分类： politics

Australia’s upcoming federal election landscape has been upended by freshly released polling data from research firm Roy Morgan, which positions right-wing populist party One Nation as the primary opposition to incumbent Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s Labor Party, pushing the traditional center-right major opposition Coalition into third place. The data, published in mid-2024, paints a startling new picture of voter sentiment, breaking the long-standing two-party duopoly that has dominated Australian federal politics for decades. According to the poll, primary vote support for the ruling Australian Labor Party (ALP) currently stands at 27.5%, enough to deliver a parliamentary majority if an election were held today regardless of whether the ALP faced One Nation or the Coalition as its main competitor for power. One Nation, the nationalist party led by Pauline Hanson, recorded a primary support rating of 24% – a 1.5 percentage point drop from the previous survey, but still enough to place it well ahead of the Liberal Party, the largest member of the Coalition. The Liberal Party saw a 1.5 percentage point rise in support to reach 20%, while its traditional rural coalition partner, the Nationals, held steady at 3.5% aggregate support. Combined, the two Coalition parties sit at just 23.5% primary support, half a point behind One Nation. Beyond voter intention, the polling also tracks a notable dip in public confidence in the federal government, with the overall confidence index falling 1.5 points to 67.5 out of 100. A majority of Australian voters – 59.5%, up 1.5 points from the last poll – now believe the country is headed in the wrong direction, a reading that signals broad underlying voter dissatisfaction with the current political trajectory. The survey also highlighted stark divides in confidence across party bases. Unsurprisingly, ALP supporters recorded the highest confidence rating, at 137.5, far above the baseline 100 mark. Greens supporters came next with a confidence rating of 70, down 16.5 points from the previous survey, followed by Coalition supporters at 50 – up 7.5 points. One Nation supporters, who are among the most dissatisfied with the current government, recorded a confidence rating of just 6.5, a seven-point drop from the last poll. Based on the data, Roy Morgan’s analysis concludes that the next federal election will now be framed as a head-to-head contest between the ALP and One Nation, rather than the long-running ALP-Coalition battle that has defined Australian federal elections for over a century. The research firm acknowledged the fragmented nature of modern Australian politics, noting that multiple three-way and four-way contests will play out across different electorates, with battles also occurring between the ALP and the Coalition, One Nation and the Coalition, and all major parties facing challenges from the Greens, centrist Teal Independents, and smaller regional parties including Katter’s Australian Party (KAP). The shake-up in voter polling comes amid concurrent political controversy for One Nation leader Pauline Hanson, who this week banned three major Australian news outlets – The Guardian, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), and The Age – from a public event scheduled for Monday, where the party is set to unveil eight candidates for the upcoming Victorian state election this November. The move has drawn criticism from media freedom advocates, who argue that excluding major independent outlets from public political events undermines transparency in the lead-up to state polling. This realignment in voter support marks a significant shift in Australian politics, reflecting growing voter dissatisfaction with the traditional major parties and the rising influence of right-wing populist messaging ahead of the next federal election, which is scheduled to be held by mid-2025.

Nearly three and a half years after a military coup ousted Myanmar’s democratically elected government, the detained opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi has held her first publicly confirmed meeting with an international official, according to the country’s presidency. On Monday morning, Arnaud de Baecque, the ICRC’s Resident Representative to Myanmar, held a face-to-face encounter with the 81-year-old Nobel Peace Prize laureate, the office confirmed.

The junta-led administration released multiple images alongside the announcement: one captures Suu Kyi shaking hands with a figure that matches de Baecque’s description, while two other images show Suu Kyi cutting a birthday cake inscribed with the message “Happy Birthday Aunty Suu.” While AFP could not independently certify the images’ authenticity, artificial intelligence analysis found no evidence of digital manipulation, and no prior versions of the photos had been circulated online before Monday’s announcement. The AFP has reached out to the International Committee of the Red Cross for further comment on the meeting.

The February 2021 military coup ended Suu Kyi’s five-year tenure as Myanmar’s state counsellor, after her National League for Democracy won a landslide re-election victory. The junta immediately detained Suu Kyi on a sprawling set of criminal charges that international human rights organizations universally dismiss as politically fabricated, designed to remove her from public life and dismantle her widely popular party. The post-coup uprising against military rule has devolved into an ongoing civil conflict that has killed more than 100,000 people, according to data from the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED).

Earlier this year, the junta oversaw a widely boycotted and restricted general election that consolidated its control over the civilian government. In April, former junta chief Min Aung Hlaing was sworn in as the country’s new civilian president, and shortly after the inauguration, he announced he would commute the remainder of Suu Kyi’s combined 27-year prison sentence and transfer her from prison to private house detention in the capital Naypyidaw. To date, junta authorities have refused to disclose the exact location of her detention or confirm how much of her sentence remains in effect.

For months, Suu Kyi’s family and the international community have called for independent verification that she remains alive. Her son, British national Kim Aris, has repeatedly pushed for independent access to confirm her welfare following the transfer to house arrest. This meeting marks the first time a third-party international representative has been allowed to see Suu Kyi publicly since the coup.

A senior veteran politician from Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy, speaking to AFP on condition of anonymity, called the confirmation of her survival a small relief. “We are happy to see her photo like this if it’s really her meeting with the ICRC. We can know now that she’s alive,” the politician said, adding: “However, Aunty should be released immediately as she’s being detained unlawfully.”

Since the 2021 coup, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has suspended Myanmar’s junta leadership from participation in the bloc’s high-level summits, over the military’s failure to implement a peace and reconciliation roadmap agreed with the bloc. In recent months, however, neighboring Thailand has led a diplomatic push to readmit Myanmar back into ASEAN’s regional framework, both through bilateral engagement and bloc-level initiatives.

Min Aung Hlaing has already undertaken official visits to China, India, and ASEAN member Laos since taking office as president, and he is scheduled to make a high-profile official trip to Thailand later this week. Independent Myanmar analysts and regional policy researchers say the timing of the ICRC meeting, coming just days before the Thailand trip, is no coincidence.

“It’s the old military game plan to use Suu Kyi as a bargaining chip,” independent Myanmar analyst David Mathieson told AFP. He noted that multiple ASEAN member states have long demanded public proof of Suu Kyi’s status as a condition for normalizing diplomatic relations with the junta. “As a gesture to the international community, it’s the wildcard Min Aung Hlaing was holding close to his chest,” Mathieson added.

Morgan Michaels, a researcher focused on Myanmar at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, said the junta stands to gain significant diplomatic ground by allowing international access to Suu Kyi. “Releasing her in particular would go a long way to facilitating Myanmar’s re-invitation at the political level,” Michaels said. Even with this latest gesture, Suu Kyi’s continued detention remains a major sticking point for the international community: ASEAN has repeatedly called for its own special envoy to be granted access to meet Suu Kyi, a request the junta has rejected repeatedly to date.

A weeks-long standoff that threatened to derail the confirmation of U.S. President Donald Trump’s pick for attorney general has been resolved, after acting Attorney General Todd Blanche announced Sunday he had struck a deal with skeptical Senate lawmakers and formally signed an order terminating the widely contested $1.8 billion anti-weaponization compensation fund.

Blanche’s announcement comes on the heels of the Senate Judiciary Committee delaying a procedural vote to advance his nomination last week, a move that followed mounting opposition from two key Republican senators: John Cornyn of Texas and Thom Tillis of North Carolina. The pair had publicly pledged to block Blanche’s confirmation until the Trump administration fully walked back its plan for the fund, which was created to compensate individuals who claim they were targeted by politically motivated prosecutions.

In a public post on X shared Sunday, Blanche laid out the outcome of weeks of negotiations with committee leaders and rank-and-file senators. “My team and I have met with committee members and Senators over the past several weeks and addressed any concerns or outstanding questions,” Blanche wrote. “We have enjoyed good faith discussions, and as a result issue the following order and update with regard to the May IRS settlement.”

Attached to Blanche’s post was a signed executive order that formally invalidates the previous May 18, 2026 order that established the Anti-Weaponization Fund. “The Attorney General’s May 18, 2026 Order establishing the Anti-Weaponization Fund… is rescinded and shall have no force or effect,” the order reads. “This Order establishes, beyond any doubt, that there is no Fund.”

The controversial fund grew out of an extraordinary legal settlement between Trump and his own administration over the unauthorized disclosure of Trump’s personal tax records several years ago. As part of the original terms, the agreement granted sweeping protection from future tax audits and government legal claims to Trump, his immediate family, and his affiliated business entities. From the moment the fund was unveiled, critics across the political spectrum raised sharp objections, arguing it lacked a clear foundation in U.S. law, included almost no provisions for public oversight, and could be exploited to provide payouts and legal protection to Trump loyalists — even including defendants convicted of crimes connected to the January 6, 2021, assault on the U.S. Capitol.

While Blanche had previously offered verbal assurances that the fund would not move forward, Cornyn and Tillis refused to accept informal commitments. The pair insisted on a binding written order that ruled out any future revival of the fund and included specific language to narrow the scope of the broad tax protections granted to Trump and his associates in the original settlement. As of Sunday evening, neither senator had issued a public response to Blanche’s announcement.

The Senate Judiciary Committee is now scheduled to hold its long-delayed vote on Blanche’s nomination on Tuesday. The impasse had grown so tense in recent days that Trump suggested Thursday he could temporarily pull Blanche’s nomination — the former personal lawyer to the president — and re-nominate him after Cornyn and Tillis leave their Senate seats at the end of January, when new members of Congress are sworn in.

A fierce public debate has erupted over the Albanese government’s newly unveiled revisions to Australia’s landmark media bargaining framework, with the ruling Labor party claiming the changes will force large global technology firms to pay far more for repurposing Australian news content — while leading domestic media executives warn the revisions will eviscerate the core purpose of the original scheme designed to make tech platforms compensate local journalism.

Unveiled on Monday, the revised package amends both the Media Bargaining Incentive and the News Journalism Payment Scheme, marking the second iteration of the policy following a draft proposal released this past April. The most eye-catching adjustment on paper is an increase to the financial penalty for tech and social media giants that refuse to strike voluntary compensation deals with Australian news outlets, raising the levy rate from 2.25% to 2.5%. But the reform narrows the revenue base the levy applies to: instead of being calculated against a company’s total Australian revenue, the penalty will only be charged on digital advertising revenue that can be specifically linked to Australia. Industry analysts broadly agree this base narrowing will result in lower overall penalty amounts for non-compliant firms, undermining the incentive to negotiate.

Michael Miller, executive chairman of News Corp Australia, one of the country’s largest media conglomerates, issued a scathing rebuke of the changes, arguing they “gut the incentive” for tech platforms to negotiate fair compensation agreements at a moment when existing rules need to be strengthened, not weakened. “On an already uneven playing field, getting this wrong won’t just hurt Australian media. It will erode the quality and independence of news every Australian relies on,” Miller said, adding that major tech firms must not be allowed to continue avoiding their regulatory obligations, and that Australia needs full revenue transparency backed by strict, uncompromising penalties for platforms that break local media laws.

Matt Stanton, chief executive of Nine Entertainment, another leading domestic media group, echoed the criticism, noting that foreign-owned tech giants already exercise outsized influence over how Australian audiences access news content from outlets like Nine. “Independent journalism plays a fundamental role in democracy, holding governments, institutions and businesses to account. In this rapidly changing world this is more important than ever,” Stanton said, adding that the last-minute substantive changes to the scheme demand far closer parliamentary scrutiny to ensure the policy retains its core goal: forcing platforms to negotiate fairly for the journalism they profit from.

Sally Eagle, chief executive of Are Media, added her voice to the concerns, stressing that the levy must deliver on its founding purpose of pushing major digital platforms to the negotiation table. She called on the Australian parliament, which is set to vote on the final legislation in the coming months, to ensure the final draft is transparent and free of loopholes that would allow platforms to dodge their responsibility to strike long-term sustainable deals with local media.

Tim Duggan, chair of the Digital Publishers Alliance, described the revised reforms as “a pretty mixed bag”, noting that the biggest problem is that the total potential penalty pool has been reduced too dramatically to drive compliance. “I struggle to see how it will incentivise the outcome desired by the government once the platforms start using accounting trickery to minimise their obligations,” Duggan said.

The revised framework comes after major Australian media outlets including the ABC, Australian Community Media, Network 10, and The Guardian previously praised the April draft as a critical step forward for protecting local journalism. In a joint statement earlier this year that included Miller and Stanton, the groups urged all Australian parliamentarians to back measures that safeguard Australian journalism and its vital democratic role for all citizens.

Speaking to reporters on Monday, Assistant Treasurer Daniel Mulino defended the reforms, arguing that tech platforms will still end up paying “substantially more” if they refuse to negotiate commercial deals with local media firms. “Under the previous arrangements that we inherited under the News Media Bargaining Code, big tech platforms could walk away without any consequences,” Mulino said. “Now, they will end up paying substantially more than if they enter into commercial agreements. There is a substantial financial incentive on big tech platforms to enter into agreements.”

The opposition Liberal-National Coalition has also blasted the reforms, with communications spokesperson Sarah Henderson — a former journalist — arguing Labor has failed to deliver on the original News Media Bargaining Code first introduced by the former Coalition government, which was fiercely opposed by major tech firms including Meta, the parent company of Facebook that shut down its Facebook News tab in Australia in 2021. “Labor’s dithering and delay on a promised replacement scheme has left tech giants unaccountable for their use of Australian copyrighted news content, while newsrooms and regional newspapers face uncertainty about their future,” Henderson said, adding that “it’s clear Labor is more concerned about giving the tech giants a free kick than distributing monies fairly to Australian news organisations. Not only will Labor’s scheme mean less money for Australian journalism, the government is now doing even less to encourage commercial deals with big tech which is extremely disappointing.”

The Coalition did welcome minor adjustments to the scheme, including the elimination of a carve-out for professional networking platforms, which means services like LinkedIn will now be required to comply with the payment rules. But Shadow Assistant Treasurer Kevin Hogan warned the scheme will only work if digital platforms report their Australian revenue accurately. Additional changes introduced by Labor include raising the minimum number of deals a tech platform must strike with local media outlets to avoid penalties from four to six, grandfathering existing valid deals from previous bargaining rounds, and mandating a full independent review of the scheme after three years of implementation. Major tech companies that already pushed back against Labor’s initial draft proposal earlier this year are widely expected to oppose the revised measures as well.

A trailblazing shift in Australian public sector working arrangements is set to kick off in the New Year, after Murrumbidgee Council in regional New South Wales voted to roll out the country’s first ever four-day work week trial for local government employees.

The 15-month experimental program, scheduled to launch in January, compresses the standard 38-hour working week into four days across all council operations spanning Darlington Point, Coleambally and Jerilderie. This includes frontline office services, depot work crews, and public library facilities. While most non-essential services will close entirely on Fridays to accommodate the new schedule, critical community-facing services including the local childcare centre and caravan park will remain open, and on-call essential staff will continue their existing rosters.

Proponents of the scheme argue the compressed work week will deliver three key benefits for the regional council: it will make the authority more competitive in attracting skilled workers to a tight regional labor market, it will boost overall staff productivity, and it will give every employee 52 three-day weekends each year, significantly improving work-life balance.

The plan follows months of structured consultation with both council staff and the local community, which found that 75% of employees backed the transition to a four-day model. Council General Manager John Scarce told the council’s July 28 ordinary meeting that public feedback showed overwhelming acceptance of the change.

“If there was widespread community pushback, residents had every opportunity to voice their concerns,” Scarce said. “The fact that so few have come forward with objections makes it clear the majority of people have no issue with this trial at all.”

To ensure transparency and evidence-based decision making, the trial will follow a structured evaluation timeline. An initial review of performance data will be conducted after 12 months, with the remaining three months of the trial period reserved for full impact assessment. The final decision on whether to make the four-day week permanent will not rest solely with management: staff will hold a binding vote on whether they want to retain the model, and elected council representatives will also cast a final vote after reviewing whether all pre-set performance and service delivery targets have been met. Over the coming six months, Scarce will finalize the formal trial agreement and the key performance indicators that will be used to measure the program’s success.

Not all local stakeholders have voiced support for the change, however. Trudi-Louise Chant, a disability service provider with Coleambally-based Riverina Connect, raised concerns about the planned Friday closure of the combined local council office and library, a facility that has already seen reduced opening hours in recent years.

Chant noted that most public conversation around the trial has focused on the benefits for council staff, rather than potential impacts on community access to services. “Most people’s take is that government workers just want more time off,” she said.

Murrumbidgee Council’s trial puts the regional authority at the center of a growing national debate over working hour reforms in Australia. The local government trial is more targeted than the sweeping national changes proposed by Australian unions, which are pushing to cut the standard full-time working week from 38 to 35 hours as part of a national transition to a four-day week with no reduction in pay for workers. Unions argue that decades of productivity growth driven by new technology have not translated to better work-life balance for workers, and that shorter weeks can improve employee health, reduce staff turnover, and actually boost overall output. The United Services Union has specifically pushed for greater flexible working arrangements, including four-day week options, for New South Wales local government workers, as households grapple with soaring transport costs and councils struggle with staffing and retention pressures.

At 80 years old, Brazil’s sitting President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva officially launched his campaign for a fourth presidential term Sunday at the Workers’ Party (PT) convention in Sao Paulo, declaring he remains “in great shape” to lead the nation through a period of global and domestic political upheaval.

A towering figure of Latin America’s progressive left, Lula has framed his 2024 October election campaign as a fight to defend Brazilian sovereignty against external interference and stem the rising tide of far-right politics across the globe. While US President Donald Trump was never named directly during the convention’s proceedings, Lula and other senior leftist speakers centered their message on shielding Brazil from outside threats, a reference to ongoing trade and diplomatic tensions between Brasilia and the Trump White House.

“I want to be prepared so that no one invades this country,” Lula told assembled party members, while calling for increased public investment in Brazil’s national defense. He also pushed back against widespread speculation about his age and fitness for office, noting that his consistent exercise routine and active lifestyle keep him ready to serve. “I want to fight against old age. I don’t want to be shuffling along,” he added.

Lula’s political career is one of the most dramatic comeback stories in modern Latin American politics. A former metalworker and union organizer, he first held the presidency from 2003 to 2010, before a controversial set of corruption convictions saw him jailed and barred from politics. Those convictions were eventually annulled, and he reclaimed the presidency in 2022, returning to power after years on the political sidelines. Today, he remains one of Brazil’s most polarizing figures: supporters credit his signature social programs with lifting millions of Brazilians out of poverty and expanding access to housing and social services, while critics point to persistent issues of violent crime and systemic corruption, and note that the PT has held the presidency for 17 of the last 24 years.

For many of Lula’s base supporters, his policies have been transformative. “I’m here today because Lula’s policies changed my life and my family’s. Thanks to him, we own our own home today,” 51-year-old social worker Cristiane Rosa Julho told AFP on the sidelines of the convention.

Brazil’s electoral rules allow presidents to serve two consecutive terms, and permit a return to candidacy after a break in service with no lifetime cap on total terms. Lula has stressed that this campaign will be his last, saying that after a fourth term, he and his wife 59-year-old Rosangela will retire to focus on personal life. “We’re going on vacation to focus on romance for another 20 years,” he joked.

Lula’s leading challenger in the upcoming race is 45-year-old Senator Flavio Bolsonaro, eldest son of far-right former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro. Flavio stepped into the presidential race after his father was convicted of orchestrating a coup attempt to block Lula’s 2023 inauguration. The entire Bolsonaro family maintains close political alliances with Donald Trump, who has already thrown his support behind several winning far-right candidates across Latin America, as well as Argentina’s libertarian President Javier Milei.

Tensions with Washington have been a key flashpoint in the early days of the campaign. In July, the Trump administration imposed two new rounds of tariffs on Brazilian exports, citing claims of unfair trade practices. Last year, the Bolsonaro family publicly welcomed earlier tariffs the Trump administration put in place as retaliation for Jair Bolsonaro’s criminal trial; those duties were largely rolled back after diplomatic negotiations. Lula has made clear he will not tolerate foreign meddling in Brazil’s politics or its natural resources, which hold massive reserves of critical rare earth minerals that are in high demand globally. “In Brazil, we do not accept anyone sticking their nose where it does not belong,” Lula said last week, adding at the convention: “neither the Chinese, nor the Americans, nor the French are going to get their hands on our rare earths.”

Speaking at the convention, Lula’s running mate Vice President Geraldo Alckmin took aim at the Bolsonaro camp’s longstanding questioning of Brazil’s electronic voting system, concerns that Flavio repeated publicly just last week. “Anyone who doesn’t believe in the popular vote shouldn’t even run for president. The electronic voting machine is so competent that it won’t accept votes from Argentines or Americans,” Alckmin said, in a veiled jab at foreign influence on the Brazilian race.

Recent polling from the Datafolha institute shows the race remains extremely tight: the poll finds 48% of likely voters would back Lula in a head-to-head second round runoff, compared to 43% who would support Flavio Bolsonaro, leaving the race far from settled ahead of the October vote.