Author: MIL-OSI Publisher

Source: Government of Australia Capital Territory

Source: Australian Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Industry

Jim Chalmers:

Earlier this morning, the International Monetary Fund issued a very positive statement about the government’s economic strategy. The IMF is very positive about Australia’s economic fundamentals and about the government’s reform agenda. This is a very powerful endorsement of the Albanese Labor government’s responsible economic management. I just wanted to read to you a couple of passages from the IMF report. They say this: ‘Australia is managing a soft landing amid global uncertainty, inflation has declined significantly, the labour market’s still strong and private demand is recovering.’ They go on to say, and I’m quoting again, ‘The Commonwealth’s fiscal strategy has been effective over the post‑pandemic period.’

And so, this is very clearly a very positive, a very powerful endorsement of the way that the Albanese Labor government is managing the economy in a responsible way in the face of all of this global economic uncertainty. Very positive about Australia’s economic fundamentals but also very positive about the government’s reform agenda. Their report goes out of its way to mention the progress that has been made and the momentum that was built at the government’s productivity roundtable a couple of months ago, and they also go out of their way to back in the Albanese Labor government’s approach to net zero. And once again I’m quoting from the IMF report, which says that; ‘the green transition, including the authority’s recently announced 2035 commitments, offers opportunities for enhancing investment, productivity and diversification while contributing to Australia’s climate goals.’

They really couldn’t be clearer when it comes to the economic upside of the government’s orderly transition in Australia towards net zero. The IMF agrees with the Albanese government that net zero is a golden economic opportunity for our country, whether it’s the IMF report released today or the Treasury modelling and analysis in the document I released not that long ago, the conclusions of sensible economic institutions are extremely clear – net zero is a golden economic opportunity for Australia. An orderly transition will give us the best chance of strengthening our economy, creating more jobs, lifting wages and living standards at the same time as we get emissions down over time.

The IMF couldn’t be clearer, the Treasury couldn’t be clearer. Now, the Treasury has also made it clear that the worst outcome for Australia’s economy would be to abandon net zero completely and that is the economic insanity being peddled now by the Coalition. If we were to abandon net zero, that would mean power prices would be higher not lower, it would create serious investor uncertainty and it would weaken our economy as a consequence and that’s what the Coalition is proposing. The Coalition’s proposal to abandon net zero will push power prices up not down, create serious investor uncertainty and they will weaken our economy as a consequence.

Now, the IMF’s made clear today that the best approach to net zero is the approach that the government is adopting, the alternative to that is the economic insanity being pushed by our political opponents. That’s very clear in the Treasury modelling, very clear in the IMF analysis released as well. Once again, a very powerful endorsement of the government’s strategy, our reform agenda, our approach to net zero, the economic fundamentals of this country. We know that there’s more work to do. We know that people are still under pressure. We know that our economy is not yet productive or resilient enough in the face of all this global economic uncertainty and that’s what guides us in our responsible economic management and in our reform agenda more broadly.

Happy to take a couple of questions.

Journalist:

Would you like to see the states get on board for tighter fiscal controls?

Chalmers:

Oh look, I try not to give free advice to my colleagues in the states and territories. We’ve all got budget pressures to manage and my focus is on the mid‑year budget update, which we will release some time in December after we see the National Accounts for September. That mid‑year budget update, it won’t be a mini budget, it will be an opportunity to account for pressures on the budget and to revise our forecasts. And why that’s especially relevant today is because the IMF makes it clear in their analysis today that Australia is seeing the kind of soft landing in our economy that the government has been planning for and preparing for and also, frankly, hoping for. And this soft landing is all about making sure we get inflation down to half what we inherited, we saw real wages grow yesterday for the eighth consecutive quarter which is a deliberate part of our economic strategy to make sure people are earning more and keeping more of what they earn. We’ve got the debt down, we’ve got the triple‑A reaffirmed by all 3 major credit ratings agencies and so that’s my focus, managing the economy and the budget in the most responsible way that we can, and that means a focus on the mid‑year budget update in December.

Journalist:

How much money has the government spent campaigning for the COP in recent years?

Chalmers:

Well, that’s not a line item in the Budget, it’s part of the ongoing and important work that we do to make sure that our voice is heard in international forums when it comes to climate change and the vast economic opportunities presented to us by the global shift to net zero. And that gives me an opportunity to really welcome the announcement made by Chris Bowen earlier this morning our time about Australia’s approach to COP.

This is a very good outcome in the circumstances. Now, of course, we would have liked to have showcased Adelaide and Australia to the world, but what Chris and the PM and others have been able to secure here is a very important, very welcome opportunity for Australia and that’s because Australia’s interests are best served by making sure we have a powerful and influential voice in global forums and we have assured that by getting the outcome of Chris Bowen being the President of Negotiations for the COP. Our interests are best served by putting the Pacific front and centre, and we’ve found a way to do that as well.

And our interests are best served in making sure that we don’t jeopardise multilateral progress towards net zero at a difficult time for the global economy. And so, the approach that Chris Bowen has announced today ticks all 3 of those boxes: an influential voice for Australia, the Pacific front and centre, and maintaining momentum and progress in multilateral forums. It was in nobody’s interests for this to drag on forever, and so the outcome that was achieved by Chris Bowen and others in the last little while is a very welcome one and especially in the circumstances that we confronted.

Journalist:

After it failed, though, is it fair to say that the hours and the money that was spent campaigning for it has been a waste?

Chalmers:

No, of course not. Because it’s in Australia’s national economic interest for us to maintain an influential voice in the world when it comes to the global shift to net zero and that work would be necessary regardless. And so I don’t see it the way that you have characterised it at all. This is an important opportunity for us to make sure that our voice is heard in the world on climate change and the economics of net zero. It ensures that our brothers and sisters in the Pacific are front and centre in the lead up to the COP, and it also means that we’re not jeopardising multilateral progress towards net zero and getting emissions down.

I think I said yesterday in Perth, on the other side of the country, we didn’t want to see this drag out for another 12 months. That wouldn’t have been in anyone’s interests. For all of us who believe in climate change progress and the economic opportunity presented by net zero, we didn’t want to see this drag out for another 12 months, and so I think this is a good outcome in the circumstances. Certainly good when it comes to those 3 priorities that I mentioned.

Journalist:

The PM has told premiers and state ministers they need to rein in public hospital spending, does that mean the federal government expects the states to cut the public hospital activity to suit the budget bottom line?

Chalmers:

What we’re proposing is to dramatically increase hospital funding for the states. The $20 billion of additional investment in hospitals, on top of the $200 billion or so that we’re already providing, represents a very substantial increase. Even since the structure of the deal was agreed at the end of 2023, I believe, our position that we’ve put to the states has increased by $7 billion. So, we’re talking about increasing Commonwealth investment in hospitals. There are good reasons to do that, $20 billion is a very substantial offer that the Commonwealth has put on the table and that’s because we recognise that there are pressures on public hospitals.

It’s also why we’re putting so much time and effort and resources into urgent care clinics and the work that we’re doing tripling the bulk‑billing incentive to take some of the pressure off our emergency departments as well. So I think any objective observer of what we’ve been doing in hospitals funding, what we’ve been doing in health funding more broadly and strengthening Medicare would conclude that we are dramatically increasing investment in our health system and that’s a good thing.

Now, finally on the states, it’s not unprecedented or especially surprising to see that the states are campaigning for more money from the Commonwealth. That story is as old as federation. We continue to engage with the states and territories in good faith. I do as Treasurer, the Health Minister does, the Prime Minister does, to try and get the best outcome that we can for the people that we represent.

Journalist:

The IMF report suggests that the federal government should provide oversight to state spending, saying they’re putting a strain on the budgets. What can be done by the Commonwealth to hold states accountable and is there a discussion between premiers?

Chalmers:

Well, there’s always a discussion between treasurers about the pressures on our budgets. But again, even when provoked, I try not to give free advice to my state and territory colleagues managing their budgets. My responsibility and my job is to work closely with Katy Gallagher and our Cabinet to focus on where we can make a meaningful difference to our own budget. And working together, we’ve got Commonwealth debt down by almost $200 billion. We delivered 2 surpluses and got the third year’s deficit down to a fraction of what we inherited, we found $100 billion in savings, we’ve engineered the biggest nominal positive turnaround in the budget in a single parliamentary term in the history of this country. And so we’re focused on our job, we continue to engage with the states and territories as they grapple with some similar sorts of pressures.

Journalist:

Meta is moving on our social media ban laws about a week earlier than when the ban actually comes into effect. What do you make of that and would you like to see other social media companies follow suit?

Chalmers:

It’s really important that the platforms and the tech companies play their part in what are really important reforms to protect our kids online. And so no doubt Anika Wells, who would be following this much more closely, would have a detailed view about the announcement made by Meta. But we want to see the platforms and the tech companies do their bit. We want to make sure that we’re all working together to protect kids online and that’s what this reform is all about.

Journalist:

The Grattan Institute has found taxpayers are spending $6,000 more for a hospital visit of a person about to enter an aged care home than an otherwise identical patient returning home. Would it be more efficient use of taxpayer dollars to build more aged care facilities so there are enough beds to minimise the bed block crisis in the country?

Chalmers:

Obviously we want to make sure people are getting the care that they need in the most appropriate place and the federal government has provided a substantial amount of money, whether it’s investing in new aged care beds, or whether it’s providing money to the states to help people, get people out of hospitals where they would be more appropriately cared for somewhere else. We know this is part of the conversation that the states have initiated with us around the hospitals funding deal. As always, we engage with the states and territories in good faith. We want every Australian, particularly older Australians, to be cared for where they can be best cared for and that’s what motivates us.

Journalist:

Is the federal government planning to reimburse South Australia for funds already spent on COP preparations?

Chalmers:

I haven’t heard that mentioned by anyone else before now. I say to the South Australian Government, Premier Malinauskas in particular, obviously it’s disappointing for South Australia, it’s disappointing for Australia after being so well supported around the world that we can’t showcase that beautiful city and beautiful state in our country to the world in the context of COP. We’re all working in a pragmatic way to get the best outcome that we can. I think this represents the best outcome we can get in the circumstances and I hope and I expect that Premier Malinauskas, who is a pragmatist, will understand.

Journalist:

Can you understand South Australia feels hard done by here? They’ve done the work and been preparing for the bid for months now but the only winners here are Chris Bowen and other Pacific partners.

Chalmers:

I obviously don’t see it the way you have described it. I would only repeat what I said a moment ago. Premier Malinauskas, who is an absolutely outstanding premier of a wonderful state in South Australia, he’s put his best foot forward. I could understand that there would be some disappointment from his end, but we’ve tried to find a way through here and I think this is the best outcome we could get in the circumstances because it puts the Pacific front and centre, it maintains an influential voice for Australia and it means that we’re not stuffing around for another 12 months to try and get a solution. And so Adelaide’s a beautiful city, I spend a lot of time there, the in‑laws are there. It’s a wonderful state, South Australia. And obviously, we’re always looking for ways to showcase Australia in the world. It didn’t pan out the way that Premier Malinauskas would have liked, but I hope that he understands this is the best outcome we could get in the circumstances.

Journalist:

The state government is launching its own review into the GST system, accusing the national Productivity Commission’s probe of being too light touch. Do you think it’s fair that Queensland’s GST revenue has grown by only 28 per cent while New South Wales has had a 58 per cent increase? Are we being short‑changed?

Chalmers:

Of course, not. I mean – and this is the sort of absurdity that we get from the Treasurer here in Queensland. The Commonwealth government is pouring billions and billions of dollars, extra dollars, into Queensland. We do that enthusiastically, not just because I’m a Queenslander, but because we believe in investing in this wonderful state of Queensland. We are investing heaps more money in schools, we’re making sure that the no‑worse‑off guarantee is being applied. You know, $7 billion for the Bruce, $3.5 billion for the Olympics – this Albanese Labor government invests a lot of money and resources into Queensland and for good reasons, we’re proud to do that, we’re enthusiastic about that.

Now, when it comes to the GST distribution, that’s determined at arm’s length by the Commonwealth Grants Commission. When it comes to the Productivity Commission’s work, it hasn’t finished yet, and so it’s strange for the Treasurer here in Queensland to dismiss a process that only really getting started. And so the Productivity Commission will put out an issues paper before long. I hope it’s quite soon. Certainly by the end of the year, but I hope it will be quite a lot sooner than that. And he will have an opportunity to make his voice heard in that, to make his views known. Obviously, every state and every territory wants a bigger share of the GST carve‑up, again, that’s not unprecedented, but we should have some honesty from the Treasurer here in Queensland. The Commonwealth’s pumping billions and billions of dollar extra dollars into Queensland and that should be recognised when he gets this kind of weekly or fortnightly run in the Courier‑Mail, making these sorts of points, pointing the finger at others. He should focus on his job, I’ll focus on my job, we’ll both support the good people of Queensland.

Journalist:

Mr Janetzki’s issue with the review is that the in‑principle draft has a reference agreed to by the state [inaudible] carve‑up by the states and territories was not what was in the final version of the terms of reference. Did you water down the terms of reference?

Chalmers:

No, of course, not. The terms of reference are deliberately broad and they allow the Treasurer here in Queensland and every treasurer and every state government to make their views known. This is an important opportunity for the Treasurer here in Queensland. I encourage him to make the most of it. We haven’t watered down the terms of reference. They’re deliberately broad so that he can make his views known. And this is more about the partisan politics of the state government here than it is about getting a good outcome for Queensland. We have shown, not just with our words but with our deeds and with our billions of dollars, we’re big investors, enthusiastic investors in Queensland – the Olympics, the Bruce, the schools, the offer that’s on the table for hospitals – and it’s dishonest in the extreme to pretend otherwise.

Journalist:

Meta are sending out alerts to kids about their accounts soon getting closed. Have your children received any notifications? It looks like platforms are taking reform seriously.

Chalmers:

I mean, first of all, I’m not going to go into the details of my kids. I’m not aware of any notifications that they’ve received but more broadly, I’d refer you to the answer I gave Kaiser a moment ago, which is these are really important reforms. They’re about protecting all Australian kids online. Where we can do that, we expect the platforms to do their bit as we move towards the full implementation before long.

Journalist:

There’s been some suggestion that the states and territories have threatened to boycott a meeting with NDIS Minister McAllister; are you aware of any such discussions or threats from the states?

Chalmers:

No, I’m not aware of that but I always believe that you get more out of engaging rather than disengaging. That’s true of the world, it’s true in the federation. I’d encourage the states and territories to take the approach that the Commonwealth does, which is to engage and negotiate in good faith in the interests of the people that we jointly represent.

Journalist:

As the population ages and grows, the country is going to need more hospitals. Is it feasible for the Commonwealth to enforce an 8 per cent gap on the annual growth of funding?

Chalmers:

What we’re talking about contributing is a $20 billion increase in hospital funding in the context of some very substantial budget pressures. We’ve found that $20 billion to offer to the states, a $7 billion increase since the structure of the deal was agreed at the end of 2023 and I think that represents a willingness on the Commonwealth’s part to do more on hospitals. Extra tens of billions of dollars to invest in hospitals because we recognise the pressure that’s on hospitals at the same time as we’re doing what we can in primary care to take some of that pressure off with urgent care clinics and strengthening Medicare so that fewer people rock up to the emergency departments. So we’re investing on a range of fronts and the offer that we’ve put to the states reflects that.

Journalist:

So you’re not proposing that they reduce the amount of growth?

Chalmers:

We’re proposing that they sign up to an extra $20 billion in the hospital system, and that’s an extra $7 billion since the original offer was put and I think it shows a willingness on the Commonwealth’s behalf to do the right thing by the states, by the hospitals and by the people that we jointly represent so that people get the healthcare they need and deserve.

Thanks very much.

Source: New South Wales Ministerial News

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has recently warned of a recall of children’s sand products that may contain asbestos and were sold at various Australian retailers.

The sand is brightly coloured and designed for children to play with and for educational purposes and, as set out in the recall, is labelled as Kadink Sand (1.3kg), Educational Colours – Rainbow Sand (1.3kg) and Creatistics – Coloured Sand (1kg).

The products were recalled because they may contain tremolite asbestos, a naturally occurring asbestos, which was detected in some samples after laboratory testing. Asbestos is a prohibited substance in Australia.

The products were sold throughout Australia between 2020 and 2025.

Greater Bendigo residents who may have purchased these products can safely dispose of them at the Eaglehawk Landfill by following the guidelines that apply to the disposal of domestic asbestos that can be found on the City’s website.

The guidelines require asbestos products to be wrapped in two layers of thick plastic sheeting or approved asbestos bags, securely taped and marked Asbestos.  The bags must be accompanied by a completed Application and Self Assessment Form for the Disposal of Domestic Asbestos.

The City will accept small quantities under 10kgs for free disposal. However, larger quantities will be subject to a fee for disposal.

Residents need to know that it is illegal to dispose of asbestos products in the City’s red lid kerb side general waste bins.

Source: Australian Capital Territory Policing

A Victorian sole trader who bought, sold and moved relocatable homes is facing serious allegations in the Federal Court.

Consumer Affairs Victoria is seeking penalties and other orders against Peter Weis, of Nunawading, for breaching the Australian Consumer Law by:

• making false or misleading representations about the standard and quality of his services
• wrongly accepting payment for services he failed to provide within a reasonable time, or at all, and
• using undue harassment and coercion.

Weis advertised his services, including selling, moving and restumping homes, through various online platforms.

The case will be heard in the Federal Court on 21 November 2025.

This matter is among several cases Consumer Affairs Victoria is pursuing against tradies for alleged breaches of building and consumer laws.

Earlier this year, unlicensed builder Mark (Najy) Rayes was convicted and fined for taking more than $100,000 in payments for services he failed to provide.

In a separate matter, Ballan tradie Austin Bongart is facing the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court over allegations relating to concreting and fencing work. Bongart allegedly accepted thousands of dollars from consumers for agreed works but left jobs unfinished or failed to return to complete them.

Consumer Affairs Victoria Director Nicole Rich urged anyone planning to hire a tradesperson to take steps to protect themselves.

‘The law is there to protect you. Making sure that whoever you hire has the right qualifications, and the right documentation, will help ensure you get a result you’re happy with.

‘And do your own due diligence – ask family and friends for recommendations, seek more than one quote, and thoroughly research tradespeople before you hire them.’

Source: Airservices Australia

Before I begin, I would like to acknowledge the Gadigal people, the Traditional Custodians of the land on which we are meeting today. We are very lucky in Australia that our First Nations people protect our land and culture to hand down to future generations, and I would like to pay my respects to Elders past and present and extend that respect to any First Nations people here with us today.

One of the things I enjoy most in my job is interacting directly with all parts of the community in Australia; I always learn a lot and appreciate hearing a wide range of perspectives on what’s happening in the economy, and how interest rate settings are affecting households and businesses across sectors and geographies.

While we are continuously assessing current economic conditions and the short-term outlook for the economy, we also undertake research and analysis on a wide range of structural shifts that shape the Australian economy over time.

This work deepens our understanding of current conditions and the outlook by how monetary policy transmits through the economy and how longer term forces may be changing the economy’s fundamentals.

Therefore, today I thought I would highlight three key questions that we are currently researching and analysing. In all three cases, information and insights from the business community and our own liaison program can help shed some light on the answer. So, it’s a pleasure to be here today, not just to share some of our work, but also to hear from you. I’m looking forward to our Q&A conversation in a few minutes and the opportunity to gather some fresh insights.

There is always change happening somewhere in the economy: a new sector is being developed as technology and its uses advance; the composition and preferences of households continuously change; and we’re exposed to shifting global winds from evolving geopolitical relationships, financial markets and trading patterns. It’s not enough for us to focus only on what’s happening in the here and now, we have to look ahead to make sure we make good policy decisions today and in the future.

The first topic I want to touch on is, perhaps unsurprisingly for a central bank, inflation dynamics. Forecasting inflation over the past few years has been challenging – indeed we were materially surprised by the latest data, which came through stronger than we were expecting.

A particular focus of our work on inflation dynamics is to understand whether businesses have changed the way they set prices since the pandemic. Do firms now look to pass costs through more quickly, if they can, given the recent experience of high inflation? How do firms’ profit margins vary as economic conditions change?

To get a handle on these questions, we are making use of microdata sets from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) that allow us to look at anonymised individual firms’ pricing decisions. We’re hopeful that this research will tell us more about how businesses respond as their costs and conditions change, which will ultimately add to our understanding of inflation.

A second topic we’re currently focused on is the economy’s supply capacity. As my colleague Deputy Governor Hauser recently discussed, the Monetary Policy Board is focused on setting monetary policy to keep demand in the economy in line with potential supply. If we can sustain this over time and expectations remain anchored, inflation will be within our 2–3 per cent target band and the labour market will be sitting at full employment.

Ideally, we would know what the economy’s supply capacity is at any given point in time – it would be great if it were possible to measure this directly. Unfortunately, precisely measuring the economy’s supply capacity is impossible – we can measure actual outcomes such as employment or economic output (GDP) but we can’t, for example, measure full employment or the level of potential output.

We are particularly focused on ways to measure capacity in the labour market. We think the labour market is currently a bit tight – in other words, it is operating slightly beyond what can be sustained with inflation at target, but this judgement is uncertain so we’re actively investigating how close we are to full employment.

Within this line of enquiry, some of the questions we’re currently investigating include:

• the extent of the upward trend in the number of women and older people in the workforce
• whether the easing in the cost-of-living squeeze (though we know it’s still challenging) has resulted in some people choosing to dial back on work
• whether the match between the skills and expertise of those looking for work aligns with what firms are looking for (and if the speed of matching in the labour market is faster or slower now relative to the past).

As you can see, we have plenty of questions that we’re actively digging into, and we’ll have more to say on how we’re thinking about full employment next year.

A third topic we’re actively exploring is whether the transmission channels for monetary policy have changed in recent years, and if so how. As I’ve spoken about previously, there are a number of channels through which policy impacts the economy, and the importance of each channel depends on a range of factors. For example, the impact of a change in rates on household disposable incomes is crucially dependent on how many households are borrowers and how many are savers, and this can change over time. We are currently expanding and extending our tools and frameworks that will let us explore shifts like this.

A key conjunctural question that relates to the transmission of monetary policy is how to think about the way the housing market has responded to the interest rate cuts that have already occurred. Thus far the response has been a little stronger than we anticipated, with activity in the established housing market picking up slightly more than expected in recent months. As outlined in the November Statement on Monetary Policy, we are actively watching how this unfolds from here, and what that might mean for our inflation and labour market objectives.

The three issues I’ve highlighted today are just a glimpse into the broader research agenda our economists are actively exploring at the moment. We are constantly curious about how the economy is shifting and changing beneath the surface, the drivers of these undercurrents, and what they collectively mean for policy settings.

Hearing from businesses, not-for-profit institutions and individuals across the country is a vital source of information for this research and analysis. That’s why conversations like today’s matter. Your insights – from the ground level – help bring our analysis to life. So, thank you for being part of that process. I’m looking forward to our discussion and hearing what’s on your minds.

Source: South Australia Police

Faye’s involvement in the pursuit and arrest of two people for making off without payment, unlawful possession and illegal use, has led to her being crowned as the 2025 Lions Citizen of the Year.

When Faye, a long-term Mannum resident, went to work on Tuesday 29 July 2025, she did not know that her job operating the Cowirra Upstream Ferry in Mannum would put her in the centre of police action.

During her evening shift, Faye received a phone call from local police asking her to look out for two suspicious vehicles travelling together, trying to evade police capture.

This is not an uncommon request, and local police have a very good working relationship with ferry operators in the region.

Only 10 minutes later Faye saw the suspect vehicles boarding her ferry. On the phone to the police, Faye confirmed the presence of the cars and provided valuable information about the occupants in each vehicle.

“I didn’t think much of it at first,” Faye said.

Faye managed to slyly delay the launch from the east bank, walking away from the ferry for a ‘quick break’. Faye’s quick thinking allowed time for a police officer to board the ferry and park behind the subject vehicles without detection.

With an officer in place behind the offenders, and more police set to arrive at the other end of the ferry trip, Faye started to realise the seriousness of the situation.

“I knew it was getting serious when all of a sudden I could hear the helicopter flying past,” she said.

The journey across the Murray River was tense with the frustrated passengers making their displeasure known. Faye needed to stay calm as police were still on their way to the landing point on the western bank.

The ferry arrived, but police were still on their way to the western bank. Faye stayed calm and kept the gates closed, denying their escape.

“The people in the suspect vehicles were getting angry. They were aggressively asking why we weren’t moving,” she said.

“I just tried to stay out of sight and not confront them face to face.

“I just keep thinking ‘the police are coming soon, I’ll be fine’, and I’ve done security before, and I know how to handle myself.”

Before long, additional patrols arrived, boarded the ferry and safely arrested the two suspects without incident.

Faye continued her outstanding assistance by reassuring the other passengers aboard the ferry whilst police dealt with the arrest, and then promptly returned the ferry to its normal operations with minimum impact on customers.

Faye didn’t shy away from taking responsibility when the unusual situation arose. She met the challenge head on and became an extremely valuable addition to the team looking to bring a resolution to the unlawful circumstance.

“All I was thinking was that I’ve got to get all my people across safely,” Faye added.

Sergeant Anthony Hoy, who nominated Faye for the Lions Citizen of the Year award, acknowledged her significant impact on the community through the incident.

“By working collaboratively with SAPOL Faye helped us achieve our vision of ensuring Safer Communities,” he said.

“Faye helped police hold these recidivist offenders accountable for their actions, reducing the risk of further harm to the community.

“Without her unwavering support during this incident, Murray Mallee patrols would not have been able to do their duty, and for that we are sincerely grateful.”

Faye Horstmann is the worthy recipient of the 2025 South Australian Citizen’s Award presented by The Lions Club of the City of Adelaide and SAPOL.

Today, she was presented with the award by Andrew Stacey, President of the Lions Club of the City of Adelaide at a ceremony held at Police Headquarters.

Commissioner of Police Grant Stevens, the City of Adelaide Lions Club and South Australia Police (SAPOL) 2025 Citizen of the Year Faye Horstmann, and City of Adelaide Lions Club President Andrew Stacey pictured at the award ceremony on Thursday 20 November.

Commissioner of Police Grant Stevens, the City of Adelaide Lions Club and South Australia Police (SAPOL) 2025 Citizen of the Year Faye Horstmann, and the nominating officer Sergeant Anthony Hoy.

City of Adelaide Lions Club President Andrew Stacey (right) passes on the award to Commissioner of Police Grant Stevens (left) to present to this year’s recipient.

Source: Australian Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Industry

The International Monetary Fund has today backed Australia’s budget and fiscal strategy at a time of global uncertainty.

The IMF’s Statement highlights Australia’s soft landing, strong economic foundations and our ambitious reform agenda.

It is a powerful endorsement of Labor’s responsible economic and fiscal management.

“Australia is managing a soft landing amid global uncertainty: inflation has declined significantly, the labor market is still strong, and private demand is recovering,” the IMF finds in its Concluding Statement for its 2025 Article IV Mission to Australia.

“The Commonwealth’s fiscal strategy has been effective over the post‑pandemic period,” the Statement says.

Under Labor, inflation is around a third of its peak, debt is down, real wages are growing, unemployment is low, we’ve overseen the creation of more than 1.2 million jobs and interest rates have already fallen three times this year.

This is the soft landing we have been planning for, preparing for and hoping for.

Together we have made remarkable progress in the economy, but we know there is still much more to do because the international economic environment is so uncertain.

We know the best way to build on all the progress we’ve made is to make our economy more resilient and more productive.

The Statement acknowledges the Government’s ambitious agenda across productivity, dynamism and competition.

“The authorities are implementing a series of reforms to modernize competition policy to better support business dynamism, innovation, and investment.”

“Going forward, the authorities’ multi‑pronged agenda as recently discussed at the August 2025 Economic Reform Roundtable, marks an important initiative, but it is essential to maintain momentum with clear implementation plans.”

The IMF also concludes the net zero transformation is a golden opportunity for investment and productivity in Australia.

“The green transition, including the authorities’ recently announced 2035 commitments, offers opportunities for enhancing investment, productivity, and diversification while contributing to Australia’s climate goals,” the Statement says.

We’ve made substantial progress on productivity reform since our Roundtable in August, across housing, environmental approvals, better regulation, artificial intelligence, and simplifying trade, with more underway.

We know the job is far from over because people are still under pressure. That’s why our economic plan is all about helping with the cost of living at the same time as we modernise Australia’s economy to boost living standards.

The best defence against global volatility and the best way to lift wages and living standards over the long term is with a more productive and resilient economy and a stronger budget, and that’s our focus.

Source: Government of Queensland

Issued: 19 Nov 2025

As the 2025–26 turtle nesting season begins across the Great Barrier Reef, new results from the world’s largest green turtle rookery are offering fresh hope for this threatened species.

In an Australian first at this scale, more than 3,000 green turtle eggs were successfully relocated last summer from Raine Island to Sir Charles Hardy Islands (Wuthathi National Park (CYPAL)) to test whether large numbers of turtle eggs can be moved in remote locations to achieve better hatching outcomes.

While Raine Island is the world’s largest green turtle rookery, its nesting beach can be inundated during high tides—drowning eggs when nests are submerged for long periods. Beach reprofiling at the island has been highly successful in mitigating this threat, however risks remain under projected sea level rise. In addition, climate change has caused sand at Raine Island to become too warm for male hatchlings to develop. The sex of baby green turtles is determined by nest temperature—leading to a shortage of juvenile males in the northern Great Barrier Reef.

The 70% hatching rate at the Sir Charles Hardy Islands showed relocation was a viable method. The trial sets the stage for new cooling techniques aimed at producing more males. Building on this success, a second egg relocation trip has just returned, transferring 50 clutches of eggs. Shade structures have been installed over the relocated nests to lower sand temperatures and boost male hatchling production.

This trial is part of the Raine Island Recovery Project—a collaboration between the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service (Department of the Environment, Tourism, Science and Innovation), the Wuthathi and Meriam Nation peoples, and project partners. The project is part of the Reef Joint Field Management Program.

Source: ACT Police

Last update: Wednesday, 19 November 2025 4:36pm

Original publication: Wednesday, 19 November 2025 4:36pm

Source: ACT Police

Last update: Wednesday, 19 November 2025 8:40am

Original publication: Tuesday, 18 November 2025 12:21pm