Incoming Feed Items

To mark PPE@10 this feature continues a series of posts to celebrate ten years of Progress in Political Economy (PPE) as a blog that has addressed the worldliness of critical political economy issues since 2014. 

One of the true joys of scholarly life is a genuine discourse between fellow travelers that is both unplanned yet organic. Last year, over a period of some weeks, we were both privileged to share such a discourse. We have decided to craft a post here based on that discourse, not necessarily because it has resulted in radically new concepts or methodologies, but because it captures a (hopefully) productive effort to work through common problems.

Privacy is essential to upholding democracy, reining in corporate power, and building a safe and fair digital future.

The bill has been described as a ‘first tranche’ in the process of reforming the Act. The two central proposals, a statutory tort and the roadmap for a children’s online privacy code, together represent a good first step, but Australia’s privacy legislation remains decades behind other nations. In particular, we note the absence of an updated definition of ‘personal information’, a fair and reasonable test, and the continuing exemptions such as those that currently exist for small businesses. Delay in pursuing these reforms leaves gaping holes in Australia’s legal regime for the protection of personal information.

We are past the time for incremental amendments to the Act.

If the Attorney-General’s office intends on introducing these reforms in ‘tranches’, as is suggested, we expect to see a detailed roadmap and timeline for the introduction of the remaining tranche(s), else we risk the remaining reforms being delayed indefinitely. We concur with many other civil society organisations in calling on the government to implement the remaining reforms within six months of taking office, should they win the next election. We also call on the opposition to make a similar commitment should they win office.

You can read our submission in full below:

The Wrap with Ebony Bennett

To coincide with the Australian Government’s Nature Positive Summit this week, we published a full-page ad in The Sydney Morning Herald and The Canberra Times to highlight that beneath the spin, current government policies are overwhelmingly “nature negative”.

Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek has talked a big game — she recently claimed that Australia has made “good progress” towards becoming nature positive. However, just two weeks before the summit she approved three giant new coal mine extensions that will cover an area almost the size of Sydney. That makes seven new coal mines and over 200 new gas wells approved under this government.

Polly Hemming, Director of our Climate and Energy Program, appeared on the 7am podcast to explain that so long as the government keeps doing more harm, it won’t even be “nature neutral”, let alone “nature positive”. And Richard Denniss, our Executive Director, appeared on ABC News Radio to reiterate that we’re not going to be “nature positive” until we stop logging native forests and approving new coal and gas projects.

New analysis reveals that renters living in Australia’s capital cities are spending on average nearly $15,000 more a year to rent a house since the pandemic.

To kick off the first day of Anti-Poverty Week (13-19 October), Everybody’s Home has analysed SQM Research weekly asking rents data, showing the shocking annual rise in rents that have been smashing Australians across the country since January 2020.

The analysis shows renters in capital cities are on average paying $14,700 more a year to rent a house, and $9,600 more a year to rent a unit compared to the beginning of 2020.

Sydney and Perth have seen the steepest rent rises, with the annual increase well above the capital city average for both units and houses. Adelaide and Brisbane unit rents are also above the capital city average.

This essay was written by one of my college writing students at the Elmwood Correctional Facility in Milpitas, California. I am so grateful to share this beautiful piece of scholarship with you. These students do not have Internet access, only paper, a golf pencil, and reading that I give them.

Making traffic fines proportional to drivers’ incomes, as is done in Finland, is a fairer system according to a new report from The Australia Institute, supported by Uniting Vic Tas and Financial Counselling Victoria.

With cost of living already pushing many Australians into financial difficulties, traffic fines can force low-income people into choosing between essential spending and paying fines. By contrast, traffic fines are a minor annoyance for Australia’s high-income earners.

A new report from The Australia Institute outlines a more equitable model for speeding fines based on a Finnish proportional fine system.

Key points:
●        Finland has a minimum fine amount but otherwise calculates a fine based on a driver’s income and whether they have dependents
●        This is better for equality, and sometimes catches headlines when really big fines are issued to billionaires
●        Australian states are already moving in this direction: in NSW there is already a Centrelink discount.

Lower-income drivers would see average speeding fines decrease in every state and territory, while people with the highest income bracket would see their speeding fines increase.

“For a person on a low income, speeding fines can be crippling,” said Alice Grundy, an Australia Institute research manager and report co-author.

“Having a billionaire pay the same $200 speeding fine as a low-income earner is unfair.

A report by the National Anti-Corruption Commission into payments to a former Department of Home Affairs official by a company with a lucrative contract with Home Affairs raises more questions than answers.

Bill Browne, Director of the Australia Institute’s Democracy and Accountability Program, says the report is disappointing when it comes to transparency and public expectations.

Parliamentarians, academics and former whistleblowers will be among those meeting at the Australia Institute’s Transparency Summit next week to discuss how to address Australia’s culture of secrecy, including how to strengthen the NACC.

A survey of 1,005 Australians was conducted by Dynata between 21 and 23 May, 2024, about the circumstances under which the National Anti-Corruption Commission should be allowed to hold public hearings.

Riley Gaines is at it again! This time she appears to be paying collegiate sports teams to forfeit games against a school that may or may not have a trans volleyball player.

The rock is Israel’s intransigence and the implacability of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu‘s coalition partners.

The hard place is the immense suffering of the Palestinian and, now, the Lebanese people.

“Acceptance” of Israel’s extreme brutality in the assertion of its right to national security and “concern” at the slaughter of 30,000 non-combatants, including over 10,000 children, are irreconcilable.

Trying to steer between the two results in the impotence and timidity that distinguishes the procession of state leaders and foreign ministers now talking at the UN General Assembly.

Its repeated claims to indispensability and world leadership notwithstanding, the US is as impotent as its allies.

Despite its repeated efforts at brokering, it has been little more than a bystander since 1948.

Netanyahu dismisses President Joe Biden’s suggestions and Anthony Blinken’s advice with scorn, preferring instead to take the Middle East to the brink of war, sure in his belief that the US is powerless to apply sanctions, cut off arms and demand a ceasefire.

Israel is certain that the US will not permit it to fail.

But driving Hamas and, now, Hezbollah further underground – literally – while reducing neighbourhoods to rubble will only increase the desperation of the Palestinian and Lebanese people and encourage further acts of terrorism and missile assault by both.

It will thus diminish rather than strengthen Israel’s long-term security.

An academic report released today outlining the failure of carbon offsets has found Australia’s biggest carbon credit method is barely removing any greenhouse gas from the atmosphere.

The report adds to the significant body of independent analysis demonstrating that Australia’s carbon credits are not effectively storing or avoiding carbon emissions, and when used as carbon offsets they are increasing emissions.

Our new report, developed with BLAM, takes a critical look at how racial trauma can be understood and effectively addressed through the development of anti-racist therapy that centres the voices and experiences of racialised people. Racial trauma in the UK is not just a personal burden, but a public health emergency. It stems from persistent […]

The post Advancing Anti-Racist Therapy for Racialised Communities appeared first on Equality Trust.

BFLR 7th Annual FinTech Issue (due May 1, 2025), BFLR FinTech Fellowship (due May 1, 2025), and BFLR Law Student FinTech Writing Program (due June 16, 2025)


More “Announcement
Calls for papers and fellowship opportunities from the Banking & Finance Law Review”

Transgender activist Riki Wilchins interviews political theorist and leader in trans studies Paisley Currah.

On this episode of Dollars & Sense, Greg and Hayden discuss the government’s ‘Nature Positive’ summit, Australia’s housing debate, and a new push to end youth award rates.

Greg Jericho is Chief Economist at the Australia Institute and the Centre for Future Work and popular columnist of Grogonomics with Guardian Australia. Each week on Dollars & Sense, Greg dives into the latest economic figures to explain what they can tell us about what’s happening in the economy, how it will impact you and where things are headed.

Host: Greg Jericho, Chief Economist, the Australia Institute and Centre for Future Work // @GrogsGamut

Host: Hayden Starr, Digital Media Manager, the Australia Institute // @haydenthestarr

Show notes:

‘On the climate crisis, housing and more, politicians avoid clarity because it demands action’ by Greg Jericho, Guardian Australia (October 2024)

Julian di Giovanni, Galina Hale, Neel Lahiri, and Anirban Sanyal

To mark PPE@10 this feature continues a series of posts to celebrate ten years of Progress in Political Economy (PPE) as a blog that has addressed the worldliness of critical political economy issues since 2014. 

Feminist political economists all have a friend called Tom (or Richard. Maybe not Harry). Our Tom comes to us with questions about how class and gender collide or coincide in various aspects of the contemporary global economy. When the Economist released a report on a widening divergence in voting behaviours between young men and women, our Tom shared it in the group chat, cognizant that we had been interested in what appeared like rising rates of misogyny among young men in Australia and the implications for national security.

As feminists working at the intersection of critical political economy and international security, we’ve long been frustrated by the mainstream’s recognition that gender plays some role in the rise of extremist ideologies and violent extremist actions without a clear understanding of how and why.

Published at Financial Times Alphaville

I had a piece ready to go tomorrow covering the shocking story of the Federal Reserve nearly abandoning its 13(3) emergency lending authority in 1967. But I’ve moved it to next Tuesday because of the urgency of the moment. Obviously it's very unlikely for the Federal Reserve to jump in the middle of the Hurricane Milton disaster response but the situation is genuinely so dire that I am hoping pushing them right at this moment could lead them to seriously think about it. And in the bigger picture, criticism for their failure now makes it more possible in the future. Meanwhile the 30,000 pages of FOIAed Federal Reserve Board Minutes will come right after 

Sebastian Heise, Jeremy Pearce, and Jacob P. Weber

On this episode of Follow the Money, Margaret Beavis, Co-Director of Quit Nukes, and Adam Gottschalk, Anne Kantor Research Fellow at the Australia Institute, join us to discuss how some superannuation funds invest Australians’ retirement savings nuclear weapons.

This discussion was recorded live on Friday 4 October 2024 and things may have changed since recording.

Guest: Margaret Beavis, Co-Director, Quit Nukes // @margaretbeavis

Guest: Adam Gottschalk, Anne Kantor Research Fellow, the Australia Institute // @adamchalksitup

Host: Ebony Bennett, Deputy Director, the Australia Institute // @ebony_bennett

Show notes:

Risky Business: An update on super funds and nuclear weapons by Rosemary Kelly and Margaret Beavis (September 2024)

Theme music: Pulse and Thrum; additional music by Blue Dot Sessions

This interview is also available on podcast platforms and Rumble.

The current world order is designed to be complex and confusing. Its function enshrines the power of our rulers, who purposely obscure its origins and underlying philosophy. Politicians, the media, so-called intellectuals at think tanks — along with the inertia of systemic falsehoods — perpetuate this veiled system. Neoliberalism has maintained its dominance through exploiting the many to sustain the prosperity of the few.