‘Economies need entrepreneurialism. They need people to risk their own capital’.

The prominent civil servant was allegedly offered a job without the foundation knowing.

National MP was forced to apologise for comments about the former Today FM host.

Hundreds of thousands of Aussie homeowners have been preparing for months to move from their low fixed rate to a budget-breaking high variable rate but the question remains, have we reached the cliff yet?

CoreLogic said an estimated 1.3 million mortgage holders were on the precipice of a fixed rate cliff – where a homeowner moves from a low fixed rate to a high variable rate – with those people expected to fall onto higher repayments this year as their term ends.

A larger than average number of fixed term loans were taken out between 2020 and 2022 before interest rates started their upward trajectory but those loans have an expiration date.

READ MORE: At least six people dead in Hawaii wildfires

Now many Aussies are getting close to that expiration date before falling off a cliff onto significantly higher variable rates, but are we there yet?

Head of Research Eliza Owen said we're now in the three-month peak transition period before the loans expire. 

So a three-year fixed-rate loan taken out in May 2021 was about 1.95 per cent while a variable rate now is about 5.66 per cent.

On a $500,000 30-year loan term, repayments would increase about 60 per cent from $2017 to $3175 a month.

Owen said some borrowers will struggle to service their loans on these new, higher variable rates but the cliff isn't looking as big as previously forecast.

There are a few contributing factors that show borrowers may be able to handle the move to variable rates.

Data from the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority shows the number of defaults and arrears remains "extremely low" despite the cash rate surging to 4.1 per cent.

This means a small number of borrowers are paying their mortgage late or are unable to pay it at all.

"It seems official data on mortgage stress has not seen a blow out in arrears amid the expiry of low fixed-term loans," Owen said.

"As home values rise, the risk of default also remains low."

READ MORE: Fast food giant to launch 200 stores on our shores

The Reserve Bank of Australia has also seen a change in consumer spending where borrowers are prioritising their mortgage repayments as fewer people are putting money into offset and redraw facilities.

Owens said the data shows a reduction in the savings for households, which was accumulated during the COVID-19 period, which reveals again a prioritisation of mortgage repayments.

The number of new listings has also risen in July, particularly in Sydney, which Owens said isn't a common trend at this time of year.

"The rise in new listings could be at least partially attributed to more motivated selling if homeowners are struggling to keep up with rising mortgage repayments," she said.

"It could even be indicative of some homeowners selling based on foreseen issues with mortgage serviceability."

READ MORE: What's behind the 'pro-cash' movement gaining traction on social media

After looking at all of this, Corelogic forecasts the fixed-rate cliff won't be as terrible as previously forecast with households able to bear the brunt of rising rates due in part to changes in spending and the possibility the central bank is at the end of its course in rate rises.

"The good news for mortgage holders is that this period of economic slowdown will also take the RBA close to its long term inflation target which could be the impetus for a reduction in the cash rate in the second half of 2024," Owens said.

Sign up here to receive our daily newsletters and breaking news alerts, sent straight to your inbox.

The information provided on this website is general in nature only and does not constitute personal financial advice. The information has been prepared without taking into account your personal objectives, financial situation or needs. Before acting on any information on this website you should consider the appropriateness of the information having regard to your objectives, financial situation and needs.

US District Judge Tanya Chutkan set the tone for how she would preside over the election subversion against Donald Trump in a hearing Friday focused on what limits would be placed on how the former president can handle the evidence prosecutors will be turning over to him.

Chutkan kicked off the hearing – the first in the case before her and one that took place in her courtroom at DC federal court house – noting that while Trump's rights as a criminal defendant would be protected, his First Amendment right to free speech was "not absolute."

"In a criminal case such as this one, the defendant's free speech is subject to the rules," she said.

READ MORE: NSW Liberal leader backs Voice to parliament

The judge closed the hearing with a promise that the case would advance like any normal proceeding in the criminal justice system, but warned that the more "inflammatory" statements were made by a party, the quicker she would need to move toward a trial to preserve a fair jury.

"It is a bedrock principle of the judicial process in this country," she said, while quoting precedent, "that legal trials are not like elections, to be won through the use of the meeting hall, the radio and the newspaper."

"This case is no exception," she said.

READ MORE: Motorcyclist dies in horror crash in Victoria's south-east

Over the course of the proceedings, she expressed some skepticism to the arguments made by the office of special counsel Jack Smith, siding with Trump on at least a few matters related to the protective order over evidence that was the subject of Friday's hearing.

Addressing a submission from the government that she refused to let be filed under seal, she also emphasized a need for public transparency into the docket.

The hearing, roughly an hour and 40 minutes long, was the first in the case before Chutkan.

She has already shown a habit of responding quickly and tersely on the docket to debates between the parties over scheduling.

An Obama appointee and former public defender who has overseen several cases regarding the events of January 6, 2021, Chutkan has been outspoken about the harm the US Capitol attack caused to American democracy.

Chutkan later issued a protective order barring Trump from publicly disclosing sensitive information in the case.

Trump pleaded not guilty to four criminal charges related to his efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election last week, and the judge cautioned lawyers for Trump, who did not attend the hearing, about any public statements by their client that could possibly intimidate of witnesses.

READ MORE: Maui death toll rises again as resident describes being 'caught off guard'

Whether or not Trump's public statements are covered by the protective order that's issued, she said, if they result in the intimidation of a witness or the obstruction of justice, "I will be scrutinising them very carefully".

Trump's lawyer John Lauro said: "President Trump will scrupulously abide by his conditions of release".

Later on, Chutkan said that "even ambiguous statement from either party or counsel … can threaten the process."

Details of protective order

Chutkan adopted restrictions proposed by prosecutors that would bar Trump from publicly disclosing "sensitive information" – including witness interviews – that are turned over to his legal team by special counsel investigators in the case.

She also rejected Trump demands for broader language in the order that would allow people not directly employed on the defence team – including volunteers – to access discovery.

While Chutkan declined a broader protective order sought by prosecutors who wanted to lock down all evidence turned over in discovery, she did restrict how Trump and his legal team can handle and publicly share sensitive information.

Her order defines sensitive information as grand jury secrets, including subpoenaed information and witness testimony; transcripts and recordings of witness interviews done by investigators outside of the grand jury; evidence obtained through court-approved searches; and sealed orders related to the investigation.

The evidence Trump cannot share publicly also includes material from other government agencies, such as the Secret Service.

Prosecutors said the sensitive information represents a large amount of the evidence they've collected.

The order also specifies that while Trump can review the evidence unaccompanied by a lawyer and take notes about it, he cannot put in those notes any especially personal identifying information and cannot make photos, copies or recordings of the evidence.

How Chutkan handles the case is likely to serve as a contrast to US District Judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee in Florida who has been in less of a rush to move proceedings along in the classified documents case against the former president.

Cannon has already been heavily scrutinised for what critics say is a favourable treatment of the former president in a previous lawsuit Trump brought last year challenging aspects of the Justice Department's investigation

Politics and criminal defence

Chutkan and Lauro had several pointed exchanges about what the 2024 presidential contender should be allowed to say about the evidence that is turned over to him in the case.

"No one disagrees that any speech that intimidates a witness would be prohibited, what we are talking about is fair use of information," Lauro said at one point, putting forward a hypothetical that Trump is publicly remarking on something from his personal memory that is also evidence in the case.

"The fact that he is running a political campaign currently has to yield to the administration of justice," the judge said.

"And if that means he can't say exactly what he wants to say in a political speech, that is just how it's going to have to be."

Lauro put forward a hypothetical of Trump making a statement while debating his former Vice President Mike Pence – who is also running for the White House now and is a key witness in the criminal case – that overlapped with what's in discovery.

The judge wasn't sold.

"He is a criminal defendant. He is going to have constraints the same as any defendant. This case is going to proceed in a normal order," Chutkan said.

"You are conflating what your client needs to do to defend himself and what he wants to do politically," she told him.

"And what your client does to defend himself has to happen in this courtroom, not on the internet."

The special counsel said in Thursday court filings it wants the trial to begin on January 2, 2024, a date that Trump rejected in a social media post.

Healthcare workers are being offered a $20,000 retention payment each year to work in remote NSW and fill the critical skills shortage by the government.

The Rural Health Workforce Incentive scheme also includes a range of additional benefits including a salary boost, sign-on bonuses relocation assistance and housing, additional leave, and access to training and education.

The retention payment is double the previous offer as regional health districts struggle to fill nurse shortages.

READ MORE: NSW Liberal leader backs Voice to parliament

The NSW government is making to offer as skill shortages are contributing to inequitable health outcomes in regional, rural and remote areas.

"No matter where you live in NSW you should have access to vital services but that isn't possible without our essential health workers," Premier Chris Minns said in a statement.

"I'm confident that by doubling the incentives on offer, we can attract more health staff to our regions," he said.

The packages are scaled and increase in value in more remote locations.

Sign up here to receive our daily newsletters and breaking news alerts, sent straight to your inbox.

The death toll from the Maui fires in Hawaii has risen to 67, making it the state's deadliest natural disaster in more than 60 years, but an expert is predicting the toll to rise into triple digits.

The updated death toll comes from the local Maui County government as a local resident says she was "caught off guard" due to a lack of emergency alerts before bushfires wiped out a historic town.

Hawaiian Governor Josh Green said all responsibility was "on all of us".

READ MORE: NSW Liberal leader backs Voice to parliament

"And that is, we do what we can with the resources we have here far away from the mainland," Green said.

"But this is the first time we've ever experienced this."

Rescue operation

The director of Project Dynamo, a veteran-led international rescue organisation, Bryan Stern told Weekend Today he expects the death toll to rise to triple digits.

He said some of the roads were opening up but it was "really terrible".

"They are running out of food, running out of supplies… there's lots of people that are homeless."

"The communication on the ground is very, very, very poor.

"We have done a number of air evacuations and a number of supply drops and we continue to do that."

Stern said they needed financial help as the helicopters "don't run themselves".

Emergency response

Andrea Padilla lives just outside of Lahaina, where flames tore through the town on Tuesday in the state's deadliest natural disaster since 1960.

Padilla, who is a manager of a local art gallery, said most people who lived near the gallery lost their homes.

"Their experience has been that they weren't given any alerts," Padilla told Today.

"There was no warning.

"Even as I was already on the other side of the island and was receiving texts from them saying they were seeing flames… yet there was nothing on the news.

"There were no emergency alerts on our phones. So I think that everybody was caught off guard."

READ MORE: Motorcyclist dies in horror crash in Victoria's south-east

She said Hawaiians in general stuck together.

"We help each other out… it's very much aloha spirit here to help people out."

Fuelled by a dry summer and strong winds from a passing hurricane, at least three wildfires erupted on Maui this week, racing through parched brush covering the island.

The most serious one left Lahaina a grid of grey, ashen rubble, wedged between the blue ocean and lush green slopes.

Skeletal remains of buildings bowed under roofs that pancaked in the blaze.

Palm trees were torched, boats in the harbour were scorched and the stench of burning lingered.

Previously, Hawaii Emergency Management Agency spokesperson Adam Weintraub told The Associated Press that the department's records don't show that Maui's warning sirens were triggered on Tuesday, when the Lahaina fire began.

Instead, the county used emergency alerts sent to mobile phones, televisions and radio stations, Weintraub said.

It's not clear if those alerts were sent before outages cut off most communication to Lahaina.

The Matilda's have generated a $7.6 billion economic boost for retail and travel industries across Australia, with expectations a win tonight could further increase figures.

The FIFA Women's World Cup side is facing France in the quarter finals in Brisbane at 5pm after drawing a 75,000 strong crowd in Sydney.

Airwallex global accountants tracked sales and revenue for the retail and travel sectors after tickets went on sale for the World Cup to monitor spending.

READ MORE: Australia's friendly win 'out the window'

It found $4.53 billion of the $7.6 billion was from travellers and foreign exchange.

Airwalles general manager for Australia and New Zealand Luke Latham said dollars, pounds, yen, euros, pesos and dinar are pouring into Australia's travel and retail sectors thanks to the World Cup.

"The Women's World Cup teams are drawing record crowds and they're also drawing record spending in our hotels and retail stores," Latham said.

READ MORE: Maui death toll rises again as resident describes being 'caught off guard'

"In the current environment, this has been a screamer of a goal for the Australian economy."

He said he hoped a Matilda's win tonight would "keep working its magic on our economy".

A state-by-state breakdown is below.

• New South Wales: $2.98 billion- hosting 11 matches
• Victoria: $2.30 billion- hosted 6 matches
• Queensland: $1.55 billion- hosting 8 matches
• Western Australia: $663.2 million- hosted 5 matches
• South Australia: $160.9million- hosted 4 matches

FIFA has previously said one fifth of ticket holders were from overseas.

Sign up here to receive our daily newsletters and breaking news alerts, sent straight to your inbox.

Airbnb has revolutionised the short-stay industry.

Launched in 2008, it now eclipses the world's biggest hotel chains.

In Australia alone there are about 100,000 listed properties.

READ MORE: Petrol prices hit 13-month high as drivers urged to shop around

But in dealing with both a digital platform and a private owner (or "host", in Airbnb-speak), your legal rights as a renter (or "guest") can be unclear – at least without reading lengthy terms and conditions.

This article answers six very common questions about using Airbnb in Australia.

Please note that your legal rights may differ in other countries.

Even if Airbnb's terms and conditions are near identical – and they generally are – there may be differences in consumer laws.

What if an Airbnb property doesn't match its description?

Airbnb's terms and conditions require the host to provide "complete and accurate information" about their property.

Content, including photos, must be "up-to-date and accurate at all times".

Airbnb's Host Ground Rules state that listings "should accurately describe the home and reflect the features and amenities that will be available".

If a property does not match its description or photos, report this to Airbnb.

False advertising will also likely breach the Australian Consumer Law, which prohibits (Section 18) commercial conduct that is misleading or deceptive or is likely to mislead or deceive.

Report to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission here.

Airbnb listings must provide "complete and accurate information" about the property.

There are no specific provisions to claim a refund or a discount for misleading listings.

Your only recourse would seem to be to initiate the cancellation policy that applies to your booking.

READ MORE: Virgin Galactic launches first space tourists flight

So when can I get a refund?

If you cancel your booking or leave the property early, your refund rights are determined by your cancellation policy (see "show trip details").

There are various policies (from which a host selects when listing).

Most allow full refunds if you cancel one to five days prior to check-in, while others require up to 30 days' notice or only provide partial refunds.

If the host cancels on you, they may be penalised by Airbnb.

READ MORE: What's behind the war being waged on social media against a cashless society

Can an Airbnb host impose harsh and unreasonable 'house rules'?

If an owner wants to make rules against visitors without their permission or how many times you can use the washing machine, they generally can.

When you rent a property through Airbnb, you are entering into a private agreement with the owner.

Under contract law, they can stipulate whatever terms they like, so long as those rules aren't illegal.

A Reddit user posted this list of "additional rules" they say they say was stuck on the door of their Airbnb accommodation.

READ MORE: Experts' solutions to 'completely unacceptable' rental crisis

What Australian Consumer Law does prohibit are unfair terms in standard form "consumer contracts" – which an Airbnb contract likely qualifies as.

An unfair term is one that:

• causes a significant imbalance in your rights and obligations
• is not reasonably necessary to protect the host's interests
• would cause you detriment (financial or otherwise) if it was enforced.

The problem is that you will need to sue the host (that is, initiate civil litigation) to prove this.

Your best option is to carefully review the rules before you confirm your reservation.

Once you confirm, you are legally agreeing to all of the host's terms whether you've read and understood them or not.

If you disagree with a rule, ask the host to waive or amend it.

If they won't budge, your choice is to book or not.

What are the boundaries for an Airbnb host/owner?

Hosts are required to ensure every property is secure and safe.

Airbnb's Community Policy states properties must be properly lockable and free of hazards, and hosts must be responsive and willing to answer guest queries within a reasonable time.

According to Airbnb, a host cannot physically intrude or interfere with your stay.

They can only re-enter their property (or a guest's room in a shared stay) if there is an emergency or with express permission.

In a shared stay, the host must not enter the bathrooms or guest bedrooms when the guests are inside.

The host is also forbidden from sharing private details, photos, or videos of you without consent.

Where your safety is threatened, you should contact law enforcement and notify Airbnb.

If you decide to leave, you may be entitled to a partial refund.

Your rights depend on the cancellation policy applying to your booking (discussed further below).

An Airbnb host is forbidden from sharing private details, photos or videos of you without consent.

READ MORE: How strong is Australia's passport, and how long does it take to get one?

If I am injured in or get sick because of an Airbnb property, can I claim compensation?

Clause 4.2 of Airbnb's terms and conditions states that, by staying at a listed property, you acknowledge and "freely and willfully" accept the risk of "illness, bodily injury, disability, or death".

Further, clause 19 contains a broad disclaimer absolving Airbnb of any liability for "personal or bodily injury or emotional distress" incurred in using its services.

Clause 20 also contains an indemnity preventing you from making any claim against Airbnb in relation to your stay.

This gives Airbnb legal protection.

But you may make a claim against the host.

The first step would be to formally write to the host outlining your claim.

Airbnb may also assist with any disputes.

If this fails, you can sue the host but whether the cost and effort are worth it will depend on the extent of your injury or illness.

If you do make any claim against the host, they will likely rely on Airbnb's insurance.

Every Airbnb host is insured up to about $1.5 million through Airbnb's Host Liability Insurance Programme.

This covers any bodily injuries incurred by guests (or others) and damage to or theft of any property belonging to a guest (or others).

Staying at a listed Airbnb property means "freely and willfully" accepting the risk of "illness, bodily injury, disability, or death".

There are some exceptions to what Airbnb's insurance will cover, such as intentional violence, mould and communicable disease.

If you want compensation for something the host is personally liable for, you are more likely to have to take legal action, using a lawyer.

Consider the costs carefully.

READ MORE: Research claims relief is in sight for renters. Not everyone's so sure

What's the maximum cleaning/damages fee an Airbnb host can charge?

Cleaning fees are set by the host. Airbnb provides a pricing tool to help them calculate a reasonable fee – generally based on size and facilities – but there is no maximum, presumably on the rationale that market forces (and reviews) will deter hosts from charging too much.

Nor is there a maximum damages fee. You can formally dispute the amount with Airbnb, which will determine if it is reasonable, relying on information provided by both parties.

Charging exorbitant prices is not illegal though Australian Consumer Law does prohibit "unconscionable conduct".

But, again, you need to initiate legal proceedings and have a court agree you deserve compensation.

Sign up here to receive our daily newsletters and breaking news alerts, sent straight to your inbox.

Where to go for help and advice

You can contact Airbnb for any account, listing, or reservation-related questions.

Online forums can also be useful for advice and support.

You can report consumer complaints to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission but the federal regulator does not resolve individual complaints or provide legal advice on your rights and obligations.

For preliminary advice go to the following state and territory consumer advice agencies:

ACT	Access Canberra
New South Wales	NSW Fair Trading
Northern Territory	Northern Territory Consumer Affairs
Queensland	Office of Fair Trading
South Australia	Consumer and Business Services
Tasmania	Consumer, Building and Occupational Services
Victoria	Consumer Affairs Victoria
Western Australia	Commerce WA

This article written by Mark Giancaspro, Senior Lecturer in Law, University of Adelaide, is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

When NSW Environment Minister Penny Sharpe announced earlier this week that aerial shooting was back on the table as a possible brumby control option, passions rose to the surface, as they always do on this issue.

"NSW Labor has revisited… gunship slaughter," brumby advocate Alan Lanyon told Today in his trademark emotive language.

"For far too long, the most humane and effective control method has not been available for feral horses in Kosciuszko National Park," Invasive Species Council Indigenous ambassador Richard Swain countered in more measured tones.

READ MORE: Wild horses blamed for ecological disaster in national parks

Why people love brumbies

Brumbies have roamed the high country of NSW and Victoria for up to 200 years.

They were celebrated in the poetry of Banjo Paterson and in The Silver Brumby stories penned by the late Elyne Mitchell.

Because of their celebration in literature, and because a wild horse thundering across the snow grass tussocks is a hell of a sight, many Australians see brumbies as the heart and soul of the mountains.

Show them the grandest vista from the highest summit, and it'll pale in comparison to the swish of a brumby's tail as it hides among the snow gums.

Why brumbies pose an environmental problem

Unfortunately, brumbies cause terrible damage to the alpine landscape.

The presence of huge herds of 300kg horses with hard hooves is devastating to fragile alpine plants which evolved for thousands of years alongside only small, soft-footed animals like wallabies.

Across the mountains, brumbies are turning crystal clear mountain streams to stinking, stagnant mudheaps.

They are trampling and destroying the spongey sphagnum moss that is home to the endangered corroboree frog.

They are grazing fields of snow grass to bare earth, exposing native ground-dwelling mammals that rely on grass for cover from predators.

And they are increasingly a menace to motorists.

Take a look at these two images.

The first shows the state of a creek in brumby country in northern Kosciuszko National Park.

The second shows a pristine creek in a nearby valley where brumbies generally don't go.

Ecologists liken the damage to coral bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef.

Their numbers just keep growing…

Kosciuszko National Park head ranger Dave Darlington first became concerned at rising brumby numbers back in the late 1990s.

He says there were "only" about 1000 brumbies then, but even that number was considered a problem.

Today, the estimate is as high as 23,000.

Brumby advocates dispute that number, and while they have no evidence to back up their claims, in a sense the actual number of horses is irrelevant.

What's apparent to everyone in and around Kosciuszko National Park is that there are far, far more brumbies than ever before.

Sadly, rehoming brumbies on a mass scale is not feasible, as there are simply not tens of thousands of people out there who are capable of taking a horse.

Even ground shooting has become relatively ineffective as a control method with so many brumbies in the park, as authorities just can't get the job done quickly enough.

It's also worth remembering that the Kosciuszko National Park Wild Horse Management Plan specifies that there should be around 3000 brumbies.

That's the plan put in place to protect the brumbies by former NSW deputy premier John Barilaro – the first piece of legislation in Australian history prioritising non-native animals in a national park.

That's why aerial shooting is being put on the table again

Aerial shooting of horses has effectively been banned in NSW since the year 2000, after one horse was found alive and severely wounded a full week after a cull of 600 brumbies in Guy Fawkes River National Park in northern NSW.

Amid a public outcry, the then-state environment minister Bob Debus put a moratorium on the practice.

The snow grass plains of northern Kosciuszko are less tricky terrain than the gorge country of Guy Fawkes, which is why Kosciuszko National Park rangers believe the likelihood of a similar mishap is extremely remote.

Aside from the need to protect Australia's unique alpine environment from hard hooves, a large brumby cull this summer may prevent an animal welfare tragedy in the coming years.

The land won't be able to sustain a herd this size when the summer rain stops falling after three wet La Niña years.

In the severe drought of the late 2010s, thousands of brumbies perished from starvation in Kosciuszko National Park, many on the banks of the iconic Snowy River in extremely distressing scenes.

As cruel as any aerial shoot might appear, it wouldn't be that ugly.

Sign up here to receive our daily newsletters and breaking news alerts, sent straight to your inbox.