Australia’s economy grew by a softer-than-expected 0.4% in the September quarter, slowing from 0.6% growth in the June quarter. It confirms the recovery is tracking forward but without strong momentum.

Still, figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics showed annual gross domestic product (GDP) growth was at a two-year high of 2.1%. That’s just above the Reserve Bank’s estimate of long-term trend growth of 2.0%.

The September quarter national accounts was the final major data release before the Reserve Bank’s meeting on 8–9 December.

The GDP result is steady enough to reassure the Reserve Bank the economy is not slipping backwards, while recent inflation data show domestic price pressures — especially in services — remain elevated. Together, the signals point clearly to a hold on interest rates next week.

All four major banks expect rates to remain on hold for many months, while financial markets on Wednesday were pricing in an 85% chance of a rate rise next year.

Across-the-board strength, led by IT

A key feature of the September quarter is the breadth of domestic growth.

In earlier quarters, much of the expansion came from the public sector — particularly government consumption and infrastructure spending — while private demand was subdued. This quarter marks a clear shift: private demand was the main driver, led by a strong lift in business investment, steady household consumption and continued public investment.

Domestic final demand rose solidly, with contributions from all major components — signalling improving confidence among both businesses and households and a more balanced base for growth than we saw earlier in the year.

Private investment led the gains, rising 2.9% – the strongest quarterly increase since March 2021.

Business investment in machinery and equipment jumped 7.6%, boosted by major data-centre projects in New South Wales and Victoria. IT-related machinery investment hit a record A$2.8 billion, double the June quarter, and aviation-related purchases also jumped. The Bureau of Statistics said in a statement:

The rise in machinery and equipment investment reflects the ongoing expansions of data centres. This is likely due to firms looking to support growth in artificial intelligence and cloud computing capabilities.

Household consumption rose 0.5%, but this was driven more by spending on essentials rather than discretionary items. A cold winter, reduced government rebates and a harsh flu season lifted demand for utilities and for health services.

Public investment grew 3.0%, after three quarterly declines. State and local public corporations led the rise through renewable-energy and water-infrastructure projects.

Coal exports are up

External conditions weakened this quarter as imports grew faster than exports.

Goods exports rose 1.3%, helped by a rebound in coal shipments and strong overseas demand for beef and citrus. Services exports were flat, as a fall in spending by overseas students offset a modest recovery in short-term tourism from China, Japan and South Korea.

Goods imports rose 2.1%, driven by demand for intermediate goods — especially diesel — and capital goods, mainly the data-centre-related equipment.

Companies drew down on inventories during the quarter, which acts as a drag on growth.

Households are saving more

Households remain central to the outlook. They are on firmer financial footing but still spending cautiously. The household saving ratio rose from 6.0% to 6.4%, helped by higher compensation of employees.

Economic growth per person (known as GDP per capita) was flat this quarter, but up 0.4% over the year. After several negative quarters, living standards appear to have stopped falling, though improvements remain modest.

Overall, households are in better shape financially but remain hesitant — a pattern that supports stability, not a consumption-led surge.

A steady result, but not enough to shift the rate outlook

Some parts of this quarter’s outcome — including the lift in machinery and aviation-related spending — are unlikely to be repeated.

For the interest rate outlook, however, the key issue remains inflation. Price pressures are still above the Reserve Bank’s target band, and services inflation has been slower to ease than anticipated. The Reserve Bank now expects a more gradual return to the 2–3% target band.

After three rate cuts earlier this year — the most recent in August — markets were expecting at least one more rate cut. That view has shifted. Sticky services inflation and a slower forecast decline mean expectations of further cuts have faded.

A steadier footing, but risks remain

The September quarter shows an economy on a steady, though still moderate, footing. Domestic demand is broad-based, investment is strong, and households have more income support — even if they remain cautious.

But this is not yet a turning point. Inflation is still above target. As Australia enters 2026, the Reserve Bank remains firmly on hold — but alert to the possibility that, if inflation stays above 3%, the next adjustment may need to be upward rather than downward.

Stella Huangfu, Associate Professor, School of Economics, University of Sydney

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Apple CEO Tim Cook might start to notice a few empty chairs around his boardroom table shortly, as executives drop like flies from the world's richest tech company.

In the last 24 months - with a rapid acceleration in the last six months - Apple has lost more than a handful of its senior leadership talent.

Carol Surface, Chief People Officer

Jeff Williams, Chief Operating Officer

Dan Riccio, SVP, Hardware Engineering

John Giannandrea, SVP, Machine Learning and AI Strategy

Lisa Jackson, SVP, Environment, Policy and Social Initiatives

Steve Dowling, SVP, Communications

Katherine Adams, SVP, Legal and Global Security

Those are some heavy hitters to lose all at once. Considering Apple is a company that prides itself on hardware design, security, environmental leadership and how it locks itself down to keep all communications tight as a drum, losing all the folks responsible for those activities is a bad beat.

Similarly, compared to its competitors like Google and Meta, Apple is currently struggling on its mission to bring AI to the forefront of its customer experience. The loss of its head of AI isn't going to make matters easier for the company, then.

These departures are backlit by the tenure of its CEO, Tim Cook. Cook, who succeeded Steve Jobs after his death in 2011, is reportedly considering hanging it up in 2026 to make way for a new man at the top in 2026.

It's now being reported that Apple's head of chips is set to depart to "continue his career elsewhere".

To give you an idea of his significance at the tech giant, Apple is currently sitting pretty thanks to its A-series and M-series chips. The latter series of chips currently powers its laptops and a few iPads. The company ditched Intel chips in favour of its own design, and it put Apple generations-ahead of the competition.

While the brain drain at the top is yet to show up in the share price, it might be an alarm bell for investors going into 2026.

Australia is heading into a hotter and in many areas wetter summer, with the Bureau of Meteorology warning of an elevated risk of flooding and fire as temperatures climb.

This story was originally published on 21 October 2025, and is being republished as Australia's bushfire season begins.

The Bureau’s long-range outlook for the final months of 2025 points to above-average rainfall across much of the eastern half of the country, especially in northern Queensland as the wet season builds. At the same time, warmer-than-usual days and nights are expected nationwide.

That combo of wet ground and rising heat creates a double-edged risk. The BOM says saturated soils and near-full water storages in the east raise the chance of flooding over summer, while prolonged warmth in the south-east and Kimberley heightens the threat of bushfires and heatwaves.

Meanwhile, on the mercury, “daytime temperatures for October to December are likely to be above average across most of Australia,” the agency said. “Minimum temperatures are also very likely to be above average across the country.”

For farmers, the BOM’s outlook means a summer of mixed blessings and high stakes. While above-average rainfall in the east and north could support strong pasture growth and refill dams, it also brings a heightened risk of crop losses from flooding and makes harvest timing more unpredictable. In the south-east and parts of Western Australia, the increased fire risk and expected heatwaves will keep growers and graziers on alert for both water security and asset protection.

The forecast notes that September brought record rainfall in parts of the north and east. Cairns notched its wettest September ever, while Sydney recorded its soggiest September day since 1879. But other regions remain parched, with central Victoria and sections of south-eastern Australia still showing severe rainfall deficits.

For investors and businesses, the BOM’s data suggest continued volatility in weather-sensitive sectors such as agriculture, insurance and energy. Above-average rainfall can boost pasture growth and dam levels in Queensland and New South Wales but complicate grain harvests and transport. Prolonged warmth tends to lift electricity demand and pressure grid reliability.

Looking slightly further ahead, the November–January outlook reinforces the theme: warmer-than-average conditions are likely almost everywhere, with only northern Australia showing a clear signal for heavier rainfall. The Bureau says the Pacific’s El Niño–Southern Oscillation remains neutral, though a La Niña event could still develop in spring, while a negative Indian Ocean Dipole is already contributing to higher rainfall across southern and eastern Australia.

New model to better track potential extreme El Niño and La Niña events

The BOM recently announced a pretty major change to how Australia’s weather is tracked, with a new method for measuring the climate patterns known as El Niño and La Niña. As a reminder, El Niño and La Niña are naturally occurring climate patterns in the Pacific Ocean that shift ocean temperatures and winds. El Niño will bring hotter, more dry conditions, while La Niña offers cooler and wetter periods.

Starting in September 2025, the Bureau now uses what it calls the “relative Niño index” to track the El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO). That's what basically governs the El Niño/La Niña cycle, bringing either big rains or serious heatwaves and potential droughts.

Why the change? 

In short: it's climate change-driven. As global oceans have warmed over the decades, traditional ways of measuring ENSO (where meteorologists would compare Pacific Ocean temperatures to an historical average) have become less reliable. 

The Bureau explains: “The traditional Niño indices show how warm certain regions are, but they don’t account for the long-term warming trend. If we don’t account for the warming, El Niño may seem more common and La Niña may seem less common” .

The new relative Niño index solves this by measuring how unusually warm (or cool) the Pacific is compared to other tropical oceans.

“Assessing how unusually warm or cool the ocean is compared to the broader tropical areas gives us a clearer picture of how the ocean and atmosphere interact to reinforce each other,” the Bureau says.

What difference does it make? 

For the average reader, it means Australia’s climate forecasts now more accurately reflect genuine shifts in ENSO, not just the creeping background of a warming ocean. In practice, this should lead to more accurate tracking of weather extremes and better comparisons with past El Niño and La Niña events—crucial for everyone from farmers and insurers to investors and policymakers.

The Bureau stresses the thresholds for declaring an El Niño or La Niña event remain unchanged, and the overall record of historical ENSO events is largely unaffected. The new model did prompt a reassessment of two recent weak La Niña events, but for the most part, past events remain consistent.

For those who prefer the more retro model, the BOM says the old index is still available for those who'd rather use that. But “by using relative Niño indices we are improving our capacity to monitor ENSO and provide clearer and more reliable insights into climate patterns,” the Bureau says.

Other international weather agencies are now reviewing the science behind the new approach, with growing recognition that the relative Niño index can help the world keep pace with a changing climate.

This week, investors will be watching how central banks balance rate policy with signs of economic softness, both at home and abroad. The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) and the US Federal Reserve both meet this week, while Aussie jobs data on Thursday will provide a key test of how the economy is responding to early rate cuts. Here's what to watch.

Monday December 8

CBA wage & labour insights (November)
Tracks wages and employment — helpful for understanding how tight the labour market remains.

China international trade (November)
Exports could rebound 4.2% year-on-year.

Tuesday December 9

NAB business survey (November)
Conditions are the highest since March 2024 — a gauge of corporate confidence.

Reserve Bank (RBA) Board interest rate decision
No change expected, as rate cuts are likely over after October’s hot inflation print.

RBA Governor Michele Bullock media conference
Scheduled for 3.30pm AEDT — commentary could guide future rate expectations.

US consumer inflation expectations (November)
From the New York Federal Reserve.

US NFIB small business optimism index (November)
The index is at a six-month low — signals softening small biz sentiment.

US JOLTS job openings (September)
Expected to dip slightly to 7.20 million from 7.23 million.

US nonfarm productivity & unit labour costs (Sep. qtr.)
Labour costs could increase 0.8%.

Wednesday December 10

China consumer and producer prices (November)
Consumer prices tipped to rise 0.6% year-on-year.

US employment cost index (ECI, September quarter)
The ECI is expected to lift 0.9%.

US Federal Reserve (FOMC) interest rate decision
A 25-basis point cut is widely expected, with concerns about job losses mounting.

Bank of Canada (BOC) interest rate decision
No change is expected — rate currently at 2.25%.

Thursday December 11

CBA household spending insights (November)
Leading indicator of real-time consumer spending habits.

Labour force (November)
Economists tip 25,000 jobs to be added, keeping unemployment steady at 4.3%.

US international trade balance (September)
A trade deficit of US$66.6 billion is expected.

Key themes to watch

• RBA on hold: After three cuts, the RBA is expected to pause at 3.60% amid sticky inflation.
• Jobs test: Thursday’s employment data will be key to seeing if growth holds up without more stimulus.
• Fed pivot? A rate cut from the US Fed would mark a major shift — markets will be watching tone and commentary closely.
• Retail mood: CBA data and job numbers will set the tone for confidence-sensitive sectors like consumer discretionary.

Check back next week for the latest investor calendar — only on Switzer.

The Australian government is poised to introduce a new domestic gas reservation policy on the east coast. The plan is meant to tackle growing concerns around spiking gas prices and domestic supply. Large gas producers in Queensland export the vast majority of their gas to overseas buyers and long-reliable wells in Bass Strait are running empty.

While details are still forthcoming, the broad brushstrokes are clear. Gas reservation policies work because, in this instance, they require east coast liquefied natural gas (LNG) producers to reserve specific volumes for domestic use rather than exporting them.

It’s not unexpected. The government flagged the need for major reform following a sector-wide review of the gas market. Domestic gas prices have tripled in a decade as producers focus on export markets. Price rises have hit big users hard and driven up power prices, as gas is now the most expensive way to produce electricity.

High gas prices have pushed the government to bail out gas-reliant smelters and steelworks. Price shocks have forced industries and households to look for cheaper electric options.

The move comes after Australia’s energy market operator warned the east coast will soon face a gas shortfall.

If designed appropriately, the policy has a real chance of forcing exporters to boost domestic supply. This could cut the link between domestic gas prices and much higher global LNG prices. Something has to be done – gas supply stress is real and worsening. It won’t address all market and infrastructure issues facing the east coast gas market, such as a shortage of pipeline capacity linking Queensland and the southern states.

What would a gas reservation policy look like?

After an energy crisis in the 1980s, Western Australia introduced its own gas reservation policy which required producers to reserve 15% of gas for domestic use.

But no such scheme has applied on the east coast. Instead, there’s been a mix of regulatory reforms, voluntary industry deals and state-level proposals. Former Liberal leader Peter Dutton took a plan to reserve gas to this year’s election, though it lacked detail on the mechanics, infrastructure constraints and who would bear the costs.

What the Albanese government is proposing would apply only to the east coast, which has a separate gas network, and only to gas that hasn’t already been committed under long-term export contracts.

The proposed scheme would likely build on existing regulatory frameworks such as the Australian Domestic Gas Security Mechanism and Mandatory Gas Code, but would apply more directly to east-coast exporters which are largely located in Queensland.

The plan is to link the new scheme to a broader regulatory overhaul as part of the government’s Future Gas Strategy launched last year. The strategy is meant to ensure gas remains affordable and to manage supply and demand as Australia shifts to clean energy.

Three pillars

While full details are yet to be announced, we know there will be three main elements: a mandatory reservation volume, a gas security incentive, and competitive domestic pricing.

The mandatory reservation will require gas producers to reserve a portion of their supply for the domestic market, likely to be around 50–100 petajoules in its first year of operation. That would represent roughly 10–20% of the 520PJ burned in gas power stations as of 2021–22.

Efforts by previous governments have been voluntary. This will be mandatory, forcing producers to reserve a specific percentage for the domestic market. Once introduced, the scheme will significantly increase dwindling east coast supplies.

The gas security incentive is a strategic move to encourage producers to offer more gas on the domestic market. It will likely work by levying a charge to gas exports, excluding those under long-term contract. The charge is, however, a temporary measure and when a producer fulfils its annual obligation to supply gas to the domestic market, the levy will be returned to them.

The scheme is likely to include competitive domestic pricing to ensure domestic purchasers can buy gas at prices that reflect the cost of production rather than the substantially higher international export prices. This is likely to stabilise gas prices and significantly reduce our dependence on volatile international markets.

Who bears the cost?

Gas producers are not likely to be happy, given they will have to sell gas more cheaply. The peak oil, gas and coal body, Australian Energy Producers, has previously warned against interventionist policies such as mandatory reservation schemes. It says there is a risk of undermining investor confidence and discouraging exploration and production.

The government doesn’t seem concerned about these claims. Rising energy prices have a political cost. Well-designed mandatory reservation scheme will go some way to tackling cost-of-living issues by improving domestic supply security and alleviating some price pressures.

It makes sense to take advantage of Australia’s enormous gas reserves and tackle the looming shortfall and pricing concerns. Disconnecting the domestic east coast market from global LNG price volatility is rational.

Ideally, the forthcoming scheme will form just part of a broader structural overhaul of the gas market including infrastructure, contracting, investment incentives and demand-management reforms.

Samantha Hepburn, Professor of Law, Deakin University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

It often seems like a great idea at the time. There’s a streaming service or premium version of an app you want to try, offering a “no strings attached” free trial.

You sign up – with a few easy clicks and your credit card. The trial period passes, and for whatever reason, you decide this product isn’t for you.

But when you try to cancel, you’re forced to navigate confusing web pages, asked whether you’re “really sure about this” an unreasonable number of times, or even told to call a generic customer hotline.

Sound familiar? According to the Consumer Policy Research Centre, three in four Australians with subscriptions have had a negative experience when trying to cancel them.

Making it hard to cancel – commonly called a “subscription trap” – isn’t currently illegal. But now the federal government has announced a plan to ban subscription traps and other hidden fees.

Easy to sign up, tricky to leave

Subscription traps are sometimes referred to as the “Hotel California” problem, referencing the famous 1977 song by US rock band The Eagles.

Echoing that song’s lyrics, while it is often easy to sign up – it can be really hard to leave.

The traps can take many different forms. One example is when consumers sign up for a service quickly and easily online, but can only cancel on the phone (sometimes needing to ring another country).

Delay, delay, delay

Announcing the proposed new laws at a press conference, Assistant Minister for Competition Andrew Leigh also singled out cases where the cancellation takes 28 days to come into effect. Leigh said:

A simple rule for businesses: if you can’t cancel a subscription through the same process that you started the subscription, then perhaps there’s a subscription trap going on.

Another example, known as “confirm shaming”, involves requiring consumers to click through multiple screens before they can cancel.

Typically, each of those screens has a message asking consumers to reconsider, often reiterating the service’s purported benefits and even offering new discounts on the price not previously available.

Why it’s a problem

Individually, all these difficulties may seem trivial. But cumulatively they are problematic.

Consumers are spending time trying to cancel subscriptions for services they don’t use and businesses are making money from services consumers don’t want.

Consumers are also being locked into those services by artificially created friction and techniques that rely on triggering uncertainty or doubt – “do you really want to cancel?”

The proposed new laws will ask the process of cancelling to be straightforward.

What new laws are proposed in Australia?

The proposed ban on subscription traps is part of a broader package of federal law reforms targeting unfair trading.

Consultation on a draft of the new law is set to take place in 2026 (following an earlier consultation in 2024).

The federal government has indicated the law will include a general ban on unfair practices that manipulate consumer decision making, while also targeting specific deceptive practices, such as certain kinds of subscription traps.

It should not apply to the kinds of subscription where there are legitimate reasons for slowing down the cancellation process, for example, where pushing the wrong button might delete all your photos or digital content.

What do other countries do?

Several other jurisdictions already have responses to subscription traps.

Californian law now includes a suite of protections for consumers, including requiring notice:

• of automatic renewal
• at the end of a free charge period before a fee is incurred.

California’s “click to cancel” rules also mean consumers must be able to cancel using the same method of communication they used to subscribe. And businesses must offer consumers information on how to cancel.

In the European Union, rules on unfair commercial practices have led to changes in the previously complicated process required to unsubscribe from Amazon Prime – reducing cancelling a subscription to just two clicks.

In the meantime what should Australians do to manage subscriptions?

Until Australia gets its own unfair business practices law, Australians can protect themselves from being trapped by subscriptions.

But it takes some work, including recording important information at the time you subscribe:

• if there is a free trial, make a note of when that expires and remember to cancel before being charged a fee
• take a screen shot of what you were promised and the price – if what is delivered is different from what was promised you should be able to cancel at any time for a refund
• record contact details for the service provider at the time you sign up.

Above all, persevere in cancelling subscriptions you don’t want. Remember, those pleading messages such as “why cancel?” or “don’t leave us” are designed to manipulate your emotions. So try to ignore them.

Jeannie Marie Paterson, Professor of Law (consumer protections and credit law), The University of Melbourne

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The rapid expansion of artificial intelligence and cloud services has led to a massive demand for computing power. The surge has strained data infrastructure, which requires lots of electricity to operate. A single, medium-sized data center here on Earth can consume enough electricity to power about 16,500 homes, with even larger facilities using as much as a small city.

Over the past few years, tech leaders have increasingly advocated for space-based AI infrastructure as a way to address the power requirements of data centers.

In space, sunshine – which solar panels can convert into electricity – is abundant and reliable. On Nov. 4, 2025, Google unveiled Project Suncatcher, a bold proposal to launch an 81-satellite constellation into low Earth orbit. It plans to use the constellation to harvest sunlight to power the next generation of AI data centers in space. So, instead of beaming power back to Earth, the constellation would beam data back to Earth.

For example, if you asked a chatbot how to bake sourdough bread, instead of firing up a data center in Virginia to craft a response, your query would be beamed up to the constellation in space, processed by chips running purely on solar energy, and the recipe sent back down to your device. Doing so would mean leaving the substantial heat generated behind in the cold vacuum of space.

As a technology entrepreneur, I applaud Google’s ambitious plan. But as a space scientist, I predict that the company will soon have to reckon with a growing problem: space debris.

The mathematics of disaster

Space debris – the collection of defunct human-made objects in Earth’s orbit – is already affecting space agencies, companies and astronauts. This debris includes large pieces, such as spent rocket stages and dead satellites, as well as tiny flecks of paint and other fragments from discontinued satellites.

Space debris travels at hypersonic speeds of approximately 17,500 miles per hour (28,000 km/h) in low Earth orbit. At this speed, colliding with a piece of debris the size of a blueberry would feel like being hit by a falling anvil.

Satellite breakups and anti-satellite tests have created an alarming amount of debris, a crisis now exacerbated by the rapid expansion of commercial constellations such as SpaceX’s Starlink. The Starlink network has more than 7,500 satellites, which provide global high-speed internet.

The U.S. Space Force actively tracks over 40,000 objects larger than a softball using ground-based radar and optical telescopes. However, this number represents less than 1% of the lethal objects in orbit. The majority are too small for these telescopes to reliably identify and track.

In November 2025, three Chinese astronauts aboard the Tiangong space station were forced to delay their return to Earth because their capsule had been struck by a piece of space debris. Back in 2018, a similar incident on the International Space Station challenged relations between the United States and Russia, as Russian media speculated that a NASA astronaut may have deliberately sabotaged the station.

The orbital shell Google’s project targets – a Sun-synchronous orbit approximately 400 miles (650 kilometers) above Earth – is a prime location for uninterrupted solar energy. At this orbit, the spacecraft’s solar arrays will always be in direct sunshine, where they can generate electricity to power the onboard AI payload. But for this reason, Sun-synchronous orbit is also the single most congested highway in low Earth orbit, and objects in this orbit are the most likely to collide with other satellites or debris.

As new objects arrive and existing objects break apart, low Earth orbit could approach Kessler syndrome. In this theory, once the number of objects in low Earth orbit exceeds a critical threshold, collisions between objects generate a cascade of new debris. Eventually, this cascade of collisions could render certain orbits entirely unusable.

Implications for Project Suncatcher

Project Suncatcher proposes a cluster of satellites carrying large solar panels. They would fly with a radius of just one kilometer, each node spaced less than 200 meters apart. To put that in perspective, imagine a racetrack roughly the size of the Daytona International Speedway, where 81 cars race at 17,500 miles per hour – while separated by gaps about the distance you need to safely brake on the highway.

This ultradense formation is necessary for the satellites to transmit data to each other. The constellation splits complex AI workloads across all its 81 units, enabling them to “think” and process data simultaneously as a single, massive, distributed brain. Google is partnering with a space company to launch two prototype satellites by early 2027 to validate the hardware.

But in the vacuum of space, flying in formation is a constant battle against physics. While the atmosphere in low Earth orbit is incredibly thin, it is not empty. Sparse air particles create orbital drag on satellites – this force pushes against the spacecraft, slowing it down and forcing it to drop in altitude. Satellites with large surface areas have more issues with drag, as they can act like a sail catching the wind.

To add to this complexity, streams of particles and magnetic fields from the Sun – known as space weather – can cause the density of air particles in low Earth orbit to fluctuate in unpredictable ways. These fluctuations directly affect orbital drag.

When satellites are spaced less than 200 meters apart, the margin for error evaporates. A single impact could not only destroy one satellite but send it blasting into its neighbors, triggering a cascade that could wipe out the entire cluster and randomly scatter millions of new pieces of debris into an orbit that is already a minefield.

The importance of active avoidance

To prevent crashes and cascades, satellite companies could adopt a leave no trace standard, which means designing satellites that do not fragment, release debris or endanger their neighbors, and that can be safely removed from orbit. For a constellation as dense and intricate as Suncatcher, meeting this standard might require equipping the satellites with “reflexes” that autonomously detect and dance through a debris field. Suncatcher’s current design doesn’t include these active avoidance capabilities.

In the first six months of 2025 alone, SpaceX’s Starlink constellation performed a staggering 144,404 collision-avoidance maneuvers to dodge debris and other spacecraft. Similarly, Suncatcher would likely encounter debris larger than a grain of sand every five seconds.

Today’s object-tracking infrastructure is generally limited to debris larger than a softball, leaving millions of smaller debris pieces effectively invisible to satellite operators. Future constellations will need an onboard detection system that can actively spot these smaller threats and maneuver the satellite autonomously in real time.

Equipping Suncatcher with active collision avoidance capabilities would be an engineering feat. Because of the tight spacing, the constellation would need to respond as a single entity. Satellites would need to reposition in concert, similar to a synchronized flock of birds. Each satellite would need to react to the slightest shift of its neighbor.

Paying rent for the orbit

Technological solutions, however, can go only so far. In September 2022, the Federal Communications Commission created a rule requiring satellite operators to remove their spacecraft from orbit within five years of the mission’s completion. This typically involves a controlled de-orbit maneuver. Operators must now reserve enough fuel to fire the thrusters at the end of the mission to lower the satellite’s altitude, until atmospheric drag takes over and the spacecraft burns up in the atmosphere.

However, the rule does not address the debris already in space, nor any future debris, from accidents or mishaps. To tackle these issues, some policymakers have proposed a use-tax for space debris removal.

A use-tax or orbital-use fee would charge satellite operators a levy based on the orbital stress their constellation imposes, much like larger or heavier vehicles paying greater fees to use public roads. These funds would finance active debris removal missions, which capture and remove the most dangerous pieces of junk.

Avoiding collisions is a temporary technical fix, not a long-term solution to the space debris problem. As some companies look to space as a new home for data centers, and others continue to send satellite constellations into orbit, new policies and active debris removal programs can help keep low Earth orbit open for business.

Mojtaba Akhavan-Tafti, Associate Research Scientist, University of Michigan

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Trust is not something a company can buy, borrow or barter. It has to be earned, then guarded. Roy Morgan’s latest national survey charts which brands managed that feat in 2025 and which ones fell further behind.

The 2025 results confirm a familiar leader, shifting fortunes for major banks and a sharp fall from grace for several online retailers whose rise in popularity has been matched only by a rise in distrust.

Banks bounce back into trusted territory

Australia’s biggest banks spent much of the past decade clawing back public confidence. The latest Roy Morgan figures show that effort is finally paying off. Commonwealth Bank jumped two places to land in the top five trusted brands for the first time. Westpac climbed five spots to reach fourteenth.

NAB edged higher to nineteenth. ING returned to the top twenty in twentieth place. Bendigo Bank held steady in fifteenth. The banking industry as a whole moved into net trust for the first time in years, rising ten industry-ranking places in one quarter, an unusually fast shift in sentiment.

Physical retail shines, as online retail Shein's itself

Shoppers continue to give brick and mortar retailers the benefit of the doubt. Bunnings retained its crown as Australia’s most trusted brand for an eighth straight quarter. There's a reason it's one of the only Aussie stores to ever score its own spot in the famed kids show Bluey.

Meanwhile, Aldi held second, and Kmart stayed third to round off the podium.

Big W remained in the top ten, slipping only one place to seventh. JB Hi Fi and Myer again featured among the country’s most trusted names. No wonder, seeing as how physical stores - despite falling sales - are seen as reliable, consistent and transparent.

Online marketplaces tell a different story. Temu’s distrust worsened to make it the fifth most distrusted brand over the year. Amazon fell one place to tenth most distrusted. Shein slid to eleventh. Their reputations are being dragged down by concerns about poor quality goods, a lack of ethics, profit driven behaviour and unreliable service. Roy Morgan noted that the more Australians use these platforms the faster their distrust grows, a trend that has accelerated through 2025. Honestly? Thank God. The fewer folks using them the better, says I.

The top 10s

Who doesn't love a top ten list?

Australia’s most trusted brands in 2025

Bunnings stayed in first place. It has led the national trust rankings for eight consecutive quarters, so its position is unchanged. Aldi held second without movement. Kmart stayed in third, continuing a four quarter run in that position. Apple remained in fourth with no change. Commonwealth Bank rose two places into fifth, its highest result on record. Toyota slipped one position to sixth, pushed out of the top five by CBA’s rise. Big W fell one place to seventh. Coles held eighth without change. Woolworths held ninth. Australia Post slipped one place to tenth.

Australia’s most distrusted brands in 2025

Screenshot

Everyone hates the duopoly, it seems. Woolworths again ranked as the most distrusted brand in Australia. Coles remained in second, with both supermarkets holding their positions for a fourth straight quarter.

Online fast-fashion retailer and international bad guy, Temu, deteriorated one place to become the fifth most distrusted brand on a twelve month view, although it ranked as the single most distrusted brand for the month of September.

Speaking of villains, Tesla slipped one place to seventh.

2025 market-darling Telstra improved one place to eighth. Amazon meanwhile fell one place to tenth.

Outside of the top 10, Shein worsened one place to eleventh. McDonald’s deteriorated two places to sixteenth. Jetstar dropped three places to eighteenth. Shell slipped one place to nineteenth, while BP improved one place to twentieth. News Corp rose two places to twelfth.

Rio Tinto climbed one place to seventeenth.

It seems President Trump has been paying closer attention to Australia than some of us might have given him credit for. He told reporters on Wednesday that his Administration is looking at the Australian-style superannuation system to fund retirement as a way of lifting the nation's rapidly declining birth rate.

Implementing superannuation schemes in America would be a right-sight better than whatever hodgepodge they've got over there now (as I'll get into). But using super schemes to increase the birth rate? I'm not sure the numbers stack up here for the Donald.

He said what?

The President made the rather off-the-cuff comments in praise of super at an event where billionaire Michael Dell and his wife announced a $US6.5 billion endowment to benefit American kids under the so-called "Trump Accounts" scheme. It's worth pointing out that the donation by the Dell's to America's youth represents the second largest in American history behind that of Warren Buffett to the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation.

Trump Accounts is just one lever the President has pulled to help expand the birth rate in the US. One idea he previously landed on after just retaking office was giving American women who had eight or more children a literal medal for doing so.

Reporters from the press pool asked what else the Administration would be working on to lift fertility rates, and he talked specifically in favour on Australia's  Superannuation scheme.

"We are looking at programs. There’s a certain Australian plan that people are liking and they’re talking about … not for children, necessarily, but it’s for people, working people," adding "we're looking at it very seriously, it has worked out very well.

"It's a good plan," he concluded.

It's no secret the US retirement system is a mess compared to something like superannuation. So how would it work if Trump wanted to switch it up for a more green and gold-style approach to retirement? And what does money when you're old have to do with having kids?

Could superannuation supercharge the US birth rate?

We've currently got more people alive on earth than ever, right now. By 2026 the global population is estimated to be around 8.3 billion folks getting about. Almost 350 million of those live in the USA. 

But despite the big numbers, it's the little ones that has Trump and his Administration concerned. The US fertility rate is now at around 1.63 children per woman as of 2023, and slid to 1.60 in 2024 according to US health data. That's the lowest it has ever been, and it's below the bar for what's known as the 'replacement' birth rate. 

The replacement birth rate refers to the number of kids needed per woman to literally "replace" the generation that came before them while still growing the population. In most developed countries, that number is at 2.1. It's worth noting, however, that the World Bank puts the replacement rate at 2.3 and the UN puts it at 2.24.

But what does all this have to do with retirement accounts and super?

401(K)s versus superannuation: how does the US differ from Australia?

I'm no economist, but from my spot up here in the cheap seats, the system for funding retirement in the US looks like a right mess. 

Talking about super in an American context means talking about two very different creatures. A 401(k) is essentially a voluntary savings account with tax perks. Australian super is a compulsory, whole-of-workforce retirement architecture. They might both be “retirement accounts” on paper, but they behave very differently in the real world.

In the US, a 401(k) only exists for you if your employer offers one, and if you personally choose to participate. That sounds like you're speaking a foreign language to Australians, some of whom have had super since the 1980s. Contributions to a US 401(k) account come from your pay, and sometimes your employer matches a portion. 

As a result, not everyone has super to fall back on in America. Big companies tend to offer a generous 401(k) and a matching contribution as a perk to attract new talent. But small- to medium-sized businesses often don't match contributions or offer 401(k) accounts at all.

Those who do have a 401(K) are then asked to figure out how they want the funds invested. As opposed to the Australian system where many folks simply let a big bank or funds manager sort it out for them.

That's why Trump's praise for Aussie super is kind of weird. He's a lover of the free-market, hater of so-called 'big government, a worshipper at the altar of Wall Street and campaigned on increasing the take-home pay of his constituents. Implementing an Australian-style super guarantee would see less money in the pay checks of ordinary Americans overall.

But weirdness aside, adding financial stability for your post-retirement years - Trump would argue - likely leads to reduced long-term financial anxiety and increases funds available overall at a household level to start or grow a family.

But is it that simple? Looking at our data, I'm not so sure.

Has Australia's super scheme boosted the birth rate?

Former Treasurer Peter Costello once famously and horrendously said on TV back in the 90's that Australian mothers should have "one for mum, one for dad, and one for the country". This was back when he announced the baby bonus back in 2004 hat was designed to similarly lift the local birth rate. 

I can't say that particular turn of phrase - nor its user - influenced anyone to hop into the baby-making process, but stats back me up here.

The ABS says Australia has been below the 2.1 replacement rate since about 1976, and it continues to precipitously fall, regardless of what the government does to increase mandatory super contributions from employers.

The Howard Liberal government upped the super contribution to 9% in 2003, while the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd government successfully proposed a staged rise of 0.5% per year up to 12% starting from 2015. Tony Abbott's government delayed the scheme, but eventually we ended up in 2025 with a super guarantee of 12%.

In the background of all this argy-bargy over super, however, the local birth rate continued to decline. And decline, and decline.

Source: ABS

When Keating kicked off the mandatory super guarantee in 1992, the total fertility rate was 1.89. But that had slumped to 1.76 by the time Howard and Costello gave super a boost in 2003. Admittedly, the rate then climbed until 2007 (1.99) when the global financial crisis hit home. Rates in 2025 - despite a 12% super guarantee - now sit at 1.48. Yep: we're lower than the US which by its President's own admission, is experiencing something of a birthing crisis.

It's no surprise that just tweaking someone's retirement guarantee doesn't immediately have them looking at schools and shopping for prams. Demographers note that things like housing affordability, cost of living, childcare costs and parental leave all contribute far more to the fertility rate than superannuation guarantees do.

But nobody suggested this is a silver bullet, after all. There are many levers on which government can pull, and this is just one such lever. Reducing long-term financial anxiety can go a long way towards benefiting an economy in the short- to medium-term as well as in the long term.

And whether it helps the birth rate or not, it'd likely see many senior Americans (mostly women, I might add) not having to work until they drop dead on the job, or worse, turfed out onto the streets into poverty.

Have at it, Donald.

New polling out today from DemosAU shows that Pauline Hanson’s One Nation party could pick up as many as 18 seats if the election were held today. That is as many as the Liberals hold right now in Parliament. Could PHON become the new Opposition? Here is how it works.

Parliament by the numbers

Labor is already dominating the House of Representatives following its recent commanding election win. Albo's party holds 94 seats in the House of Representatives right now. The Liberal–National Coalition, meanwhile, once the natural alternative government for as long as any of us can probably remember, has shrunk to 43 seats spread across three parties. The Liberals hold 18 seats, the Queensland LNP holds 16 and the Nationals hold 9. Minor parties have just three seats between them, while ten independents sit on the crossbench.

Against that backdrop, the new DemosAU multilevel regression projection lands like a thunderclap. It suggests Labor could climb toward the 100-seat mark if an election were held today. The Coalition would fall to roughly half its current size. And One Nation, which holds no lower-house seats at present, could surge into double digits. The model’s upper range has them reaching 18 seats, which is the same number the Liberal Party currently brings to the chamber.

🚨 NEW: One Nation is nearing striking distance of becoming the official opposition, according to a federal voting intention poll and MRP released today by DemosAU

One Nation would win 12 seats and are within range of 18, while the Coalition risks falling to as low as 21 https://t.co/CfEysXAY2R pic.twitter.com/zbLnZTPqyB

— AusPoll (@AusPoll6) December 2, 2025

This polling begs the question: could Pauline Hanson become the new opposition leader if the election were to be held today?

Could PHON really become the new Opposition?

While Labor or Liberal-National Coalition have held onto both government and opposition for decades, it doesn't mean it has to stay that way. The Opposition is not defined by tradition or history, it is defined by simple maths. The largest non-government grouping in the House is recognised by the Speaker as the Opposition. That grouping can be a single party or a formal coalition.

The key blocker to a Hanson-led Opposition? The fragile Coalition agreement between Libs and Nats.

Under today’s DemosAU projection, One Nation does not come close to overtaking the Coalition bloc as it currently operates. Even if PHON were to win at the upper end of the model’s range, they would match the Liberal Party, not the combined Coalition. As long as the Coalition agreement holds, the three conservative parties act as one parliamentary unit, and that keeps them the Opposition regardless of how many seats One Nation manages to collect.

Still, the projection highlights two important currents. First, One Nation’s vote is concentrated in Queensland and parts of regional Australia, which is why a modest national vote share can translate into a cluster of winnable seats. That same geographic concentration is what makes the Greens competitive in inner-city electorates. Second, if the Coalition parties ever broke their agreement, each would be judged on its seat count alone. A Liberal Party reduced to the high teens would suddenly be competing with One Nation to be the largest non-government party.

The path for PHON to become the Opposition therefore exists, but only through a political rupture on the right combined with a sustained rise in their regional seat strength. Under normal conditions, the Coalition remains the Opposition by sheer weight of numbers.