal action against supermarket giants Woolworths and Coles. The ACCC alleges that they breached consumer law by misleading customers through fake discount pricing on hundreds of products. They also alleged that both companies had sold items at regular prices for up to six months, then increased the prices of those items by at least 15 per cent before placing them in the promotion. The ACCC alleges up to 266 products were involved in the fake discount pricing at Woolworths at different times over an estimated 20 month period, and 245 products for Coles over a 15 month period. “Following many years of marketing campaigns by Woolworths and Coles, Australian consumers have come to understand that the ‘Prices Dropped’ and ‘Down Down’ promotions relate to a sustained reduction in the regular prices of supermarket products,” ACCC chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb said. “However, in the case of these products we allege the new ‘Prices Dropped’ and ‘Down Down’ promotional prices were actually higher than, or the same as, the previous regular price.” Some of the Woolworths products reportedly included Tim Tams, Dolmio sauces, Doritos Salsa, Energizer batteries, Kellogg's cereals and more. For Coles, products reportedly included Arnott’s Shapes biscuits, Band-Aids and Cadbury chocolates amongst others. In a statement, Woolworths CEO Amanda Bardwell said they would carefully review the claims and engage with the ACCC on the matter. "Cost-of-living pressures remain a key issue for millions of Australians who shop with us every week,” she said. "Our customers are telling us they want us to work even harder to deliver meaningful value to them and it's important they can trust the value they see when shopping our stores. "Our Prices Dropped program was introduced to provide our customers with great everyday value on their favourite products. "We remain committed to offering many ways for customers to save at the checkout, including thousands of weekly specials, everyday low prices on household essentials, a great value own brand range and through our Everyday Rewards program." Coles said the allegations related to a period of significant cost inflation for the retailer. “Coles’ own costs were rising, which led to an increase in the retail price of many products,” it said. “Coles sought to strike an appropriate balance between managing the impact of cost price increases on retail prices and offering value to customers though the recommencement of promotional activity as soon as possible after the establishment of the new non-promotional prices.” CHOICE Director of Campaigns Rosie Thomas welcomed the ACCC's announcement and call for greater transparency in supermarket pricing. "We know … promotional labels at the major supermarkets often confuse shoppers and the frequent changes in prices make it difficult to tell whether there is a genuine discount or not," she said. The ACCC said it identified the conduct through consumer contacts and social media monitoring. "We're seeking a significant penalty," the ACCC chair said. "This is serious conduct that is of great concern to us, that affected many consumers with millions of products sold, subject to this practice." Image: ABC News

Legal

Pay-by-weight airfares are an ethical minefield. We asked travellers what they actually think

<div class="theconversation-article-body"> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/denis-tolkach-11345">Denis Tolkach</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/james-cook-university-1167">James Cook University</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/stephen-pratt-335188">Stephen Pratt</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-central-florida-1925">University of Central Florida</a> Imagine checking in for a flight with your two teenage children. At the counter, you are told that your youngest teenager’s suitcase is two kilograms over the limit. You get slapped with a $75 penalty for their excess luggage. This penalty feels arbitrary and unfair. The youngest weighs about 45 kg, and their luggage weighs 25 kg, making their total payload on the flight 70 kg. Their older sibling, on the other hand, weighs 65 kg, and has brought 23 kg of luggage to check in. Their total weight is higher – 88 kg – yet they receive no penalty. Obviously, things aren’t that simple. Charging passengers based on their weight is highly controversial for many reasons. But that hasn’t stopped some airlines <a href="https://theweek.com/articles/466035/should-airlines-charge-passengers-by-weight">experimenting</a> with such policies. Imagine checking in for your flight only to have the staff tell you to <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/plus-size-travelers-slam-airline-seat-policies/index.html">purchase an extra seat</a> as you are a plus-size passenger. You feel discriminated against because you are using the same service as other passengers and your weight is beyond your control. But despite the lived experience of many and hot debate in the media, there has not been a formal study into what passengers themselves think about this matter. Our recently published <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.2691">research</a> examined air passengers’ views on alternative airfare policies to understand whether the public finds them acceptable and what ethical considerations determine their views. Though we found a range of ethical contradictions, most travellers were guided by self-interest. <h2>A controversial but important topic</h2> The issue of whether airlines should weigh passengers is an ethical minefield with no easy answers. Despite its sensitivity, the aviation industry can’t ignore passenger weight. Airlines intermittently undertake <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/marisagarcia/2024/02/11/despite-backlash-heres-why-airlines-need-to-weigh-passengers/?sh=5f07623e1bfa">passenger weight surveys</a> as they need to accurately calculate payload to ensure flight safety and estimate fuel consumption. The evidence shows passengers are <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/marisagarcia/2024/02/11/despite-backlash-heres-why-airlines-need-to-weigh-passengers/?sh=5f07623e1bfa">getting heavier</a>. Airlines including the now-defunct <a href="https://theweek.com/articles/466035/should-airlines-charge-passengers-by-weight">Samoa Air</a> and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/oct/23/hawaiian-airlines-american-samoa-weight-passengers">Hawaiian Airlines</a> have taken things one step further and experimented with weighing passengers regularly. Samoa Air, for example, became the first airline to introduce a “pay-as-you-weigh” policy, where the cost of your ticket was directly proportional to the combined weight of you and your luggage. In contrast, Canada has now long had a “<a href="https://otc-cta.gc.ca/eng/publication/additional-seating-and-one-person-one-fare-requirement-domestic-travel-a-guide">one person, one fare</a>” policy. It is prohibited and deemed discriminatory to force passengers living with a disability to purchase a second seat for themselves if they require one, including those with functional disability due to obesity. To complicate matters further, the issue of passenger and luggage weight is not only ethical and financial, but also environmental. More weight on an aircraft leads to more jet fuel being burned and more carbon emissions. About <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-24091-y">5%</a> of human-driven climate change can be attributed to aviation, and the industry faces enormous pressure to reduce fuel consumption while it waits for low carbon substitutes to become available. <h2>What do passengers actually think?</h2> To get a better sense of how the public actually feels about this issue, we surveyed 1,012 US travellers of different weights, presenting them with three alternatives: <ul> <li>standard policy – currently the most widely used policy with passengers paying a standard price, irrespective of their weight</li> <li>threshold policy – passengers are penalised if they are over a threshold weight</li> <li>unit of body weight policy – passengers pay a personalised price based on their own body weight, per each pound.</li> </ul> The standard policy was the most acceptable for participants of differing weight, although the heavier the passenger, the more they preferred the standard policy. This can be partially explained by status quo bias. Generally, people are likely to choose a familiar answer. The threshold policy was the least acceptable. This policy was seen to violate established social norms and be generally less fair. The unit of body weight policy was preferred to the threshold policy, although participants raised concerns about whether it would be accepted by society. Perhaps unsurprisingly, we found that self-interest played a clear role in determining whether respondents considered a policy acceptable. Younger, male, financially well-off travellers with lower personal weight generally found the alternative policies more acceptable. <h2>An ethical conflict</h2> Alternative airfare policies that are based on passenger weight bring environmental and ethical concerns into conflict. Obviously, the effect isn’t from any one traveller, in particular, but averages over the entire industry. Interestingly, respondents that were more concerned about the environment – “ecocentric” – preferred air fare policies that would reduce the carbon emissions. This made them more open to the controversial alternatives. While the threshold policy was clearly rejected by many respondents as discriminatory, environmental concern played a role in the level of acceptance of the unit of body weight policy. It’s important to apply a critical lens here. These ecocentric travellers were also generally younger and had lower personal weights, so many would benefit from the alternative policies financially. For policymakers overall, our study suggests when it comes to controversial ticketing policies, the public is more likely to be swayed by self-interest than anything else.<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/237856/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/denis-tolkach-11345">Denis Tolkach</a>, Senior Lecturer, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/james-cook-university-1167">James Cook University</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/stephen-pratt-335188">Stephen Pratt</a>, Professor, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-central-florida-1925">University of Central Florida</a> Image credits: Shutterstock 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/pay-by-weight-airfares-are-an-ethical-minefield-we-asked-travellers-what-they-actually-think-237856">original article</a>. </div>

Travel Trouble

Edwina Bartholomew's classy call to action

As a regular on Sunrise, Edwina Bartholomew is used to sharing stories with Australians every morning. But recently, she shared something far more personal: a story about her own health. “I have cancer,” she revealed, <a href="https://www.oversixty.com.au/health/caring/sunrise-star-announces-cancer-diagnosis-live-on-air" target="_blank" rel="noopener">live on Seven's popular morning program</a>. The diagnosis? Chronic Myeloid Leukaemia (CML), a form of cancer she can manage with a daily tablet, giving her a good prognosis. But it's what she did next that was so classy and impressive. After the show went to air, Edwina <a href="https://7news.com.au/sunrise/sunrise-star-edwina-bartholomew-reveals-cancer-diagnosis-in-bid-to-make-sure-mums-put-health-first--c-15951518" target="_blank" rel="noopener">published a statement on 7News</a> that gave more detail on her circumstances, including how she came to discover her condition and why she chose to share the news the way she did. “It’s the luckiest unlucky thing to ever happen to me,” Edwina wrote, but her diagnosis also served as a wake-up call – one that she believes many other women, particularly mums, might need to hear. For Edwina, it all began with a decision many mothers know all too well: the choice to put everyone else’s needs first. "Although I’d been to the doctor for snotty noses and inexplicable toddler rashes many times, I hadn’t been to see a GP for myself since I was pregnant with my son – more than two years ago," she wrote. Sound familiar? As mums, it’s so easy to focus on the demands of children, work and home, while neglecting their own well-being. But Edwina’s story is a powerful reminder that sometimes, it’s not just about juggling it all – it’s about making time for yourself before life demands it. Her diagnosis came after a series of small but pivotal moments. She recalled how her four-year-old daughter, Molly, jumped on her, causing discomfort that made her realise she hadn’t truly focused on her own health in years. This led her to take the important step of scheduling a doctor’s appointment, where routine blood work revealed irregularities. Although a mammogram came back clear, the blood test results were anything but. From that moment, life changed in a whirlwind. Within days, Edwina was in hospital undergoing a bone marrow biopsy and starting treatment. But what’s perhaps most surprising – and relatable – is that, like so many mums, she almost didn’t make it to that crucial blood test. “It took me another month to pop into a pathology clinic," she wrote. "You know how it is; work to do, the house to clean, the laundry to do, the dinner to cook. I was busy.” That delay is something many women can relate to. They prioritise families, jobs and the never-ending to-do list, but at what cost? Edwina's story is a call to action for mums to stop delaying their own self-care. And she wanted to deliver that call to action in the strongest way possible; not through an interview, but through her own clear words. "I didn’t want to be interviewed and I didn’t want a sad photo of me here," she wrote. "That’s why you are reading my words, accompanied by a photo of my happy little family." “It was important to me to tell you my story because I suspect there are quite a few people out there suffering from a not-so-healthy dose of benign neglect, particularly mums like me," Edwina explained. "We often take care of everyone else in our family and forget to put on our own oxygen mask first.” Edwina’s words are a reminder that it’s essential to look after yourself – not as a last resort, but as a priority. Regular check-ups, preventative tests and simply listening to your body can make all the difference. The experience has clearly reshaped Edwina’s outlook on life. “What is clear from the past few months is that I need to dramatically change things,” she wrote. While she’ll still appear on Sunrise, she’s decided to cut back her work schedule, take breaks and spend more time with her family – genuinely focusing on her health and well-being. Her advice to other mums is clear: “If this sounds familiar to you, maybe it’s time to check in on your health as well.” This is a timely reminder that mums must take care of themselves first. As Edwina’s journey has shown, early detection and self-care are key. Make that appointment, get that check-up and take a moment to breathe. Your health is worth it – because if you don’t look after yourself, you can’t fully look after the ones you love. Images: Instagram

Caring

"I am a woman": Boxer launches legal action after gold medal win

Imane Khelif has filed an official complaint over online bullying and harassment she has been subject to throughout the course of the Paris Olympics. The Algerian boxer, who took home the gold medal in the women's competition, has been at the centre of a wave of abuse over her gender, with misinformation circulating over her gender. According to Khelif's lawyer Nabil Boudi, the gold medallist has filed a legal complaint in France for online harassment. “The boxer Imane Khelif has decided to begin a new fight, a fight for justice, dignity and honour,” Boudi said in a statement, saying Khelif had filed the complaint for “aggravated online harassment … to Paris prosecutors”. He added, “The investigation will determine who was behind this misogynist, racist and sexist campaign, but will also have to concern itself with those who fed the online lynching.” The “iniquitous harassment” the boxing champion had been subjected to would remain “the biggest stain on these Olympic Games”, said Boudi. On Saturday, Khelif emerged victorious in the women’s 66kg final against China’s Yang Liu in a unanimous points decision, having been the focus of intense scrutiny in the French capital for the duration of the Games. After her victory, Khelif said the gold medal she had won was the best response to her critics. Asked by reporters about the row over her eligibility, she said, “I am fully qualified to take part, I am a woman like any other. I was born a woman, lived a woman and competed as a woman.” Image credits: Ulrik Pedersen/CSM/Shutterstock Editorial

Legal

Sacked Seven reporter launches legal action

Veteran journalist Robert Ovadia has launched legal action against Channel Seven and its news boss Anthony De Ceglie after claiming he was unlawfully <a href="https://oversixty.com.au/finance/legal/veteran-seven-reporter-sacked-over-misconduct-allegations" target="_blank" rel="noopener">sacked</a>. The well-known news reporter was let go from the network on June 21st, following allegations of "inappropriate behaviour", with the alleged conduct reportedly including the exchange of messages with a female colleague four years ago. Seven management only became aware of the allegedly inappropriate exchange when it was reportedly brought to their attention by the ABC’s Four Corners program, which was working on an investigation into allegations of a toxic culture at Seven. Now, reports from The Australian claim the journalist lodged paperwork with the Fair Work Commission last month just days after being axed. Ovadia's lawyer John Laxon has confirmed to <a href="https://www.news.com.au/finance/business/media/veteran-journalist-robert-ovadia-takes-legal-action-against-seven/news-story/4ef1a259b51f72e35381eb1571c56d09" target="_blank" rel="noopener">news.com.au</a> that a general protections application has been lodged seeking orders of compensation for his dismissal, reinstatement to his job and pecuniary penalties. The reporter, who worked at Seven for 23 years, has previously said any suggestion of inappropriate behaviour was “false, malicious and will be defended”. A Seven spokesperson told The Australian it took “very seriously any allegations in relation to sexual harassment, bullying and other behaviours deemed to be inappropriate within the workplace”. “We take complaints seriously, manage them confidentially and deal with any breaches decisively.” Image credits: Seven

Legal

“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

Our Partners

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

"Lots of NDAs": Channel Nine could face class action

Parents demand action after five-year-old son brutally attacked with golf club

ACCC launches legal action against Coles and Woolworths

Pay-by-weight airfares are an ethical minefield. We asked travellers what they actually think

Edwina Bartholomew's classy call to action

"I am a woman": Boxer launches legal action after gold medal win

Sacked Seven reporter launches legal action

“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

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

Qantas slapped with class action lawsuit

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

ABC threatened with legal action over coronation coverage

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

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

The ethics of home ownership in an age of growing inequality

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

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

Our Partners