The message to students used to be simple: “Just say no.”

But in today’s schools, that message is not only outdated, it may be part of the problem.

Across Canada, student substance use is a growing concern. According to the most recent national student survey, 15 per cent of students in Grades 7-12 reported vaping in the past month, and 18 per cent identified using multiple substances at the same time. Many Grade 7 students could not identify the health risks of substances they can easily access.

Schools want to respond more effectively. But many are doing so without a clear roadmap.

New standard based on evidence

A new cross-Canada standard, to be officially launched soon, aims to change that. It sets out what evidence-informed substance use prevention, education and intervention should look like from kindergarten through Grade 12 (K-12).

Rather than prescribing a single program, it provides a shared, evidence-informed framework, outlining the principles, practices and structures that are most likely to make a difference. And it’s designed to complement what provinces, territories and districts are already doing.

But the standard on its own won’t change what happens in schools. Without system-level support, even the best guidance risks sitting on a shelf.

Our national survey of more than 200 K–12 administrators highlights the gap. Nearly 90 per cent reported frequent student substance use challenges in schools, with vaping as the top concern. While almost two-thirds said they were willing to change their approach, far fewer felt they had the evidence, resources or support to do so effectively.

Without clear alternatives, many schools default to familiar responses, particularly zero-tolerance policies that can lead to suspension or expulsion — approaches that can sever the very connections that help buffer young people from substance use harms in the first place.

This isn’t a failing of individual educators. It’s a systems problem.

The new standard responds to the realities young people are navigating today, including the proliferation of vaping, the legalization of cannabis and an increasingly toxic drug supply. Without shared guidance, current approaches vary widely, and many still rely on scare tactics and abstinence-only messaging, which decades of research show don’t have a lasting impact.

The challenge extends beyond the classroom. Our analysis of nearly a decade of Canadian news coverage found that youth substance use is often framed as an individual problem, with young people portrayed as a threat to themselves.

Missing from these narratives are the broader social and structural factors that shape their substance use. This framing makes it harder for schools to adopt approaches that are more supportive, and ultimately, more effective.

How the new standard is different

The new standard was developed through a national partnership between Wellstream: The Canadian Centre for Innovation in Child and Youth Mental Health and Substance Use at the University of British Columbia, the Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction and the Canadian Association of School System Administrators.

Physical Health and Education Canada and the Students Commission of Canada joined to support a robust implementation strategy. Educators, researchers, health professionals and Indigenous interest holders all contributed.

Young people also helped shape this work from the beginning. Youth were part of the technical committee and student voices are embedded as a guiding principle. Research shows that youth-partnered approaches are more relevant, more effective and better aligned with real-world experiences.

Different ages, different strategies

At its core, the standard recognizes a simple but often overlooked reality: What works for a 10-year-old will not work for a 17-year-old.

The new standard is organized around developmental stages and tiers of support. Rather than offering a one-size-fits-all program, it outlines what effective practice looks like in terms of prevention, education and intervention — from building foundational social-emotional skills in early grades to providing targeted supports for older students who are already using substances.

The evidence is clear that effective approaches must evolve with development. Younger children benefit most from building personal competencies. Early adolescents respond to social norms approaches. Older adolescents require strategies focused on social influence and navigating life transitions.

Our own overview of systematic reviews and meta-analysis confirmed that existing programs tend to produce only modest effects, partly because success is often defined too narrowly as abstinence. The new standard broadens this lens, emphasizing outcomes such as well-being, school connectedness and help-seeking.

Read more: Vaping in schools: Ontario’s $30 million for surveillance and security won’t address student needs

It also calls for a shift away from punitive responses. When a student is found vaping, suspension may remove the behaviour temporarily, but it doesn’t address the underlying issue and can push them further away from help. In fact, long-term research shows that practices such as exclusionary discipline and increased police presence in schools are associated with higher rates of substance use over time.

Instead, the new standard emphasizes restorative approaches and support plans that prioritize health, safety and continued engagement in school.

What schools need to make this work

Even the strongest standard cannot succeed without the right conditions for implementation.

Educators are already stretched thin. Without dedicated time, resources and training, this risks becoming another well-intentioned but underused initiative.

Read more: Solving teacher shortages depends on coming together around shared aspirations for children

To support implementation, the standard is accompanied by a self-assessment tool that helps schools identify where their existing practices align with the evidence and where there are opportunities to grow. Rather than functioning as an audit, it’s designed to support continuous improvement, allowing schools to set priorities based on their own context.

But meaningful change will require new tools and investment: time for professional learning, dedicated staff roles and stronger partnerships between education and health systems.

Supporting materials are in development to help bridge this gap. They include training resources, informational materials for school boards, families and students, a network of experienced practitioners and briefs showing how the standard connects to existing international, national and provincial frameworks.

The message to students can no longer be reduced to “just say no.”

Supporting young people today requires approaches that reflect the complexity of their lives — grounded in evidence, connection and care. Schools are ready to move beyond outdated responses. Now education systems must support them in doing so.

Reg Klassen, executive director at Canadian Association of School System Administrators and Ryan Fahey, manager, programs and education, at Physical and Health Education Canada co-authored this story.

This initiative was supported by funding from the Canadian Institutes for Health Research and the Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction through its federal funding. The standard was developed under the management of CSA Group.

Emily Jenkins receives funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research through their Canada Research Chairs program.

Recently, a spate of news coverage has raised concerns about grade inflation in schools across Canada.

These concerns stem in part from policies stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic, when there was widespread cancellation of large-scale tests, freezing of grades during school closures and “compassionate” grading practices that accounted for students’ personal situations.

Read more: What will happen to school grades during the coronavirus pandemic?

Together, these changes led to a spike in average student grades and spurred ongoing worries about grade inflation.

But these concerns aren’t new. Grades have been steadily rising in the United States and Canada for decades. Harvard University’s grade point average, for example, has risen almost every year since the 1950s. So just how serious is post-pandemic grade inflation?

What is grade inflation?

Grade inflation refers to the tendency for students to receive higher grades over time, on average.

Put simply, work that might have been awarded an 85 per cent in 1990 might now receive 90 per cent. The implicit assumption is that this rise in grades is unearned and that student performance has not actually improved.

If grades lose their signalling power — that is, if students, families, universities and employers cannot trust grades or no longer know what they mean — then selection, promotion and other important decisions get undermined.

The facts behind grade inflation

Most studies about grade inflation find that students’ average grades have increased steadily over time. Grade increases during the pandemic are also well-documented.

For example, between 2019 and 2021, average grades for Grade 12 students in the Toronto District School Board increased six per cent. Between 2016 and 2021, the percentage of A-level students taking the ACT, a standardized test for U.S. college admissions, rose more than 13 per cent.

Our search for published studies that document grade inflation in Canada since the pandemic did not yield any findings: there has been no concrete data from Canadian elementary or secondary schools on grades being inflated since 2021.

Current conversations about grade inflation often zero in on the role of grades in college and university admissions because most post-secondary programs use students’ grades in the admissions process.

As a CBC investigation of data from the Council of Ontario Universities has shown, entry averages for Grade 12 students have been rising for some time. Data from the council show that across 16 universities, the median entry grade rose from 81.4 per cent in 2006 to 88.2 per cent in 2021.

The Winnipeg Free Press reports that at the University of Manitoba, 40 per cent of high school students admitted in 2024 had a grade of at least 95 per cent.

Post-secondary supply and demand

But a rising admissions average is different than grade inflation in elementary and secondary school. Increases in university admission averages are a function of multiple factors, most directly supply and demand.

Let’s take the Ontario data as an example. Between 2005 and 2022, the number of applications to Ontario’s universities rose 86.5 per cent. That’s 344,000 more applications. At the same time, the number of students who went on to register also rose, but only by 31.2 per cent.

That means that even if average grades had stayed the same, students with lower grades were increasingly less likely to get admitted because they are competing with more applicants. Demand is outpacing supply.

Avoiding difficult courses

The current supply and demand issue has real consequences on students’ pressure to get higher grades in secondary school. Sixty-one per cent of American teenagers say they feel pressured to get good grades. That focus on grades increases student anxiety and makes students more likely to avoid difficult courses.

Teachers and university instructors also report pressure to give good grades, especially when grades and graduation rates are used to evaluate performance.

These pressures are longstanding — there has always been pressure on students to perform and on teachers to award high grades — but the increased competition for seats in post-secondary provides additional fodder for grade inflation.

Providing additional provincial funding to increase spaces at universities and colleges could help address these pressures.

Why have grades increased?

There are multiple reasons grades increase. First, in almost every province, the share of people graduating high school has been increasing for years.

More high school graduates means more passing grades, which typically results in higher average grades.

And we want students to learn and achieve. On average, secondary school graduates live longer, earn more money and are less likely to be incarcerated.

Shifts in assessment policies, teaching

Second, teachers’ use of evidence-based teaching and assessment strategies is supporting better learning. Shifts in school assessment policies over the past 20 years help students better understand what the learning goals are and what success looks like. These also encourage feedback to close the gap between where students are and their learning goal.

Assessment policies have also separated assessing learning skills and habits from assessing curriculum content knowledge.

Manitoba’s assessment policy, for example, tells teachers to base grades on students’ actual achievement, not on things like effort, participation or attitude.

Such policies acknowledge that docked marks or zeroes are sometimes needed for late or missing work, but caution that such practices may misrepresent student achievement. If grades and behaviour aren’t reported separately, it becomes difficult to know what a “B-” grade represents, for example. It may mean proficient achievement, or it may mean “C-level work with A-level effort,” “A-level work that’s late” or something else.

Schools have also made evidence-based teaching advances, such as using differentiated instructional strategies and culturally responsive teaching. One expected result from these changes should be higher grades.

Is an A still an A?

The purpose of grades is to communicate student achievement. While that purpose is less important than the main purpose of assessment — to improve student learning — students, parents and other stakeholders still depend on grades to make decisions.

Importantly, and contrary to many people’s understanding, teachers don’t grade on a bell curve. There is no limit to the number of As and the quality of learning it represents. In fact, having more students achieving higher grades is good, if the grades are warranted and accurately reflect what students know and are able to do.

Should we be concerned?

Even though the pandemic created a spike in grades, the lack of research since means we do not accurately know the current state of grade inflation or how grades may be assigned differently across different groups of students (for example, across family income, race or gender).

Read more: Are ‘top scholar’ students really so remarkable — or are teachers inflating their grades?

While grades are increasing, they continue to hold their signalling power. Grades can still be trusted alongside other measures to make important decisions.

Even when grades rise, we shouldn’t assume that every rise is unearned or indefensible. The full picture is messier than that.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

As we transition into spring, wildfires are on the minds of many Canadians. In fact, wildfires have already started in some parts of the country.

Over the last decade, the land burned in Canada and many other parts of the world has increased, resulting in more socially and economically disastrous wildfires. Predictions indicate the Canadian situation could worsen over the next few decades as the climate warms and soils and forests get drier.

While the impacts on humans, forests and the animals that live in them are the most observable effects, wildfires also have devastating impacts on aquatic life, especially fish. Many of these occur during and shortly after the fire is out, but others can continue for years, and potentially, decades.

We recently published research conducted in British Columbia into how wildfires are affecting water resources and fish habitat. We used a rainfall simulator to instigate surface runoff and soil erosion at various sites impacted by the 2023 North Lucas Lake wildfire. We showed that erosion is much worse on severely burned and steep slopes.

More water in rivers

One of the immediate impacts on fish after a wildfire comes from the increase in water draining from the burned land and entering rivers. Without thick forest cover to store and use rainfall, more water runs off over the soil towards rivers.

In some situations, soil can become water-repellent, as gases from the burning vegetation enter and condense below the topsoil, forming a barrier and limiting the amount of rainfall that can infiltrate.

The lack of vegetation also means that more heat from the sun reaches the snowpack, which causes snowmelt to occur faster and earlier. This adds to the amount of water entering rivers and also changes the annual timing of spring melt.

The increased supply of runoff entering rivers increases the volume and velocity of water, which can be problematic for fish, including young salmon that, in spring, may be emerging from spawning gravels. These shifts in timing can result in less flow in late summer and fall, a time when adult salmon return to spawn in their natal streams.

Read more: Warming winters are reshaping Canada’s snowpack

More sediment and debris

Roots normally hold the soil together. However, when forests are burned, the soil loses that support system. Our research shows that the lack of vegetation on hill slopes and the increase in runoff also cause more soil erosion.

This eroded sediment gets washed into rivers, increasing the turbidity, or cloudiness, of the water. That can pose serious problems for fish that rely on sight to hunt. Particles in the water column can scratch exposed membranes and tissues, such as gills, eyes and skin, leading to physical damage and impaired function. In extreme cases, it can clog tissues and organs.

Some of the sediment gets deposited on the channel bed. This can smother important food sources, such as insect larvae, snails and worms, and fill in spaces in the gravels where salmon, sturgeon and other species would typically lay their eggs.

The blockage of these spaces in the channel bed prevents water from flowing through the gravels, which should deliver dissolved oxygen and remove harmful carbon dioxide from the gravels. This essentially leads to suffocation.

And there are often debris flows and landslides after wildfires in hilly and mountainous areas, sometimes many years later. This adds further sediment and debris, and in extreme cases can dam rivers, blocking fish stock passage, as happened at the Chilcotin River in British Columbia in 2024.

Another issue is the impact on water temperatures in rivers. Trees provide shade, but when they are gone, sunlight heats the water. Water temperatures are key to the health and survival of many fish and other species, with higher temperatures being a key stressor.

Read more: Heat-resistant corals could help reefs adapt to climate change

Harmful chemicals

Wildfires can cause chemicals to be flushed into rivers. Nutrients like nitrogen and phosphorus, while not necessarily toxic, can cause changes in aquatic ecology and fish size in high concentrations due to wildfires.

They also contribute to harmful algal blooms in rivers and lakes. Evidence suggests that nutrients contained in wildfire ash is being deposited on lakes.

There are also often spikes in metals and organic contaminants in rivers and lakes after a fire. While these are natural byproducts of a fire, our research shows that they concentrate in soils and sediments following wildfires. We have determined that these chemicals can change fish behaviour, cause deformities or, at extreme levels, be toxic to fish.

Studies have also shown that fire retardants — chemicals used to control and extinguish fires — can be toxic to rainbow trout.

Protecting fish

It’s not a hopeless situation. Communities, organizations and Indigenous Peoples are developing innovative ways to help protect and remediate rivers and lakes following wildfires.

In British Columbia, the BC Salmon Restoration and Innovation Fund has funded projects to support salmon, including the Pacific Salmon Foundation’s Wildfire Playbook. This resource compiles best practices and offers guidance to integrate salmon into wildfire recovery planning.

The Skeetchestn Indian Band is partnering with the Pacific Salmon Foundation and others using collaborative, multidisciplinary monitoring and research to understand how the Deadman River watershed is recovering following a catastrophic wildfire in 2021, and to help guide restoration priorities.

Elsewhere, others have investigated how beavers and artificially constructed beaver dams can protect aquatic ecosystems after wildfire.

Wildfires will continue to be part of our future. Knowing their impact on rivers and lakes will help communities make informed decisions around protecting fish and other aquatic life, and ultimately, sustain resilient watersheds.

Smriti Batoye, a postdoctoral fellow at UNBC’s Quesnel River Research Centre, co-authored this article.

Philip N. Owens receives funding from the BC Salmon Restoration and Innovation Fund, Ecofish Research Ltd, Forest Renewal British Columbia, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, Nechako Environmental Enhancement Fund and the University of Northern British Columbia.

Ellen Petticrew receives funding from the British Columbia Salmon Restoration and Innovation Fund, Forest Renewal British Columbia, Natural Sciences and Engineering Canada, and the University of Northern British Columbia.

Jason Raine receives funding from the BC Salmon and Restoration Fund, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Forest Renewal BC, Natural Resources Canada: Multi-Partner Research Initiative, NSERC Alliance and the University of Northern British Columbia.

Kristen Kieta receives funding from the BC Salmon Restoration and Innovation Fund.

Since the legalization of same-sex marriage in Canada in 2005, and through provincial changes to adoption and parentage laws, gay men have gained formal recognition as parents. But my recent research suggests that access to fatherhood for this cohort remains deeply unequal in practice.

In 2021, six per cent of male same-gender couples in Canada were raising children, compared with 24 per cent of female same-gender couples. While we have no data comparing their desire to parent, the gap points to a deeper reality.

Drawing on interviews with 23 Canadian prospective gay fathers, I found that restrictive pathways to parenthood shape which gay men can become parents. Equal rights, it turns out, have not translated into equal access.

For gay men, becoming parents is a complex, expensive and uncertain project.

Why gay fatherhood is harder to access

Gay men typically build families through highly bureaucratized processes, including traditional and gestational surrogacy, donors, foster care and public and private adoption.

Each comes with its own legal, financial and emotional demands. As a consequence, pursuing parenthood typically requires gay men to spend years planning, researching and co-ordinating across multiple institutions — from fertility clinics and lawyers to social workers and government agencies — and sometimes even across countries and jurisdictions.

Many prospective gay fathers become “project managers” of their own journey to parenthood. They must compare pathways, calculate costs and assess risks with no guarantee of success.

In my research, for example, I came one couple who spent years preparing for an adoption. Although they worried about whether it would become a permanent situation, they bought baby items while waiting for the adoption to be finalized. Unfortunately, the placement fell through. Such uncertainty can fuel an emotionally turbulent cycle of hope, loss and cautious optimism.

Cost is the greatest barrier and varies depending on the pathway.

Public adoption and foster care are affordable but involve long waits and limited control. Private adoption can cost between $15,000 and $30,000. Surrogacy, especially gestational surrogacy — where intended parents reimburse pregnancy-related expenses such as medical costs rather than pay a fee for the pregnancy — can exceed the recommended budget of $100,000.

Yet even lower-cost options come with hidden financial barriers. For example, prospective adoptive parents must pass home studies that assess whether they can afford to raise a child.

Wealthier men are better able to pursue surrogacy, which can offer greater control and a biological connection between parent and child. Men with lower incomes may be more likely to pursue adoption or foster care, which involve fewer choices, longer waits and uncertainty.

Once parents, finances still shape gay fathers’ families, including their access to leave and benefits.

Gay fathers face risk, uncertainty and scrutiny

The journey to gay fatherhood is also emotionally demanding.

Foster placements are temporary. Adoptions can fall through at the last minute. Surrogacy arrangements can fail. Some face repeated setbacks.

Prospective adoptive fathers are subject to background checks, home inspections, interviews and even psychological evaluations. Many of these screening processes exist to protect children and ensure stable placements. But when oversight is excessively burdensome or inconsistently applied, it can also create barriers that some cannot overcome.

In addition, gay men must often educate institutions, correcting parental forms that assume there is a mother or explaining their families to hospitals, schools and insurers.

These men are not just building families. They are working to make their families properly acknowledged within systems that were not designed for them.

What policymakers could do differently

These challenges demand attention as 2SLGBTQI+ families grow and policymakers in B.C. and Ontario, as well as other Canadian jurisdictions, revisit fertility and adoption funding, as well as aspects of child welfare and adoption systems.

Although adoption is only one possible outcome, most youth in care are never adopted. About 2,000 children in child welfare care are adopted each years, while at least 61,104 children and youth were in out-of-home care in Canada in 2022. Reducing barriers to male same-gender parents could help connect more children with stable, supportive homes.

The gap between formal equality and unequal access raises an important question: What does it really take to make gay fatherhood truly accessible? If access depends on income, free time and the ability to navigate complex systems, equality in law is not equality in practice.

There are practical ways to reduce these barriers. Governments could expand tax credits and other financial supports for adoption and surrogacy, standardize fertility coverage across provinces and reduce administrative hurdles.

Insurance companies could cover prospective parents whose costly journey through IVF may produce no viable embryos or pregnancies. Governments and social services can improve information and support so prospective queer parents do not need to research how to navigate these pathways alone. Medical services, insurance companies and law firms can also update policies to better recognize diverse families.

Read more: 7 tips for LGBTQ parents to help schools fight stigma and ignorance

Legal recognition is only the beginning

Since 2005, Canada has made progress in recognizing the rights of 2SLGBTQI+ families. But recognition is not the same as access.

For many gay men, building a two-father family still requires navigating pathways that are complex, uncertain and costly. The significantly lower rates of gay fatherhood, compared with lesbian and heterosexual parenthood, suggest the cumulative effect of these barriers.

If policymakers are serious about supporting 2SLGBTQI+ families, this disparity should be treated as a policy problem. Until these barriers are addressed, Canada cannot claim that parenthood is accessible to all.

S. W. Underwood receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

With the Montreal Canadiens now competing in the second round of the Stanley Cup Playoffs against the Buffalo Sabres, their fans, often described as les fidèles (the faithful), continue to show devotion for their beloved team, les Glorieux, in perhaps surprising ways.

One rabbi posted a prayer for the Canadiens on his Facebook page. A church in St-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Que., hosted watch parties for every playoff game. Some fans in Habs jerseys were even seen crawling up the steps to St. Joseph’s Oratory in the past.

The jerseys are called la sainte flanelle (the holy cloth), while some players wearing them are given otherworldly nicknames. Former NHL goaltenders Patrick Roy and Carey Price are called “St. Patrick” and “Jesus Price.” The late great Guy Lafleur was known as le démon blond.

These acts might look strange to outsiders. But as scholars of religion, we think they reveal something about why hockey matters so much to fans. People often find the religious or spiritual in everyday life, and hockey is no different.

We have written books about connections among sport, spirituality and religion, and told the story of “Hockey Priest” Father David Bauer, who sought higher ideals in the game.

We’re currently drafting a book about what matters most in hockey, centred around three things: beauty, belonging and believing. Together, these explain what is so out-of-the-ordinary and enchanting about hockey, and why it can move people so deeply.

Beauty

Plato, writing in the Phaedrus, described beauty as the thing that “causes the soul to grow wings.” He meant there is something transcendent about beauty, and that our appreciation of beautiful things carries us to higher truths.

Beauty lies at the heart of our attraction to hockey. Skilful displays on the ice — like stickhandling, booming shots and toe-drags — can lift our spirits. Seeing beauty come alive on the ice takes people beyond the humdrum of regular life and toward something transcendent or special.

Players like Lane Hutson stir a sense of wonder. Hutson’s skating and spatial intelligence have been exceptional in the playoffs. In Game 3 of the first round against Tampa Bay, he fielded a pass from Alexandre Texier and scored on a slap shot to win it for the Canadiens in overtime.

Beauty is also seen in hockey’s personalities and unforgettable stories. In March 2025, after Brendan Gallagher’s mother died from a battle with Stage 4 brain cancer, a fan reached out to him on social media.

She had won his 2022 Hockey Fights Cancer jersey — the one on which he had written “I Fight For Mom” — at a Canadiens Children’s Foundation auction, and offered to give it back. He accepted, and in April 2025, the two met on the Bell Centre ice for a jersey swap.

It was a beautiful moment of humanity between the two.

Belonging

Belonging is a core spiritual need. When people feel part of a community, they have a greater sense of meaning, self-worth and hope. Hockey, at its best, enhances that sense of belonging.

Even the Canadiens’ nickname, the Habs (or les Habitants), refers to the early French settlers of Québec. The team has always carried a community’s identity, for better or for worse.

This playoff run has provided striking examples of the sport bridging real divides. On May 5, just before Game 1 of the Sabres-Canadiens series, Niagara Falls, on the Canada-U.S. border, glowed in the colours of both teams: the Horseshoe Falls in red and white for the Canadiens, the American Falls in blue and gold for the Sabres. Hockey has the power to unite even amid bitter political division.

The falls were not the only example of this. A week earlier, during Game 5 of the Eastern Conference First Round between the Sabres and the Boston Bruins, the microphone cut out for singer Cami Clune during “O Canada.” Immediately, the crowd at Buffalo’s KeyBank Center stepped in themselves.

As a border city, Buffalo is the only NHL team to play both national anthems before every home game regardless of opponent as a sign of respect and connection.

This mattered more than it might have in another year and in a different political context. Just months earlier, during the 4 Nations Face-Off, fans jeered opposing anthems on both sides of the border. The Buffalo moment was a different kind of answer.

Believing

Researchers have shown that people find the sacred in many different things, including religion, gardening, music and sport. Wherever people find the sacred, they experience a sense of the extraordinary, ineffability and deeper meaning.

Psychologist Kenneth I. Pargament, in fact, defines spirituality as “the search for the sacred.” Philosophers Hubert Dreyfus and Sean Kelly argue that many people have lost the ability to experience the sacred in this secular age, and that sport is one of the few places where people still encounter wonder and beauty.

Read more: Why sport is a spiritual experience – and failure can help

The thirst for meaning, beauty and wonder doesn’t go away. Hockey is one place where many seem to find a sense of mystery and uplifting hope, passion and awe. Discovering the sacred in hockey helps fans feel a part of something bigger than themselves; something that has meaning beyond the ordinary minutia. Intense moments in sport can bring fans an implicit sense of meaning.

The answer to meaning and happiness may not be a complicated big picture but in these smaller moments of discovering the sacred. But a word of caution: as Paragament and his team have found, when we discover the sacred in something, there are implications for our everyday lives.

Fans organize their schedules around game time. They invest in the team by buying jerseys, tickets and merchandise. They defend their teams fiercely against criticism. And when their team loses, particularly in an elimination game, the grief can be devastating.

That deep sense of loss is intensified for those who experience a sense of the sacred in hockey and their team. This intersection of spirituality with the meaning of hockey can explain why a loss can be more devastating that might seem understandable. For many people, hockey is more than just a game.

Right now, two Montréal teams are competing for championships. The Canadiens and the Sabres are tied after two games. The Victoire — Montréal’s PWHL team — are tied 1-1 with the Minnesota Frost in their semifinal, after captain Marie-Philip Poulin scored a triple-overtime winner on May 6.

Whether either team manages to bring a trophy home, the devotion surrounding both is already extraordinary.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

No wonder Jim Chalmers was anxious to use every opportunity on Sunday to weigh in on the Liberals’ “bloodbath” in Farrer.

It was extremely good news for a treasurer who is having to explain a budget in which key election promises on taxes will be broken.

The Liberals’ utter disaster provides an ideal “look at them” opportunity for the government to capitalise on.

When Shadow Treasurer Tim Wilson appeared on the ABC for a pre-budget interview on Sunday, he was inevitably peppered with questions about One Nation.

Were the Liberals right or wrong to preference One Nation in over independent Michelle Milthorpe? “Well it was a call that was made and it’s obviously one that you know has delivered a result”, Wilson said, although he went on to argue that another course wouldn’t have made any difference – many people did their own thing with their preferences.

The truth is the horse bolted some time ago in the internal Liberal argument about whether they should or should not preference One Nation. They will do so when they feel it’s to their advantage. For most (albeit not all) Liberals, preferencing One Nation has become a matter of pragmatism rather than morality.

On pragmatic grounds there would have been a case to help Milthorpe rather than One Nation, but the Liberals would have faced a revolt from supporters and didn’t seem galvanised by the dangers of platforming the surging party.

If the Liberals had preferenced Milthorpe, she would have done better but still not won.

Wilson was also pressed on whether he was “open to forming any sort of minority government with One Nation MPs”.

Now that the preference question is no longer a beach head, this issue – despite being one for the distant horizon – will dog the Coalition from now on. It is a sort of reprise of the questions Labor MPs used to face about whether they’d be willing to form government with the Greens.

Wilson’s position was confusing. “My objective is to make sure that the Liberal Party is in a position to govern as strongly as possible. Of course we traditionally form a coalition with the National Party, but it’s up to the Australian people to decide who they want to vote for. But I can tell you quite clearly my objective is to make sure that Liberals beat One Nation candidates.”

The Liberals not only don’t know what they themselves stand for – unsurprisingly, they now don’t know the answer to the related question of how closely, when it came to the point, they’d be willing to embrace One Nation.

Some voters won’t care about the answer to that question. But others, especially in urban areas, will demand to know.

Back at Tuesday’s budget, Chalmers was attempting to mimic escape artist Houdini as he tried to avoid being burned by the fire of broken promises.

His explanation, reiterated in his Sunday Sky News interview, went like this. Before the election the government’s housing policy was focused laser-like on supply. But he had increasingly come to the view “we need to go beyond supply” although supply remained “the main game”.

Given the election was just a year ago, it’s hard to see how this line is credible. Moreover, the perception last term was Chalmers was interested in pursuing changes to negative gearing at some stage, reinforced by the fact that he had treasury undertake some modelling.

It will be even more telling to hear, post-budget, how the prime minister squares his old and new positions on tax changes. But he will be confident he can ride out the politics of the U-turn. After all, he has a huge majority and haven’t critics been calling for him to be bolder and spend political capital?

Of course there is a recent precedent for a budget of broken promises and ambitious reform doing massive harm to a government with a thumping majority – the Abbott-Hockey budget of 2014.

But we are unlikely to see such an outcome from Tuesday’s budget. Politically, Albanese and Chalmers are cleverer than Tony Abbott and Joe Hockey were. The government will lose some paint for breaking its word, but the budget will go out of its way to keep the chassis in solid shape.

Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

In the grasslands and highlands of western Cameroon, some animals are believed to be sacred. Within the region’s indigenous kingdoms (fondoms), many of these animals are also considered to be royal. They include wild cats (like cheetahs, leopards, lions, tigers), buffaloes, elephants, porcupines, cowries (sea snails), and a brightly coloured bird called the Bannerman’s turaco.

These species carry deep cultural and spiritual significance. They are, for example, often used to decorate royals (kings, queens and queen mothers) or to award royal distinctions to deserving individuals. Their body parts can be used to make crowns, bedding, footstools, bangles or necklaces for royalty. Red feathers from the Bannerman’s turaco are used to distinguish warriors and hunters.

Here, indigenous cultural practices can both sustain and decimate biodiversity. The names of some of these animals, especially wild cats, are used as praise names for kings. But custom dictates that when these animals are found, they must be killed and taken to the palace as a tribute.

Most are either locally extinct or critically endangered. Except for cowries and porcupines, all these animals are included on the red list of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature.

Biodiversity loss caused by humans is accelerating at alarming rates around the world. This includes biodiversity hotspots like the Congo Basin in central Africa, which Cameroon is part of. Thousands of species have been identified in the basin, 30% of which are endemic (native).

Read more: Nuer people have a sacred connection to birds – it can guide conservation in Ethiopia and South Sudan

I am a scholar who works across disciplines. These include the arts, literature and cultural studies; environmental humanities; sustainability science; anticipatory governance and future generations; strategic foresight and futures studies.

In a recent study, I explored how literary creativity combined with foresight workshops might help change how people view these animals. Could they offer more hopeful futures for these unique species?

The role of literature

Literary texts like plays, poems and novels offer insights into dealing with climate and ecological challenges in the Congo Basin. (Even in the case of less popular but highly important species such as insects.)

This is the case in many works by anglophone Cameroonian authors, like Athanasius Nsahlai, Kenjo Jumbam, J.K. Bannavti, and John Nkengasong.

Read more: ‘A healthy earth may be ugly’: How literary art can help us value insect conservation

Their stories have the potential to warn against the destruction of royal and sacred animals. They can also help shape new visions for the future of biodiversity conservation.

I draw on postcolonial ecocriticism (the relationship between literature, culture, the environment and history) and narrative foresight (what stories can reveal about the future) in my study. I analyse how these books engage with royal and sacred animals in ways that challenge environmentally unfriendly cultural practices, and how they propose new forms of relations between humans and other animals.

Jumbam’s novella, Lukong and the Leopard, for instance, tells the story of a young man called Lukong. The son of an outcast from the Nso kingdom, he helps capture a lion. Surprisingly the king demands it be brought to his palace alive. Just as Lukong is to be decorated by the king, his father sneaks in. Fearing for his son’s life, he sets the lion free.

In a sense, the story challenges the old cultural practice of killing royal animals. It invites readers to change how they see and relate with these animals in order to protect them.

Workshops

Stories like this can then be taken into foresight workshop sessions. Narrative foresight meets group participation to create what is called participatory foresight. Participants and stakeholders from diverse backgrounds are brought together to explore future scenarios, the challenges that shape them and what can drive change.

As part of my research, I organised a day of participatory foresight workshops on #CongoBasinFutures and #RoyalAnimalsFutures in Yaoundé, Cameroon.

Over 30 participants across a range of ages, genders and interests were brought together. They included teachers, researchers, environmentalists, farmers, nurses, writers, filmmakers, musicians, journalists, students, civil society workers, policymakers, and indigenous kings (fons).

Using foresight tools, participants were asked to discuss motivations as well as historical barriers while envisioning more hopeful futures for royal and sacred animals. The workshops were designed to include literary narratives on the plight of these animals.

They drew on current trends and signals of change, like climate change, biodiversity loss and indigenous cultural practices. They imagined new futures and then collectively proposed several policy interventions that could be practical solutions.

Shaping better policies

Cameroon does have environmental laws aimed at protecting biodiversity, but they are not effectively implemented. My study – and our workshop – seeks to complement these laws and contribute to their effective use in practice. Ideas coming out of the workshop include:

• Creative arts and education should be used to help raise awareness about protecting royal animals and biodiversity. This could include programmes like our workshop, creative competitions and updating educational curricula.

• Instead of decorating those who kill, local hunters should be rewarded when they spot and report the presence of royal animals for monitoring and preservation. The use of artificial animal parts for traditional ceremonies should be encouraged.

• Policy should encourage research into the controlled breeding of endangered royal and sacred animals and the promotion of ecotourism around these animals. Special parks and reserves could combine arts and royal animals to attract tourists. Revenue could improve livelihoods, sustain cultures, and promote environmental conservation.

• Environmental regulation should be strengthened through collaboration with all stakeholders, including indigenous authorities and local communities. Hunting of certain animals could be regulated. Hunting seasons and quotas for certain species could be in place. Indigenous leaders and communities could be engaged to adapt and modernise cultural practices in an era of environmental collapse.

Read more: Literature from the Congo Basin offers ways to address the climate crisis

But we must move from recommendations into action. Otherwise, ideas from studies like this will remain good on paper only, like most environmental laws in Cameroon. If so, royal animals and other species will continue to be threatened by extinction.

Kenneth Nsah Mala receives funding from the University of Cologne (Germany), the British Council, and the School of International Futures (SOIF).

One Nation’s surge can no longer be seen as a blip or an aberration. As the results in the Farrer byelection showed, the right-wing populist party – which has been hovering on the fringes of Australian politics for 30 years – is now a serious electoral force.

While the byelection was considered likely to be a close contest between One Nation’s David Farley and independent Michelle Milthorpe, in the end voters delivered an easy win to Farley. His is the first One Nation victory in a federal House of Representatives seat.

Results on Sunday morning showed Farley attained 57.3% of the two-candidate preferred vote against Milthorpe’s 42.7%. Primary votes for One Nation surged from 6.6% in the 2025 election, to 39.4% as of Sunday morning. Milthorpe’s primary increased 20% to 28.4%, likely benefitting from Labor’s decision not to contest the byelection.

The increased support for One Nation was largely drawn from the previous Liberal vote. One Nation was also helped considerably by the Liberals opting to preference Farley over Milthorpe. Farley received approximately 60% of Coalition preferences. The Liberal total declined from the 43.4% primary achieved by Sussan Ley in 2025, to an anaemic 12.4% for new Liberal candidate Raissa Butkowski.

This outcome represents a dramatic collapse in Coalition support. But it also shows a huge surge in support for One Nation, which is now eyeing November’s Victorian state election and the next federal poll in 2028.

Dissatisfaction in the regions

Farrer is now the third strong result for One Nation in 2026, following the South Australian state election and the Nepean state byelection in Victoria. Each of these contests has seen high polling results for One Nation translate into real election results.

Farrer is centred around the inland City of Albury and surrounding agricultural areas in south-west New South Wales. Local issues that came to the fore throughout the campaign were funding for the Albury hospital, and the Albanese government’s increase of water buybacks, which have driven up costs for irrigators.

While these are not issues that resonate in metropolitan Australia, they are certainly felt in other regional and rural electorates. Combined with One Nation’s focus on cost of living and immigration, the party effectively harnessed voter dissatisfaction with long-term Coalition representation.

Coalition in deep water

Traditionally, byelections have been considered an opportunity for voters to deliver a “free kick” against sitting governments, without the prospect of changing the government. By this reading, the Farrer result could be understood as an opportunity for voters to express dissatisfaction with the establishment political parties, exacerbated by a cost of living crisis.

However, this result could also be read as more akin to the Aston 2023 and Wentworth 2018 byelections. In Aston, the Liberals lost a seat in Melbourne’s leafy eastern suburbs they had held since 1990. It also represented the first seat lost to an incumbent government in a byelection since 1921. Labor went on to hold the seat in the 2025 federal election, also gaining the seats of Deakin and Menzies in eastern Melbourne.

In Wentworth, Kerryn Phelps defeated the Liberals in a byelection caused by the resignation of Malcolm Turnbull. Wentworth went on to become the prototype for other independents – particularly the “Teals” – across northern Sydney. These socially progressive and fiscally moderate-conservative independents have since been successful in traditional moderate Liberal bastions such as Warringah, Mackellar and Bradfield.

The loss of Wentworth heralded a wave of losses for moderate Liberals in the inner city. This has left the Coalition mainly composed of rural and regional members. The Coalition’s existential task is to prevent the Farrer result from being replicated in similar seats and decimating its remaining conservative rural and regional base.

One Nation’s trajectory

This is a landmark result for One Nation. However, the party has had difficulty maintaining the loyalty of its elected members, both in the 1990s, and since 2016. For example, after its breakthrough in the Queensland 1998 state election, none of the 11 members the party elected remained in the organisation throughout the parliamentary term.

Throughout the Farrer campaign there were questions around Farley’s party loyalties. With a background in agribusiness, Farley had been affiliated with the Nationals. More contentious, however, was his involvement with the Labor party as recently as 2023, his consideration of an independent candidacy, and his endorsement of Milthorpe in 2025.

Farley also contradicted One Nation’s immigration policy on the campaign trail, stating net annual migration of approximately 306,000 per year was “probably not” too high. This is far beyond One Nation’s position of capping net migration at 130,000.

The Farrer result helps to solidify One Nation as a political force in rural and regional Australia. It may encourage Pauline Hanson and Barnaby Joyce to contest lower house electorates rather than the Senate in the 2028 federal election. This could see One Nation become a party with explicit coalition bargaining power.

This exacerbates the Coalition’s dilemma in handling One Nation, with it seeming to open the door to potential future cooperation in government.

However, Labor also faces a challenge – with Joyce signalling its Western Sydney heartland as an electoral target and the beleaguered Allan government in Victoria facing an election in November.

Josh Sunman does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Elections in England, Scotland and Wales have put further pressure on Sir Keir Starmer’s already troubled leadership of the United Kingdom’s Labour government.

These results are further evidence of significant trends in all liberal democracies – not least Australia.

First, they suggest the era of dominance by two major parties is coming to an end, if not already over. Support for the major parties is withering on the vine.

Second, the Greens have peeled young and Muslim voters from Labour, many of whom are dissatisfied with Starmer’s approach to the conflict in Gaza and its domestic spillovers.

Finally, nationalism had a good night. Scotland, Wales are all now governed by centre-left secessionist parties, albeit without majorities. The radical right populist Reform UK is ascendant in England.

Given the scale and significance of Labour’s losses, many will be tempted to push the eject button on Starmer’s leadership. An orderly transition to a new leader would be ideal for Labour.

However, the party will need a change of philosophy as much as a change of leader to overcome the deep structural problems facing all centrist parties in liberal democracies.

The fragmentation of Britain

Two voting blocs have solidified since Brexit: one is conservative; the other progressive.

However, there is significant contestation within these blocs. The progressive bloc is a coalition of urban, educated, younger voters and minorities (some of whom may be quite conservative on social issues).

Conversely, the right of British politics now exists in the “upside down” from the progressive side: these are older, less educated voters living in the shires.

Rarely do people from the two blocs meet in person, with the possible exception of Christmas dinner when inter-generational divides in political attitudes are given voice over roast beef/chestnut Wellington and Yorkshire pudding.

Importantly, the United Kingdom has shifted from a party system dominated by two main parties – Conservatives and Labour – into a multi-party system within a pluri-national polity. This makes governing more complex, and is partly the reason why Britain has become the “new Italy”, regularly ditching its leaders in a poll-driven attempt to address structural changes in British politics.

Labour and the Greens

In a similar result to the 2025 Australian election, the British Labour party won government in 2024 with a scoreline that flattered the victors. Labour won 411 out of 650 seats in the Westminster parliament; or 63% of the seats from 34% of the vote.

This has been described as a “loveless landslide”. True to form, Labour quickly set about alienating its own supporters, further weakening its already fragile electoral coalition. Admittedly, all centre-left governments tend to do this, but this alacrity with which this happened in Britain sets this Labour government apart.

The Greens have gained significant momentum over the past two years. Its membership has swelled, although many of these are disaffected Jeremy Corbyn supporters from the Labour left. How these newbies and older environmentalists will mix remains to be seen.

However, the Greens will be relishing some experience of local government to take with them into future elections.

The rise of Reform UK

Having suffered its worst ever election defeat in 2024, the venerable and adaptable Conservative Party has struggled to prevent its former voters – and many high profile politicians – from defecting to Reform UK.

Reform UK is now the ascendant right wing force in local government. It will take a lot of political momentum into the next UK-wide elections scheduled for 2029. It is not impossible that its high profile leader, Nigel Farage, may be the next UK prime minister.

The future of the United Kingdom

Labour lost Wales – where it had dominated for 100 years – to the notionally secessionist party, Plaid Cymru.

The Scottish National Party – similarly secessionist – defied political gravity to remain the largest party in Scotland for almost 20 years, even though Reform had its first major breakthrough into Scottish politics.

In England the picture was different: British nativism is ascendant in English politics. Hard-liners within Reform will be emboldened by seeming support for their anti-immigration policies.

The future of Sir Keir Starmer

All of this makes Starmer’s leadership more precarious than it was before (which was pretty shaky). There are several contenders to take Starmer’s place. Yet leaving aside how the electorate might take to yet another defenestration of a British prime minister, each prospective candidate is problematic in some way.

Andy Burnham, the Mayor of Greater Manchester and so-called “King of the North” is not actually an MP; Angela Raynor has a potentially damaging tax investigation hanging over her head; Ed Miliband already lost an election as Labour leader in 2015; and Wes Streeting is not popular on the left of the party, or in his constituency for that matter, which he holds by a very slim margin.

Whoever becomes prime minister will have a difficult job on their hands. Reform is easy to determine but difficult to enact.

Major structural changes – such as building a new economy, or changing the first-past-the-post voting system – would be a good start, but will be far from easy. Voters will also need to be patient, but they will want to see evidence of the new direction that the insurgents are promising. Of course, there is no consensus either about what needs to change – more wind farms versus fewer immigrants – further complicating a fragmented political landscape.

But one result from the elections is clear: business-as-usual from the “grown-ups in the room” is not what this political moment requires.

Ben Wellings does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

One Nation’s smashing victory in Farrer fires up the insurgent party, and casts fresh doubts over the future of the Liberal Party.

The result could not be a more devastating rebuff for Liberal leader Angus Taylor, who has been found wanting after only months in the job. This puts him under even more pressure for next week’s budget reply.

The result will raise more doubts about whether, or for how long, Taylor will survive as leader, given Andrew Hastie, a political freelancer, waits in the wings.

Taylor said after the result, “For too long, we have been a party of convenience, not of conviction, and that must change”, and again defaulted to his immigration lines. He repeated his slogan, “If the vote sprays, Labor stays”. In Farrer, it was less a matter of spraying as deserting.

One might say deposed Liberal leader Sussan Ley extracted her ultimate revenge in triggering the byelection. Once she announced she was quitting the seat, it was always potentially bad news for her successor and her party.

Ley, overseas and invisible for the campaign, re-emerged on Saturday night with a statement rejecting the argument Taylor has been making about the impact of the Coalition bust ups. She also declared: “On the day the leadership spilled in February, the new leader said the Liberal Party needed to ‘change or die’. Three months later, the result in Farrer demonstrates that statement to be far truer today than it ever was then.”

The Liberal vote has collapsed to an extraordinary low. Last election Ley received a primary vote of about 43%. This time, on Saturday night’s numbers, the Liberals were polling about 12%.

The Liberals had a weak candidate in Raissa Butkowski. One reason was the local party was in no state to throw up a strong contender.

The Nationals, able to be in the field for the first time in a quarter of a century, were polling just behind the Liberals (about 10%) on Saturday night. Their leader Matt Canavan, in contrast to Taylor, was conspicuous by his presence in the campaign, figuratively and often literally camped in the electorate.

This is the first time One Nation has won a House of Representatives seat.

The result is a case study of the wider mood of disillusionment and anger in the Australian electorate. The “parties of government” are on the nose, and their situation will likely only get worse. Commentators were noting the comparison with the United Kingdom, where Labour was taking a towelling in local elections.

One Nation had a scratchy campaign towards the end, after revelations that its candidate, David Farley, had previously wanted to be a candidate for Labor and in the 2025 election embraced independent Michelle Milthorpe, his opponent at this election, as a “straight shooter”. He also had slip ups in his public comments.

The voters didn’t care. Their mood was sour; their eyes were on Pauline Hanson, who articulated their grievances.

The Farrer seat tells a tale of two electorates – Albury, the urban area and about a third of the voters where Milthorpe did extremely well in 2025, and the sprawling scattered areas of small towns and rural holdings.

Milthorpe, who has had a swing of about 8% to her, could not lift her vote to catch the One Nation surge, which had a swing to it of 34% (having polled under 7% last time). Labor’s decision not to contest the seat did not give Milthorpe the assistance that might have been expected.

Milthorpe’s primary vote is about 28% to Farley’s 40%. On a two candidate basis Farley leads Milthorpe about 59-41%.

A year ago the time suited Milthorpe, when Farrer voters wanted to give a slap to its Liberal MP. This year, the voters wanted to take an axe to the system.

One Nation’s victory in Farrer follows a successful result in South Australia, where the party snatched four lower house seats and three in the upper house.

On Saturday night Hanson was ecstatic, projecting the vote to a much wider success:

“This is a journey that we’re going to go on, that we are going to look forward to in the future and the people out there who may be watching this - we’re coming after those other seats. If they have not represented you, you are not going to be the forgotten people anymore”.

The Farrer triumph comes before the crucial Victorian poll in November. The state Liberals, despite retaining Nepean in last weekend’s byelection, will be unnerved by the Farrer result. Many regional areas appear to be for the taking, given Victorians’ desire to rid themselves of the Allan government but their apprehension about the Liberals’ state of unreadiness. One Nation will present a vehicle for a primal political scream.

Federal Labor knows that while One Nation is presently the Coalition’s problem, it could become Labor’s too. At the raucous One Nation function on Saturday night, Barnaby Joyce declared, “Western Sydney here we come”. It might be hubris of course, but if the community mood doesn’t change, some outer suburban Labor seats could become vulnerable.

Helen Haines, the community independent who holds the Victorian seat of Indi across the Murray from Farrer, declared the result was “the end of business as usual in Farrer”.

We might say it’s also the end of business as usual for the Liberal Party, whatever that will mean.

Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

One Nation has won the Farrer federal byelection – the first time the party has won an election for a federal House of Representatives seat. At the same time, the Liberal vote has crashed, with independent Michelle Milthorpe running second on Saturday night.

The byelection in the regional New South Wales seat was triggered by former Liberal leader Sussan Ley’s resignation. At the 2025 general election, Ley had defeated independent Michelle Milthorpe in Farrer by 56.2–43.8.

With 41% of enrolled voters counted for the byelection, The Poll Bludger’s results system is projecting that One Nation’s David Farley will defeat Milthorpe by 58.0–42.0 when all votes are counted.

Current primary votes are 42.3% Farley (up 35.1% on One Nation’s 2025 vote), 25.6% Milthorpe (up 7.0%), 11.2% Liberals (down 32.2%) 9.7% Nationals (new), 2.7% Legalisse Cannabis (new), 2.4% Greens (down 2.8%) and 2.0% Shooters (down 1.7%). Labor didn’t contest after winning 15.1% in 2025.

Projections for final primary votes are 41.7% Farley, 27.0% Milthorpe, 11.3% Liberals and 9.9% Nationals. The majority of preferences come from the Liberals and Nationals to One Nation, and Milthorpe’s preference share of 48.0% is higher than I expected given the unfavourable sources. But One Nation’s large lead on primary votes will give them an easy win after preferences.

National polls have recently had One Nation in second place on primary votes behind Labor and ahead of the Coalition. If these polls are accurate, One Nation should be winning seats like Farrer, which is rural and strongly conservative.

YouGov poll: Labor rebounds from slump in prior poll

A national YouGov poll for Sky News, conducted April 28 to May 5 from a sample presumably of 1,500, gave Labor 30% of the primary vote (up three since the April 14–21 YouGov poll), One Nation 24% (down three), the Coalition 21% (up one), the Greens 14% (steady), independents 5% (steady) and others 6% (down one).

By respondent preferences, Labor led the Coalition by 54–46, a one-point gain for Labor. Labor led One Nation by a blowout 57–43, a five-point gain for Labor.

Anthony Albanese’s net approval was up five points to -14, with 54% dissatisfied and 40% satisfied. Angus Taylor’s net approval was up one point to -4 (42% dissatisfied, 38% satisfied). Albanese led Taylor as better PM by 45–36 (44–39 previously). He led Pauline Hanson by 54–35 (50–39).

Asked about their personal financial situation in the past three months, 47% of those polled said it was worse, 43% no change and just 7% better. On what Labor should prioritise in Tuesday’s budget, 36% selected budget savings, 33% energy subsidies or a fuel excise cut, 20% more social services and welfare and 11% income tax cuts.

Morgan poll

A national Morgan poll, conducted April 27 to May 3 from a sample of 1,681, gave Labor 29.5% of the primary vote (down 0.5 since the April 20–26 Morgan poll), the Coalition 24% (up 1.5), One Nation 21.5% (down one), the Greens 13% (down one) and all Others 12% (up one).

By respondent preferences, Labor led the Coalition by an unchanged 54.5–45.5. By 2025 election preference flows, Labor led by 53–47, a one-point gain for the Coalition.

UK Labour’s dismal performance at Welsh, Scottish and English local elections

On Thursday, Welsh and Scottish parliamentary elections and English local government elections occurred, which I covered for The Poll Bludger. Labour has dominated Wales since the first devolved election in 1999, but won just nine of 96 seats, with the left-wing nationalist Plaid Cymru taking 43 seats and the populist right Reform 34.

In Scotland, the left-wing nationalist SNP (58 of 129 seats) and the Greens (15 seats) combined retained a clear majority, with Labour tied for second with Reform on 17 seats.

In England, Labour has lost over 1,400 council seats, while Reform won over 1,400. The BBC’s Projected National Share that estimates a national vote share from council elections had Reform on 26%, the Greens 18%, Labour 17%, the Conservatives 17% and the Liberal Democrats 16%.

Updates on Tasmanian upper house elections

I covered the May 2 Tasmanian upper house elections for Huon and Rosevears last Monday. After postals were counted Thursday, a full distribution of preferences in Huon resulted in left-wing independent Clare Glade-Wright defeating conservative independent incumbent Dean Harriss by 52.5–47.5.

Primary votes were 30.8% Harriss, 27.5% Glade-Wright, 16.7% Labor, 15.0% Greens and 10.0% combined for two other independents.

In Rosevears, the electoral commission will wait until the final postal votes are received on Tuesday before commencing the distribution of preferences owing to a close margin between the bottom two candidates that could be affected by late postals. The Liberals are almost certain to retain.

Final SA upper house results

At the March 21 South Australian election, eleven of the 22 upper house seats were elected using statewide proportional representation with preferences. A quota for election was one-twelfth of the vote or 8.3%. Upper house members have eight-year terms with half elected every four years.

ABC election analyst Antony Green has analysis of the upper house result. Final primary votes gave Labor 4.41 quotas, One Nation 2.93, the Liberals 2.13, the Greens 1.22, Legalise Cannabis 0.28 and Family First 0.26.

The electronic distribution of preferences was finally conducted last Monday. As expected, Labor won five of the 11 seats (up one since 2018, the last time these seats were up), One Nation three (up three), the Liberals two (down two) and the Greens one (steady). SA-Best lost its two seats.

In the distribution of preferences, One Nation’s third candidate made a full quota, while Labor’s fifth was elected with 0.57 quotas. The Greens’ second surpassed both Legalise Cannabis and Family First, to be runner-up with 0.46 quotas.

Preferences beyond a “1” for an above the line group are entirely optional in the SA upper house. With the final seat decided between Labor and the Greens, right-wing voters were likely to exhaust their preferences.

In 2022, Labor won five seats, the Liberals four, the Greens one and One Nation one. One Nation’s winner at that election, Sarah Game, has defected. The upper house total is ten Labor out of 22, six Liberals, three One Nation, two Greens and Game. Labor and the Greens combined have 12 seats, a majority.

Adrian Beaumont does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

After all the predictions, projections and polling permutations, Welsh Labour’s defeat has been confirmed.

In 1985, Welsh historian Gwyn Alf Williams described Labour majorities standing “like Aneurin Bevan’s memorial stones”. Forty years on, the stones have finally been eroded. On the worst day for the party in its history in Wales, even its leader, Eluned Morgan, lost her seat.

After more than a century as Wales’ dominant political force, the figures and symbols that once anchored Welsh Labour now lie broken.

The scale of the defeat is difficult to overstate. Losses in historic heartlands that have voted Labour consistently for more than a century represent a devastating indictment of a party that has long mistaken dominance for consent. This is not a routine electoral setback, but a collapse.

Short-term factors played their part. Welsh Labour’s decision to abandon its “standing up for Wales” rhetoric and attach itself to an unpopular Keir Starmer-led UK government led the party to surrender one of its strongest political identities.

Read more: Elections 2026: Experts react to the Reform surge and Labour losses

Furthermore, the short-lived, scandal-ridden leadership of Vaughan Gething, and an incumbency backlash among certain voters, contributed to Labour’s worst-ever Senedd result. But while these factors shaped the timing and scale of the loss, they cannot by themselves explain it.

This election marks a reckoning that has been coming for a while. After more than a century of political dominance, the myths and symbols that sustained Welsh Labour (and the idea that Labour is Wales, and Wales is Labour), have finally withered. The defeat reflects not simply a bad campaign or unpopular leaders, but a party that has run out of steam and ideas.

Since devolution, Welsh Labour has spoken the language of radical politics while failing to realise radical outcomes. Limited powers and constrained budgets are real obstacles, but they do not excuse the absence of political ambition from a party that has governed Wales uninterrupted for nearly three decades. Few parties in democratic systems have enjoyed such long-term dominance; Welsh Labour has failed to take advantage of it.

Longer-term decay

The electoral collapse reflects a deeper unwillingness to confront Wales’ long-term material decline. Across health, housing, education and the economy, rhetorical ambition has been undermined by narrow, managerial interventions. Child poverty remains entrenched, educational standards have declined and the NHS is under sustained pressure. Progressive language has failed to translate into material improvement.

In defending Wales against Tory austerity, Welsh Labour neglected the harder task of articulating what Wales could become and how devolved powers could be wielded effectively to improve people’s lives. The result has been a politics that speaks the language of progress while leaving the structures of inequality largely untouched.

Over time, this gap between promise and experience has eroded trust. In an era of weakening party attachment and fluid political identities, historical loyalty can no longer be relied upon. The continued invocation of figures such as Aneurin Bevan may still resonate within the party but beyond this, their power has faded. Nostalgia has become a liability, especially when it substitutes for critical reflection or ideological renewal. Welsh Labour came to mistake familiarity for consent.

The Senedd election result is not a rejection of progressive values, but of Labour’s symbolic performance of them. Many voters were not turning away from radical ambition when they voted for Plaid Cymru; they were seeking a party they believed could still embody it. Welsh politics has often been defined by its radical traditions – and progressive voters have put their faith in Plaid to inherit them.

One-party dominance insulated Welsh Labour from the pressures that force political renewal. When that dominance finally fractured, the party found itself unable to articulate an alternative sense of purpose.

The collapse, therefore, is not a sudden termination, but the culmination of a prolonged period of stagnation. The majorities once symbolised by Aneurin Bevan’s memorial stones have been gradually eroded, enduring for decades but now standing merely as reminders of a Labour legacy that no longer finds resonance in Wales.

Nye Davies does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.