Australian Politics

More black on black domestic violence

It happens all the time but it is only when the woman dies that it comes to attention

A killer who claimed a knife accidentally impaled his girlfriend in the neck had a history of violence against women, including pushing another partner while in her wheelchair into oncoming traffic, the WA Supreme Court has been told.

WARNING: This story contains details some readers may find confronting and the name and image of an Indigenous person who has died.

Christopher Thomas Dimer has been sentenced to life in prison with a minimum non-parole period of 20 years for murdering his partner Shauna Lee Rose Headland at a townhouse in the Perth suburb of Nollamara in March 2022.

Ms Headland's mother Janis told the court her daughter's murder had reverberated through the whole family. (Supplied)

Dimer had claimed a knife fell from where it was wedged into a window frame to hold up a curtain and went straight into Ms Headland's neck, telling police he had tried and failed to catch it as it fell.

He was found guilty of murdering Ms Headland in a jury trial earlier this year.

In sentencing, Justice Joseph McGrath, rejected Dimer's explanation of events, finding he instead had picked up the knife and stabbed Ms Headland during an argument which turned violent.

Ms Headland, a Yamatji-Noongar woman, was only 22-years-old when she and Dimer, now 42, began dating.

The court heard she had previously suffered domestic violence at his hands, including one instance where he drank a bottle of whisky and punched her repeatedly in the face at a Perth train station in 2020.

Dimer's history of violence against women

It was revealed in the WA Supreme Court today that Dimer had a more extensive history of violence against two other former partners, including an attack on another woman in 2020 and an instance in 2015 when he pushed his then partner into oncoming traffic while she was in her wheelchair.

He then claimed that woman had made the allegation up but ultimately pleaded guilty.

Dimer was sentenced in the WA Supreme Court on Friday after being found guilty of murder earlier this year. (ABC News: David Weber)

Ms Headland's mother and brother gave victim impact statements to the court describing the loss of Ms Headland as devastating and heartbreaking, saying loss had reverberated through their whole family.

Shauna's mother, Janis Headland, told the court since her daughter was killed she suffered from anxiety attacks, at times breaking down crying as she described her love for her daughter.

"If you had known my big girl, loving, caring, kind, put everyone before herself," Mrs Headland said.

"My baby deserved everything. She was only 26, she was only a baby, still growing up.

"She didn't have the chance to be a mother, see the world, have a career."

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-20/christopher-dimer-jail-murdering-shauna-lee-rose-headland-perth/104374756

*****************************************************

Australia has mothballed a $550m tank fleet. Ukraine would like a word

Ukrainian soldiers could soon be using retired Australian battle tanks in their fight against invading Russian forces, as the Albanese government works with the Biden administration on a plan to send them to the battlefield.

This masthead can reveal that, after previously appearing to rule out providing tanks to Ukraine, the government is considering its request and working with the US to make the transfer happen.

One of the nation’s longest serving army chiefs joined calls for Australia to provide its old tanks to Ukraine, saying he was baffled why the decision to send them hadn’t been made already.

The July retirement of the 59 American-made M1A1 Abrams tanks, which were never used in combat and are being replaced by newer models from this month, has focused attention on whether they will be put into storage, disposed of or given to Ukraine.

This masthead revealed this week that the Ukrainian-Australian community was angry that decommissioned Australian military equipment, including long-range patrol vehicles and inflatables boats, was being auctioned online to motoring enthusiasts instead of being sent to Ukraine.

Bought for $550 million in 2004, the heavily armoured tanks weigh 63 tonnes each and are equipped with cannons and machine guns.

Ukraine has made formal requests for Australia to join the US, United Kingdom, Poland and Germany by donating tanks to help defend its nation. Earlier this year the government buried its fleet of MRH-90 Taipan helicopters rather than provide them to Ukraine as requested.

Peter Leahy, who served as army chief from 2003 to 2008 and oversaw the introduction of the M1A1 tanks, said: “I’m bemused why the tanks aren’t on offer to Ukraine.

“Although we are retiring them, they are a very competent tank, they should be well-maintained, there are spare parts available and the Ukrainians are very keen to get them.”

Leahy, the director of the University of Canberra’s National Security Institute, said: “We should put them on a ship and get them over there... I certainly wouldn’t want to see the bloody things destroyed or buried.”

After insisting in February that sending tanks to Ukraine was “not on the agenda”, Defence Minister Richard Marles has softened his rhetoric, raising Ukrainian advocates’ hopes.

“There are a range of capabilities that we are talking about with the government of Ukraine,” Marles said last month.

Government sources, who were not authorised to speak publicly, said Marles was exploring how the tank shipment could occur under the US defence export rules that apply because the vehicles are American-made.

Vasyl Myroshnychenko, Ukraine’s ambassador to Australia, said that tanks “are an essential part of our land defence, and our soldiers both need and want them”.

“If Australia makes them available to Ukraine either directly, or indirectly through the US, we will gladly accept them and put them to good use,” he said.

Stressing that Ukraine was grateful for the $1.1 billion in military assistance Australia has provided since the war began, he said: “All Ukraine is asking for is the opportunity to use military equipment Australia no longer needs.”

Opposition foreign affairs spokesman Simon Birmingham said: “Labor’s decision to bury rather than gift the retiring Taipan helicopters baffled many and must not be repeated with the Abrams tanks.”

Former senior Defence Department official Michael Shoebridge said: “These tanks are still in good shape. The Ukrainians are fighting a war for national survival so we should get them there as soon as we can.”

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/australia-has-mothballed-a-550m-tank-fleet-ukraine-would-like-a-word-20240919-p5kbsx.html

*************************************************

Truth is, the misinformation battle may be unwinnable

Michelle Rowland, the Minister for Communications, is making another valiant effort to rein in the adverse effects of ungoverned digital platforms being able to post misinformation and disinformation, which causes serious harm to the community. She has introduced a revamped version of the government’s Communications Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill 2024. The draft bill had to be comprehensively reworked when it solicited adverse comment from all quarters.

The minister has told parliament that the revised bill honours the government’s commitment to vest “the Australian Communications and Media Authority with new powers to create transparency and accountability around the efforts of digital platforms to combat mis- and disinformation on their services, while balancing the freedom of expression that is so fundamental to our democracy”. Finding that balance without even a statutory bill of rights is the challenge.

Basically, misinformation is inaccurate information. The draft bill now specifies that the inaccurate information has to be “reasonably verifiable as false, misleading or deceptive”. Misinformation becomes disinformation if “there are grounds to suspect that the person disseminating, or causing the dissemination of, the content intends that the content deceive another person”.

When introducing the draft bill last year, the minister tried selling it to the public with a couple of incontrovertible examples of unwarranted misinformation or disinformation causing serious harm.

She said: “And let’s be clear about the kind of harm we’re talking about here. This can be misinformation that actually results in people ignoring strong health advice. It can be misinformation that actually endangers lives by saying that a predicted pathway of a bushfire, for example, is going in another direction by publishing a fake map with emergency services branding. That is exactly the kind of behaviour that we are seeking to address with these new laws.”

This time around, the minister once again gave a couple of examples of serious harm to which no one could take exception: “Mis- and disinformation about the stabbing attacks in Bondi Junction and recently in Southport, UK, are just two examples that illustrate the need for digital platforms to do more to prevent and respond to its spread.”

The huge problem confronting government with this bill is that it purports not only to deal with these sorts of uncontroversial examples. Serious harm includes “harm to public health in Australia, including to the efficacy of preventative health measures in Australia”. But it also includes “harm to the operation or integrity of a commonwealth, state, territory or local government electoral or referendum process”.

It’s one thing to have ACMA reining in non-compliant digital platforms, run out of the US, to prevent serious health risks to Australians infected by disinformation on their platforms. It’s an altogether different thing to arm ACMA with the power to scrutinise whether things being said during an election campaign or referendum campaign are “reasonably verifiable as false, misleading or deceptive”, and intended to deceive.

Countries such as the US with a constitutional bill of rights or countries such as the UK with a statutory bill of rights are very unlikely to try applying this sort of regime to political speech. The US Constitution’s First Amendment provides that congress shall make no law “abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press”.

The UK Human Rights Act recognises that everyone has the right to freedom of expression: “This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.”

If these countries were to attempt the proposed Australian regime, the courts would strike down any attempt by the regulatory authority to censor political speech simply because it was false and because the regulator thought that such speech would harm the operation of the electoral process or of the referendum process. Even in Australia, the courts could well intervene. Even without a bill of rights, we enjoy the implied freedom of political communication set down by the High Court.

One has to ask: what is the evil that this part of the bill relating to political activity is wanting to stamp out? And would ACMA be able to stamp it out with the High Court standing idly by?

American disinformation expert Nina Jankowicz, author of How to Lose the Information War, was recently in Australia. She raised the alarm on 9000 digital accounts out of China that were active during the voice referendum campaign. She told Fran Kelly on ABC Saturday Extra:

“They were driving the No vote for certain. How effective they were is hard to say without looking at the data.” Speculating on the Chinese motivations, she said, “I think in particular not just to undermine Australian democracy because China of course has mining rights in Australia and a voice to parliament for Indigenous people could have affected that.”

Kelly then asked: “What’s the difference between what we understand is disinformation and what we all might recognise as political opponents telling untruths about the others’ policies or objectives or you know political dirty tricks?”

Jankowicz answered: “Disinformation is more deliberate and it’s more malign. What we’ve seen in particular around the voice campaign is the injection of noise into the debate to make people feel like they can’t know the truth, and in Australia that manifests itself in the slogan, ‘If you don’t know, vote no’.”

But hang on. There’s always an “injection of noise” in any referendum debate. Feelings are still raw with the voice referendum. So let’s think back to the 1951 referendum which was a showdown between the two finest constitutional lawyers ever to hold high political office in Australia: Robert Menzies and Dr H.V. Evatt.

Successfully opposing the referendum to extend the power of the commonwealth parliament to ban the Communist Party, Evatt and his colleagues approved a No pamphlet that stated: “The Menzies government is drunk with power and thirsts for still more power. Now is the time for you to stop Mr Menzies getting any more power. An emphatic “NO” majority will stop him before it is too late. Consciously or unconsciously, the Menzies government is heading fast towards totalitarianism in Australia. Play safe and preserve the Constitution as it now stands. Play safe and preserve the jurisdiction and authority of the High Court of Australia.”

Would Jankowicz class these remarks as disinformation? There’s much more noise and hyperbole in these remarks than in the simple statement: “If you don’t know, vote No”. During a fierce political campaign, one person’s disinformation is another person’s political credo of “whatever it takes”.

The dispassionate academics Murray Goot and Sean Scalmer concluded their 2013 study, Party Leaders, the Media, and Political Persuasion: The Campaigns of Evatt and Menzies on the Referendum to Protect Australia from Communism: “The campaign strategies of the two leaders were much as the contest demanded: each played to their strengths and sought to exploit their opponent’s weaknesses. If this meant adopting positions at odds with previous positions, talking past one another, introducing ‘extraneous’ matter, ‘scaremongering’ and so on, these were the turns the contest took.”

Presumably, Rowland will want to avoid the future prospect of an Evatt or Menzies having their comments posted on a digital platform in the heat of a political contest being reviewed by ACMA as possible disinformation.

The real challenge for the minister is that debating such a detailed bill without the backstop of a constitutional or statutory bill of rights recognising the right to freedom of expression, there are no clear guard rails for getting the balance right for “the freedom of expression that is so fundamental to our democracy”.

Ironically, the Coalition, which most opposes a statutory bill of rights, will agitate loudest against any possible interference by ACMA with the hallowed “freedom of expression that is so fundamental to our democracy”.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/inquirer/truth-is-the-misinformation-battle-may-be-unwinnable/news-story/dc1977b11bd3c24877925197aafb4d9d

****************************************************

Classroom classics revolution could save our failing society

Greg Sheridan

Nothing is failing in Western societies more completely, and more tragically, than school education. This is especially so in Australia. Billions upon billions of new dollars – Gonski funding, NAPLAN funding, state promises, federal commitments – and yet the results, even measured in narrow, utilitarian, technical terms, get ever worse and we sink further down the international education league tables.

We cram every ideological fad into the curriculum – safe schools, reconciliation, gender theory, race theory, decolonisation, peace studies, green worship, net zero hymns and devotions – yet division, alienation, even violence, spread.

Even as we’ve sometimes banned the use of mobile phones in school hours, we’ve flooded our schools with gadgets – laptops and iPads and endless, endless screens. But instead of producing citizens who master technology discerningly for their beneficial use, the memes and screens have fried our children’s brains, the relentless giddy, dizzy images, bright colours, dark colours, dopamine hits, changing images, fluid images, rapid image turnover, relentless distraction, have destroyed childhood, eaten adolescence and blighted young adulthood.

We’ve sub-let our thinking out to algorithms, and in the process all but abolished deep learning, while embracing the terror of the screens.

But there’s a way back.

Perhaps the most dramatic and hopeful development in all Western culture right now is the rapidly growing movement in the US, which is also gaining traction in Australia, for an approach of classical education in high schools. This is the same as what is often called the liberal arts approach.

It’s huge in the US, with 750-odd classical high schools and 100,000 students. Growing and growing.

It’s just getting started in Australia. I’ve been investigating this in recent months, on both coasts of the US and in three Australian states.

This is a road back to sanity, learning and truth in education. A road back to depth and texture in life. A road back to intellectual substance and enchantment.

If we’re lucky, these students will form eventually a leadership cadre in our culture.

What does classical education mean?

Mary Broadsmith, principal of Harkaway Hills College, a newish girls school in eastern Melbourne, which is not fully a classical school but has moved strongly in that direction, says: “We want students to pursue the good, the true and the beautiful.”

Frank Monagle, the founding principal last year of Sydney’s Hartford Academy (Ian Mejia is the principal this year), believes state education systems have a narrowly utilitarian ideology.

“The purpose of education was seen as getting a job,” he says.

“The true purpose of education is to help young people be the best young people they can be.”

Kenneth Crowther, the principal of the new St John Henry Newman School in Brisbane, which will take its first students in 2026, was a teacher for years before he embraced classical education.

“I realised there were deeper purposes around what it means to be a human being,” he says.

“We have this educational inheritance that we’ve rejected. I saw so much alienation. Fifteen-year-olds would say to me, ‘why am I studying Shakespeare, when will I use Shakespeare in a job?’

“This represented an ideology of utilitarianism, instead of seeing Shakespeare as a way to deeper meaning and purpose.”

Peter Crawford, academic dean of the US Institute of Catholic Liberal Education, whom I met in Napa, California, says: “The purpose of education is to teach children the art of being free.”

He adds: “A school first of all is a community.”

Claire Whereat, the secondary school head at Toowoomba Christian College, is another who, along with her school, which was established in 1979 and has 800 students, has been on a journey to a liberal arts approach. “We had to ask ourselves what is the purpose of education? The purpose of education is to form young people of wisdom,” she says. “A wise young person is able to engage in any topic with a critical understanding of truth, beauty and goodness. Wisdom is also for everyday life.”

All of these schools are classical, or liberal arts, schools up to a point. In Australia, every registered school, especially an independent school, needs to follow state and national curricula. But they can still organise much of their school’s effort around classical principles.

All these schools are explicitly Christian. In classical education, the idea of integrated understanding – as a Christian might say, all truth is God’s truth – is a central organising principle. An integrated understanding of the world leads to an integrated human being.

But in the US many classical education schools, and many liberal arts colleges, are not religious. There are 50-odd Great Hearts Charter Schools, funded by government but with a local community given a charter of independence. They’re not religious but they still study the Great Books. This is not only for religious believers, though much of humanity’s greatest thinking focuses on God.

So what does classical education consist of at the practical level of teaching and content?

From speaking to dozens of teachers, principals, parents, students, movement leaders, education administrators and curriculum developers, I would offer the following summary.

Classical education offers the student an integrated understanding of life, culture, knowledge and the meaning of being a human being. It gives students direct exposure to what English poet Matthew Arnold called “the best that has been thought and said”, the greatest of the Great Books.

It promotes an intellectually sophisticated encounter with these writers through Socratic dialogues. It offers the thrill of chronological, deep history and the finest literature. As Crowther comments: “Contemporary education fails in giving students an understanding of how the (modern) world came about.”

Thus, a classical school student may study ancient Greek civilisation in history at the same time as reading ancient Greek plays in literature. If the school teaches philosophy and theology, as many do, that too will be co-ordinated.

Says Crowther: “The unity between subjects is very important in classical education. The modern system is very fragmented. The subjects don’t connect up.”

Socratic dialogue is critical. Students might have read Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment, then explore in discussion the nature of evil. This inculcates moral education and accustoms students to disagreeing with each other, profoundly and passionately, but civilly, in friendship.

Many classical schools teach Latin, the most accessible of the classical languages, in which many of the greatest works, from ancient Rome through to the late Middle Ages, are written. Studying Latin helps students master English grammar, and understand the roots and history of words.

In the most junior years, children might begin their classical exposure through Aesop’s Fables or Arthurian legends. In Australian schools they’ll meet Snugglepot and Cuddlepie.

In the early years there’s an emphasis on play, but also on explicit instruction, led by the teacher, and on rote learning. Learning times tables and English grammar provides foundational knowledge, but also exercises brain muscle, memory, attention span.

In the US recently I journeyed out from Washington DC to Annapolis in Maryland, to spend an afternoon and evening with the Chesterton Academy of Annapolis.

I was met at a nearby rail station by Azin Cleary, who founded the school with her husband, Bill. She’s originally Iranian. The family left Iran when Azin was a teenager so her brother could avoid the army in the Iran/Iraq war. In the US she fell in love with Bill, a dashing air force pilot. He wasn’t very religious but told her he wanted to get married in a church, was pro-life, and wanted to bring his kids up Catholic.

Azin was fine with that. She was a disengaged Muslim and felt no pressure to change her religion. It was years later that she herself became Christian.

The classical education movement is extremely ecumenical. The Annapolis Chesterton Academy, although a school in the Catholic tradition, rents its space from a Lutheran church, to which it’s a close friend.

Two things are striking. First, it’s named after GK Chesterton, an English journalist – my hero – who died nearly a hundred years ago. Chesterton and CS Lewis, who died in the 1960s, are inspirations to the classical education movement. It reveres them, two of the most prodigiously gifted Christian writers of the 20th century, because they bring everything together. They wrote theology, biography, newspaper columns, novels, poetry, adventure stories, profound theological meditations. And they exuded joy.

The Chesterton schools movement has been going just 15 years but already has 62 high schools in the US and 10 overseas. Bill and Azin hadn’t heard of Chesterton when they were looking for something better for their kids. The Chesterton network provided them a full template for a classical school.

“It’s good to have someone tell you what to do when you don’t know what you’re doing,” Bill says modestly. Now they love Chesterton.

The school’s other striking feature is its no-gadgets policy. Students hand their phones in every morning. But also, throughout their entire school learning, they don’t use laptops, iPads or anything else. The fees are $US11,700 a year. That’s cheaper than many good Catholic schools, but the families typically have iPads and the like at home. The kids all have phones. They get computers. But school time is a screen-free oasis, a time for deep learning.

State school curriculum requirements are much less prescriptive than in Australia so classical schools can design the program they want. At the Chesterton Academy, the curriculum is full and demanding. For all four years of their senior secondary schooling, students study the humanities, maths and science, and the fine arts. In the humanities, they spend what Americans call Freshman Year in the ancient world. In literature: Homer, Aeschylus, Virgil and a book by Chesterton; in history: ancient Greece and Rome; in philosophy: Plato, Aristotle and formal logic; in theology: Old Testament.

In Sophomore Year literature: Augustine, Chaucer, Shakespeare and Chesterton on St Francis and on Orthodoxy; history: early church and early medieval; philosophy: Plato and Aristotle; theology: New Testament.

In Junior Year literature: Dante, Shakespeare, Cervantes, plus Chesterton on Thomas Aquinas; history: Renaissance, Reformation, and Counter-Reformation; philosophy: Aquinas, Descartes, Hobbes; theology: the Catholic Catechism.

And in senior year literature: Goethe, Dickens, Dostoevsky, Orwell, plus Chesterton’s classic, The Everlasting Man; history: American and French Revolutions, US Civil War, World Wars I and II, communist revolutions; philosophy: Locke, Rousseau, US Founding Fathers, Marx and more Chesterton.

In all four years, students study Latin and practise debate, take maths and science, practise and study art (really the history of art), practise and study music, and stage plays, including in senior year a full-length Shakespeare. And of course they play sport.

That is a rich and taxing educational experience. Not every student could manage it, not every school could attempt it. Notice there are no elective choices for students? This is extremely sensible.

When I was at secondary school, English, maths, science and history were compulsory. We could choose an elective combination either of Latin and French, or commerce and geography. I’m profoundly grateful I studied Latin and French and didn’t have elective choices, at age 14, like guitar, environment studies, or, as in some American schools, “forensics”, in which kids actually get to waste their time watching NCIS episodes and pretend it’s school work.

No electives and no gadgets at all, and the students graduating from Chesterton Academy are blitzing college entrance exams and pursuing stellar academic and professional careers. If you can think well and hard, and read deeply, you can master anything.

Some US states actively promote classical education. Florida recognises the Classical Learning Test as the equivalent to the SAT for college admission.

That night I had dinner with Bill and Azin, five of their six kids, Azin’s mum, and a school board member, at the Clearys’ home. They may be the nicest people I’ve ever met. The kids are years ahead of their respective age groups in conversation and sophistication. Nor do they automatically agree with each other, with me, or with their parents. But also, they actually seem to like their parents, and even to find the conversation of a visiting journalist from Australia worth turning up for. The oldest son, Matthew, a college student, after dinner drives me all the way back to Washington and is an absorbing conversationalist.

Kids at this Chesterton Academy are lucky. But classical, or liberal arts, education is a broad movement. There are lots of different shades of emphasis, different intensities. Australian liberal arts schools also de-emphasise gadgets. But because NAPLAN assessments have foolishly gone online, no school now can banish gadgets altogether. Some classical schools have classes on gadgets to acquire particular skills, typing or coding, but don’t use them in most classes.

Whereat tells me the science is conclusive. When students take notes by hand they can’t write as quickly as when they type, so they actually have to process and select information much more actively. They learn better taking notes by hand than typing notes on an iPad.

Broadsmith comments: “One of the problems we have is not that students aren’t interested (in deep learning) but they’ve been taught that everything has to be fast and snappy.” Students see devices not as paths to contemplation but as sources of entertainment and distraction. Efforts to ban social media for kids are a tiny recognition that gadgets fry brains.

No Australian school could produce a curriculum like the Chesterton Academy because of the state requirements, which are obviously necessary for accountability but seem to emphasise mediocrity, ideology, narrowness in the faux service of choice, triviality, incoherence.

Claire Whereat tells Inquirer that the Toowoomba Christian College secondary literature curriculum includes Shakespeare, Dickens, Jane Austen, Louisa May Alcott, Pilgrim’s Progress, To Kill a Mocking Bird. They’re all good choices.

She also makes a profound point about teaching history chronologically: “You can’t understand where Australia has come from if you don’t understand the Judeo-Christian background, or the Westminster system.”

All the classical or liberal arts schools teach grammar. She says: “We spend a lot of time looking at beautiful words, looking closely at what words mean, their Latin and Greek roots.”

NSW schools enjoy one happy curriculum freedom because of the legacy of former premier Bob Carr. Monagle says: “Carr saved history as a discipline.”

In other states history has been rolled into geography and social studies and mangled into a thousand incoherent pieces, often at best a few isolated case studies and relentless agitprop.

Carr recalls: “I insisted on maintaining the traditional disciplines. I wanted curriculum rigour. I insisted history remain a separate subject. History could be defined as what happened next and why. I also reinstated traditional grammar, and corrected the retirement of Shakespeare from English courses.”

Carr wrote his own version of a guide to the Great Books in his much-neglected My Reading Life, which is a classic of sorts in Australian letters. He thinks now a suitably supple Great Books approach has a lot to recommend it.

Dedicated classical and liberal arts schools are just beginning in Australia. But existing schools, especially Catholic and Christian schools, are increasingly examining this option. It’s a trend. It’s the future.

In an important recent speech, Sydney Catholic Archbishop Anthony Fisher argued for a move to a more integrated liberal arts approach in Catholic schools. He asked: “How might we cultivate a more expansive educational environment, whereby all academic disciplines interconnect and serve the transmission of faith and development of the whole child?”

In a distressed and bleeding culture, these schools are field hospitals; perhaps more than that – base camps; perhaps more than that – signs of a new creation.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/inquirer/classroom-classics-revolution-could-save-our-failing-society/news-story/eb31fd0a34c15fa555d091dc69c9653c