Australia’s Pinkenba Hub in Brisbane is set to become the regional operational and training backbone of the Pacific Policing Initiative (PPI), anchoring a growing, Pacific‑led policing partnership that will support major events and crisis response across the region. The expansion positions Brisbane as a key base where Australian Federal Police (AFP) officers train and deploy alongside Pacific police services under a “for the Pacific, by the Pacific” model.​   Australia’s Pacific policing ties are set for a major boost, with the Australian Federal Police announcing a significant expansion of its Pinkenba Hub in Brisbane to serve as the regional base for the Pacific Policing Initiative (PPI). The upgraded facility will underpin a Pacific‑led, Australian‑supported effort to strengthen policing capacity, coordination and shared security across the blue Pacific.​   At the heart of the new arrangements is the Pacific Police Support Group (PPSG), a multinational deployment team that will be headquartered at Pinkenba and ready to support Pacific nations during major events and in times of crisis. PPSG officers have already been deployed to support security at the Palau 2025 Pacific Mini Games, assist Vanuatu’s post‑earthquake recovery, and bolster policing operations at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) in Samoa.​   To accommodate its growing regional role, the Pinkenba Hub is set for a major build‑out, including a chapel, sporting fields, expanded training spaces, a full mess facility and dedicated gathering and cooking areas that reflect Pacific customs and community life. The site will function as both an operational base and a cultural meeting place, designed to make Pacific officers feel at home while training and working in Brisbane.​   The expansion plans were unveiled during the Hub’s first anniversary celebrations in Brisbane, which brought together police chiefs, ministers and dignitaries from across the Pacific for the inaugural PPI Leadership Board. The event also featured the opening of a traditional Leaf Hut, used as a Pacific‑style meeting space, along with public order and capability demonstrations by PPSG officers.​   During the anniversary gathering, member countries signed a series of Memorandums of Understanding that set out how the PPI will operate and how future Pacific police deployments will work. Initial signatories included Palau’s Minister of Justice Jennifer Olegeriil, Tonga’s Minister for Police Paula Piveni Piukala, New Zealand Police Minister Mark Mitchell and Australia’s Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke, underscoring the multi‑country backing for the initiative.​   AFP Commissioner leadership has described the PPI as a clear expression of the region’s shared ambition to tackle common security threats through cooperation rather than competition. Recent engagements with leaders in Papua New Guinea, Fiji and other Pacific nations have highlighted strong support for deeper collaboration and greater Pacific representation in regional and global policing forums.​   Under the PPI framework, the Pinkenba Hub operates alongside a network of Regional Centres of Excellence across Pacific countries and the deployable PPSG capability. Together, these pillars aim to build long‑term resilience against challenges such as transnational crime, disaster response, border security and community safety, with Australia committing several hundred million dollars over five years to support the initiative.​   For Brisbane and Queensland, the expanded Hub also cements the city’s role as a gateway between Australia and its Pacific neighbours, with regular rotations of officers coming through for training, coordination and deployment. For Pacific communities in Australia, the facility’s emphasis on Pacific culture and leadership sends a strong signal that regional policing solutions will be shaped and led by Pacific voices.​   MANTV understands that as the Pinkenba Hub grows into a fully fledged regional base, there will be increasing opportunities for joint exercises, community engagement and media access showcasing Pacific policing stories. For multicultural audiences across Australia and the wider region, the initiative represents a new chapter in how Pacific countries work together to keep communities safe on both sides of the Coral Sea.  

Australia is facing a prolonged shortage of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) transdermal patches, with supply disruptions expected to continue until at least July 2026. The shortage is affecting patients managing menopause and perimenopause who rely on these vital treatments.   Pharmaceutical companies Sandoz and Juno Pharmaceuticals have advised the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) of difficulties supplying both estradiol and combination estradiol/norethisterone (norethindrone) patches. The problem stems from global manufacturing constraints and an unexpected surge in demand.   In response, the TGA has fast-tracked approvals for several overseas-registered HRT patches to help meet patient needs. These alternative products will be subsidised under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS), ensuring continued affordability and access. Pharmacists can order them through the Section 19A approvals database, where contact details for approved suppliers are listed.   To minimise disruption, pharmacists are now authorised to substitute approved alternatives without requiring a new prescription. This measure allows patients to continue treatment even if their regular brand is unavailable, though some may need to switch between brands during the supply shortage.   The TGA acknowledged the “concern and frustration” caused by the ongoing shortage and said it remains difficult to predict when Australian-registered patches will return to full supply. Patients are advised to consult their pharmacists for up-to-date information and guidance on obtaining their medication during this period.

Sixteen people are confirmed dead and dozens more injured after a terror attack on a Jewish Chanukah celebration at Bondi Beach, in what authorities describe as Australia’s worst mass shooting in roughly three decades and a deliberate antisemitic attack. Police say the incident is being treated as a terrorist act, with a 50‑year‑old father and his 24‑year‑old son identified as the alleged attackers.​   A night of horror at Bondi   On the evening of Sunday 14 December 2025, what began as a joyful public Chanukah event at Sydney’s Bondi Beach was transformed into a scene of chaos and carnage when two men armed with multiple firearms opened fire on the crowd. Witnesses describe families fleeing across the sand and nearby streets as shots rang out for several minutes, with parents shielding children and bystanders dragging the wounded to safety.​​   NSW Ambulance received the first call at 6:43pm, with paramedics arriving within minutes and ultimately deploying more than 120 personnel to the scene, supported by a large NSW Police presence. Crews treated victims in so‑called “hot zones” under police protection, transporting 24 patients in the first wave and ultimately seeing 42 people present at hospitals across Sydney.​   The attackers and the police response   NSW Police have confirmed that the attackers were a 50‑year‑old man and his 24‑year‑old son, both from Bonnyrigg, who had been staying at an address in Campsie in the lead‑up to the attack. The older man, a licensed firearms owner with six registered guns, was shot dead at the scene, while his son remains in hospital in a critical but stable condition under police guard.​   Police say they are not searching for any additional gunmen and believe the father and son acted together in the Bondi attack, though investigators are still examining whether any other individuals assisted or knew of the plan. Two search warrants were executed overnight at Bonnyrigg and Campsie, and forensic work is underway to match the six seized firearms to the weapons used in the attack.​   Terrorism, antisemitism and motive   NSW Police Commissioner Mal Lanyon formally declared the incident a terrorist act at 9:36pm, triggering a joint counter‑terrorism operation codenamed Operation Arques with federal agencies. Authorities say the attack clearly targeted the Jewish community on the first night of Chanukah, with the Prime Minister bluntly calling it “an act of pure evil, an act of antisemitism, an act of terrorism on our shores.”​   Investigators are still probing the attackers’ ideology, possible overseas links and whether any extremist symbols or manifestos were involved, but have declined to confirm reports of an ISIS‑style flag or other specific indicators while the investigation is active. Officials have confirmed that there was only “limited knowledge” of the two men before the shooting, and that there was no prior intelligence suggesting they were about to carry out an attack.​   The human toll and Australia’s worst mass shooting in decades   Authorities now say 16 people have been killed, including 15 innocent victims aged from 10 to 87 and one of the attackers, making it the deadliest mass shooting in Australia in around 30 years. Among the dead are members of the Jewish community, at least one child and reportedly two police officers, while dozens more are being treated for gunshot wounds and other injuries in hospitals across New South Wales.​   This toll surpasses any gun attack in Australia since the 1996 Port Arthur massacre, underscoring the profound shock to a country that has long pointed to its strict firearms regime as a global model. Hospital staff have described extraordinary scenes as emergency departments rapidly activated major incident plans, while blood services have appealed for donors to help support the surge in demand.​   Community fear, solidarity and faith leaders’ response   The Jewish community in Sydney and around Australia has reacted with grief, anger and deep fear, with many leaders warning that they had long been raising concerns about rising antisemitism and the potential for violent attacks. Faith and multicultural leaders, including the NSW Faith Affairs Council and the Multicultural NSW Advisory Board, have issued strong statements condemning the attack as a strike at the heart of Australia’s social fabric and expressing solidarity with Jewish Australians at a time of religious celebration.​   Their message is echoed by multicultural community advocates and the NSW Minister for Multiculturalism, who have called the attack “despicable and cowardly” and insisted that hate and antisemitism have no place in Australia’s streets, synagogues or public squares. Across denominations, religious leaders are urging calm, unity and a rejection of any reprisals, arguing that the only sustainable answer to terror is a renewed commitment to pluralism and mutual respect.​   Police operations: Operation Arques and Operation Shelter   Following the terror declaration, Operation Arques has been established as the joint counter‑terrorism framework bringing together NSW Police, the Australian Federal Police and ASIO to investigate every aspect of the attack. Officers are mapping the attackers’ movements, digital footprint, financial transactions and personal networks, while forensic teams are examining ballistic evidence and two rudimentary explosive devices found at the scene and later rendered safe by bomb technicians.​​   At the same time, NSW Police have activated and expanded Operation Shelter, a long‑running program focused on protecting Jewish and other at‑risk communities from hate‑motivated violence. The Commissioner says 328 officers have been deployed in highly visible patrols at synagogues, Jewish schools and key community hubs, with a clear message that antisemitic threats, intimidation and violence will not be tolerated.​   Political fallout and questions over security   NSW Premier Chris Minns and Prime Minister Anthony Albanese have both visited Sydney to receive briefings and front the media, pledging every necessary resource to police, intelligence agencies and victim support services. Both leaders have framed the attack as a direct attempt to divide Australians along religious and ethnic lines, insisting that the country will not submit to fear, hatred or imported conflicts.​   At the same time, searching questions are being

A young koala has survived a heart‑stopping dash across a busy Brisbane road and ended up clinging to the grab rail of a city bus, in what rescuers say is one of their most unusual call‑outs.   Peri’s wild night out   The male koala, later nicknamed “Peri”, was spotted on Saturday night crossing a traffic‑heavy street in Camp Hill, in Brisbane’s inner east. A Brisbane City Council CityGlider bus driver saw the animal narrowly avoid being hit by a car before scrambling up a metal pole on a traffic island. Fearing the koala could slide back down into oncoming traffic at any moment, the driver gently covered its head with a jacket, removed it from the pole and brought it onto the bus to keep it safe. Peri then took refuge on the bus’s internal grab rail, turning a standard suburban service into an impromptu koala shuttle.   Rescue and health check   Koala Rescue Brisbane South’s rescue lead, Brianne Barkla, said she was stunned when she received a report of a koala actually inside a public bus. She described it as the first time the group had been called to retrieve a koala from a council bus, despite years of inner‑Brisbane rescues.   When Barkla arrived, Peri appeared healthy but was transported to the RSPCA for a precautionary veterinary assessment. By the following day, vets confirmed the young “sub‑adult” koala, estimated to be more than 12 months old and old enough to be independent, had no injuries and was cleared for release.   Safe release and festive name   On Sunday afternoon, Peri was released into Seven Hills Bushland Reserve, the closest patch of suitable habitat to where he was found in Camp Hill. Rescuers say koala sightings in that reserve are relatively uncommon, making Peri’s late‑night city adventure both encouraging for the local population and worrying in terms of how far he wandered.   In a nod to the festive season, the rescue team chose the name “Peri” after workshopping Christmas‑themed ideas, drawing inspiration from the classic “partridge in a pear tree” line in The Twelve Days of Christmas. Barkla said the rescue highlighted how young koalas continue to move through urban areas, especially towards the end of the breeding season.   Urban pressures and safety warnings   Koalas in south‑east Queensland face growing threats from vehicle strikes, dog attacks, disease and the gradual loss of habitat as development pushes further into bushland. Barkla said the organisation receives relatively few calls from around Seven Hills Reserve but expects koalas to be more visible on roads and in backyards at this time of year.   She urged the public not to attempt hands‑on rescues, warning that koalas are both delicate and capable of inflicting serious scratches with their claws. Instead, residents who see a koala in trouble are advised to keep their distance, monitor the animal if it is in immediate danger and contact dedicated wildlife rescue services.   Brisbane’s “most Australian” bus ride   Brisbane Lord Mayor Adrian Schrinner praised the driver’s quick thinking and compassion, saying the incident showed council drivers go “above and beyond” to look after both passengers and wildlife. He quipped that he often describes Brisbane as “the most Australian place on earth, and a koala on one of our buses just proves it”.   The Lord Mayor also reminded residents to call wildlife professionals rather than intervening themselves if they encounter distressed native animals. For MANtv viewers, Peri’s unlikely bus ride is a feel‑good reminder that even in a fast‑growing city, Australia’s most iconic marsupial is still very much part of everyday urban life.  

 First Nations organizations are calling on the Federal Government to address human rights violations after Australia recorded the highest number of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander deaths in custody in at least four decades,. The National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Legal Services (NATSILS) extended condolences to the families and communities who have lost loved ones, following the release of devastating new national statistics.    The national deaths in custody report by the Australian Institute of Criminology (AIC), released yesterday, showed that 33 Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander people died in custody in 2024–2025. This figure marks the highest yearly death toll since the AIC began keeping records and is the largest number of Indigenous deaths in custody since the 1979–80 period,. Furthermore, the total is almost double the average recorded since 1989–90.   Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people accounted for 29 percent of all deaths in custody in 2024–25, an increase from 23 percent the previous year and the highest proportion since 2002–03. Since the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody (RCIADIC), a total of 617 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander deaths in custody have been recorded.   Mass Incarceration Linked to Crisis   Nerita Waight, Acting Chair of NATSILS, stressed that this record number of deaths is not a coincidence. “There are more Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in prison now than ever before,” said Ms Waight.   Ms Waight argued that state and territory governments are prioritizing “political point-scoring” by “openly pursuing and celebrating policies that throw our people behind bars,” and warned that these policies are costing lives. She also noted that incarceration makes people less safe by increasing their chance of becoming trapped in an ongoing cycle of crime, imprisonment, and trauma.   Failure to Implement 1991 Recommendations   NATSILS highlighted the failure of governments to implement key safety recommendations from the 1991 RCIADIC, stating that it is “utterly unacceptable that more than 30 years later we are still waiting”.   One critical example cited was the recommendation to remove hanging points from cells. Despite this longstanding guidance, Ms Waight noted that at least 75% of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people who were unsentenced and died in custody last year passed away due to hanging and related complications.   Geographical Breakdown and Call for Prime Ministerial Leadership   The majority of the deaths occurred in prison custody, where 26 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people died in 2024–25,. This is the highest number of Indigenous deaths in prison custody recorded since 1979–80.   New South Wales recorded the highest number of Indigenous deaths in prison custody, which is also the highest number recorded in that state since 1979–80. Western Australia recorded six deaths, followed by three each in Queensland, South Australia, and the Australian Capital Territory,.   NATSILS maintains that the key solution to reduce deaths in custody is putting an end to the mass incarceration of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, labeling prisons as “life-threatening places”. Ms Waight urged state and territory governments to stop passing laws that conflict with their obligations to reduce Aboriginal over-representation in the criminal legal system. Instead, she called on leaders to work in partnership with Aboriginal communities to implement evidence-based, community-led solutions that prevent people from entering the system in the first place.   Citing the failure of state and territory leaders to prioritize Indigenous lives, Ms Waight concluded by calling for urgent leadership from the Prime Minister “to end this national crisis on justice”.  

The Queensland Government yesterday introduced new legislation to Parliament aimed at strengthening youth bail monitoring and expanding the use of GPS tracking across the state. The proposed Youth Justice (Electronic Monitoring) Amendment Bill 2025 seeks to make electronic monitoring a permanent fixture within the state’s justice system and extend its application to more young offenders. The government asserts the reforms are designed to curb youth reoffending and are focused on “restoring safety where you live” by holding young offenders accountable.   The push for expanded monitoring is supported by government claims that GPS electronic monitoring has demonstrated an ability to reduce reoffending by up to 24 per cent. However, the new legislation follows two previous Labor government trials, which critics noted saw limited results, with tracking devices fitted to only four young offenders during the initial year.   Challenges to Implementation   Youth advocates, while seeing electronic monitoring devices as a preferable alternative to youth detention, warn that significant practical challenges must be addressed.   Katherine Hayes, CEO of the Brisbane-based Youth Advocacy Centre (YAC)—a not-for-profit organisation dedicated to increasing young people’s access to justice—pointed out difficulties related to infrastructure and housing stability. Young people who do not have access to a safe and stable home often experience difficulties charging the devices, which require 4G phone and internet access to function properly.   Hayes also stressed the importance of obtaining consent, arguing that “Having the child’s consent for any youth justice order will lead to better outcomes in terms of behaviour change and reduction of re-offending”.   Context: Recent Youth Crime Charges   The debate over expanded electronic monitoring comes as police charged a teenage boy following investigations into two recent armed robberies. Just before 2 am yesterday, police were called to O’Grady Drive at Paradise Point concerning a break and enter, during which a group of armed individuals gained entry and stole a 2023 grey Mercedes Benz GLE53.   Police attending the scene located a 41-year-old male occupant with minor facial injuries and a wound to his left arm.   A 15-year-old Labrador boy has since been charged with fifteen offences. These charges include three counts of enter dwelling with intent, two counts each of unlawful use of a motor vehicle and facing masked or disguised with intent to commit an indictable offence, and one count each of armed robbery, enter dwelling and commit, enter premises, and attempted enter premises. The boy is scheduled to appear at the Southport Children’s Court today.

CANBERRA, Thursday, December 11, 2025 – Tensions between the Commonwealth and state governments have reached a boiling point today after Prime Minister Anthony Albanese tabled a revised $21 billion funding offer for Australia’s public hospitals a proposal that state leaders have already branded “underwhelming.”   In a bid to break the deadlock on a new five-year National Health Reform Agreement, the Prime Minister reportedly wrote individual letters to state and territory leaders this week, putting forward an additional $21 billion investment spread over the next five years.   The package includes a targeted $2 billion over four years specifically designed to free up hospital beds currently occupied by elderly patients and those awaiting NDIS support a critical bottleneck known as “bed block” that plagues emergency departments nationwide.​   However, the offer has received a frosty reception. State ministers argue the increase is negligible, representing only a minor bump from the previous $20 billion proposal rejected earlier this year.   “Underwhelming” and “Insufficient”   Queensland Health Minister Tim Nicholls led the charge against the proposal today, telling State Parliament that the offer failed to meet the reality of the crisis.   “This offer is lacking and fails to meet Queensland’s needs regarding stranded Australians, health funding growth, and disability reform,” Nicholls said.​   Other state sources, speaking anonymously to the ABC, described the deal as “clearly not sufficient” and unlikely to lead to an agreement before the year’s end. One minister noted that while the movement was appreciated, it would not alleviate the crushing pressure on emergency departments and elective surgery waiting lists.​   The Core of the Dispute   At the heart of the conflict is the federal contribution to public hospital costs. Under a landmark agreement in 2023, the National Cabinet set a target to increase the Commonwealth’s share of funding to 45 per cent by 2035, up from the traditional cap of roughly 40 per cent.   Despite this “glide path,” states contend that the actual flow of federal cash is lagging. They argue the current offer leaves them shouldering too much of the burden for rising costs, particularly as they take on more responsibility for foundational disability supports outside the NDIS.​   Compounding the tension was a separate letter from Mr. Albanese sent in September, which urged states to “rein in” their hospital spending to “sustainable levels” if they wanted the deal finalized a demand that was met with anger from state treasurers who argue demand is driven by an aging population, not waste.​​   Race Against Time   Federal Health Minister Mark Butler remains optimistic, stating today that he is “confident” a deal can still be struck before 2026.   “I would be surprised if any health minister could genuinely claim that every single hospital is functioning as efficiently as possible,” Butler said, defending the Prime Minister’s push for financial sustainability.​   With the current interim funding agreement set to expire in mid-2026 and South Australia entering a caretaker election mode in February, time is running out to secure a long-term deal. If no agreement is reached, Australia’s public health system faces a period of fiscal uncertainty just as demand hits record highs. Photo attribution:Australian Government, CC BY 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 >, via Wikimedia Commons

Australia’s world‑first ban on social media accounts for under‑16s is rapidly becoming a global test case for how far governments should go to protect children online, with reactions ranging from strong support to deep concern about overreach and free expression. The debate cuts across developed and developing nations, academic research, traditional values and a widening generational gap.​   What Australia has done   Australia now requires major platforms like TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, YouTube, Snapchat and others to block accounts for users under 16, with hefty fines if they fail to take “reasonable steps” to verify ages and remove under‑age accounts. Around one million accounts are expected to be affected, and enforcement relies on a mix of age‑verification technology, AI and identity checks that platforms must roll out quickly.   The federal government frames the law as a child‑protection measure responding to concerns over mental health harms, addictive design, cyberbullying, sexual exploitation and exposure to self‑harm and eating‑disorder content. Many Australian parents’ groups have welcomed the move, while teenagers have voiced fears about losing contact with friends, support networks and youth culture.​   How other developed countries see it   Across advanced economies, Australia’s ban is seen as both a warning shot to Big Tech and a live experiment that others may copy or deliberately avoid.​   In Europe, officials in France, Denmark, Germany, Spain, Greece, Malta and Norway are looking closely at the Australian model while considering their own restrictions such as higher minimum ages, mandatory parental consent and night‑time “curfews” for teen social media use.​ The European Union has already pushed platforms on design, privacy and harmful content through the Digital Services Act; now some member states are exploring age‑based bans or stronger verification rather than relying on self‑regulation and parental consent tick‑boxes.​ In North America, the United States and Canada have so far leaned toward targeted measures (like state‑level age‑verification rules, parental‑control tools and lawsuits against platforms) rather than a nationwide under‑16 ban, but youth‑mental‑health warnings from US health authorities are fueling calls for tougher action.​   Among developed democracies, the dividing line is not whether there is a problem – most accept serious risks – but whether an outright ban is proportionate or whether education, parental controls and platform design changes are preferable.​   How developing countries view the move   In many developing and middle‑income countries, the mood is more cautious because social media is tightly woven into education, entrepreneurship and civic voice.​   Malaysia has already announced its own under‑16 social‑media ban from 2026, pairing it with licensing and age‑verification rules, signalling that some emerging economies are willing to follow Australia’s hard‑line model.​ Countries such as Singapore, Brazil and Fiji are monitoring Australia’s rollout as a “proof of concept”, weighing children’s safety against fears of excluding poorer families whose main internet access is via cheap smartphones and social apps.​ In many parts of Africa, South Asia and Latin America, experts worry that strict bans could deepen the digital divide, limiting young people’s access to information, skills and global networks that are otherwise unavailable offline.​   For governments with younger populations and weaker child‑protection systems, the dilemma is whether rigid bans will protect or further disadvantage already vulnerable children.   Do kids benefit from a ban?   Research suggests that heavy, unregulated social‑media use in children is strongly linked with higher rates of anxiety, depression, poor sleep, low self‑esteem and body‑image issues. Studies also show that design features like infinite scroll, push notifications and algorithmic “rabbit holes” increase compulsive use, making it hard for children to disengage without structural limits.​   Potential benefits of a strong age‑based ban include:   Reduced exposure to cyberbullying, self‑harm content, sexual grooming and aggressive advertising targeted at young users.​ More time and attention available for sleep, schoolwork, physical activity and in‑person friendships, which are all protective for mental health.​ Clearer rules and less conflict at home, as parents can refer to law rather than individual household battles over screen time.​   However, researchers also highlight positive effects from moderate, guided use – such as maintaining friendships, identity exploration and access to support communities – which may be lost with a blanket ban if no alternatives are provided.​   Do children “need” social media?   Academically, social media is not considered a basic need, but it has become a major channel for socialization, information and identity formation, especially in adolescence. Completely cutting children off can create feelings of isolation or exclusion from peer culture, particularly when school, sport and community groups rely on social platforms for organising and communication.​   Researchers emphasise that the biggest problems come from intensity and type of use: frequent, passive scrolling and comparison‑heavy platforms do the most harm, while structured, purposeful and time‑limited engagement can support social and emotional development. Many experts therefore argue for “guided connectedness” – delayed access, firm limits and active adult supervision – rather than the idea that young people absolutely “need” or must be fully barred from social media.​   Traditional values and generation gap   Traditional and faith‑based communities in Australia and abroad often applaud restrictions that promise to shield children from sexualized content, online predators and what they see as corrosive globalised values. For these groups, the ban aligns with long‑standing ideas that childhood should be shaped primarily by family, school and local community rather than by distant algorithms and influencers. ​ But the generational gap is stark. Many teenagers view social media as their social neighbourhood, creative canvas and news source, and they experience bans as a form of collective punishment for harms caused by a minority of bad actors and reckless design choices. Younger adults, who grew up online, often favour digital‑literacy education, platform redesign and targeted enforcement over blanket age bans, arguing that the skills to navigate the internet safely are themselves a vital life tool.​   What this could mean for the next generation   For the next generation, Australia’s decision may mark a pivot point: either toward a world where childhood is more

For many migrants, receiving Australian Permanent Residency (PR) is a life-changing moment a reward for years of planning, sacrifice, and hard work. But what many don’t realise is that PR status, while long-term, is not unconditional. Under Australian law, several situations can lead to your residency being cancelled, even years after it’s been granted. Below are four of the most common reasons PR holders lose their status, along with practical advice on how to avoid these costly mistakes.   Failing the Character Test   Australian immigration law is strict when it comes to criminal convictions. The Department of Home Affairs can cancel your PR if you fail the Character Test even if you don’t serve time in prison.   This typically happens if you: Receive a prison sentence of 12 months or more (including suspended sentences) Commit domestic violence or repeated criminal offences Are convicted of serious driving offences such as DUI or dangerous driving   Example:A PR holder received a suspended 12-month sentence but still had their residency cancelled. The suspension didn’t protect their visa the sentence length alone was enough.   How to avoid it:Stay law-abiding, and if you face any charges, seek legal advice immediately to understand the immigration implications before sentencing.   Applying for a Temporary Visa After PR   It might sound harmless, but applying for a temporary visa after you’ve received a permanent one can automatically cancel your PR. This mistake often happens when migrants apply for a temporary visa such as a Visitor, Student, or Working Holiday visa instead of renewing their travel rights through a Resident Return Visa (RRV).   Example 1:A PR holder overseas applies for a visitor visa to re-enter Australia easily. When it’s granted, the temporary visa replaces the PR, and they lose their status permanently.   Example 2:A person applies for a Student Visa while in Australia. Before that application is processed, they’re granted PR through the 190 Skilled Nominated Visa. However, they forget to withdraw the student visa application and when the student visa is approved later, it overrides their PR.   How to avoid it:Once your PR is granted, immediately withdraw any other pending visa applications. If your travel facility expires, always apply for a Resident Return Visa (subclass 155/157) instead of any temporary visa. Spending Too Long Overseas Permanent residents must maintain a connection to Australia. Your PR includes a five-year travel facility, which allows you to leave and re-enter freely. If you spend extended periods abroad without maintaining strong ties, your Resident Return Visa may be refused when you try to return.   Example:A PR holder takes a job overseas for seven years and visits Australia rarely. When they apply to renew their travel facility, the government refuses, citing a lack of genuine ties.   How to avoid it:Return to Australia at least once every five years, maintain assets such as property or employment ties, and ensure your family or community connections remain strong.   Missing Your First Entry Date   For PR applicants granted their visa offshore, there’s a crucial first entry date listed in the visa grant letter. Failing to enter Australia by this date can result in your PR being void before you ever settle here.   How to avoid it:Even a short trip to activate your visa is enough. Enter Australia before your first entry date to ensure your PR becomes valid.   Protect Your Future in Australia   Permanent Residency offers many rights from work and healthcare to education opportunities but it also comes with responsibilities. Understanding these common pitfalls can save you from immigration heartbreak down the line.   If you’re unsure about your visa status, travel rights, or any legal issues that could affect your PR, seek advice early from a registered migration agent or legal specialist.  

The Minns Labor Government has opened the final $5 million round of its Safe Places for Faith Communities Grants program, giving religious organisations across NSW new funding to improve safety and security at their sites. The scheme aims to ensure people of all faiths can practise their religion without fear, with applications now open until 4pm, Friday 30 January 2026.   Safe places funding boost   The $5 million on offer is the third and final stage of a $15 million program designed to support faith communities across New South Wales. Earlier rounds have already distributed $10 million to 258 religious organisations, backing projects that strengthen safety at places of worship and related facilities.   Under the program, eligible not‑for‑profit organisations can seek funding for places of worship, religious schools, sites of religious significance and faith‑based community centres. The initiative is administered by Multicultural NSW, reflecting the state’s focus on supporting its diverse communities.   What grants can cover   Grants can be used to install or upgrade physical security measures, including CCTV systems and secure fencing, to better protect congregants and visitors. Funding can also support the development of risk management plans and other preparedness measures tailored to the specific needs of each faith community.   The program also backs training for staff and religious leaders in safety, preparedness and risk mitigation. Another key focus is helping faith communities build resilience, including initiatives that strengthen community connections and support recovery after incidents.   Government and community statements   Minister for Multiculturalism Steve Kamper said the funding reflects the government’s commitment to ensuring no one in NSW feels unsafe when attending their place of worship or practising their faith. He emphasised that being able to gather safely for religious observance is central to many people’s lives and that the government is determined to support that right.   Multicultural NSW Chief Executive Officer Joseph La Posta said the program encourages faith communities to take proactive steps to safeguard their spaces and strengthen resilience. He noted that investment in prevention, preparedness, response and recovery helps religious organisations protect their people, their values and their right to gather in peace.   How to apply   Faith‑based, not‑for‑profit organisations interested in the Safe Places for Faith Communities Grants can apply online through Multicultural NSW. Detailed program guidelines, eligibility criteria and application forms are available via the Multicultural NSW website.   Applications for this round close at 4pm on Friday 30 January 2026, and organisations are encouraged to prepare proposals that clearly outline their security needs and how the funding will be used to support safe, welcoming spaces. For full details, visit the Safe Places for Faith Communities program page on the Multicultural NSW site.