Latest news with #CPRC
CTV News
4 days ago
- Business
- CTV News
Riverside hockey head backs plans for move to Capri Complex
Curlers might be booted of their ice rink to make room for hockey teams. CTV's Robert Lothian reports. Loading the player instance is taking more time than usual Loading the player instance is taking more time than usual The head of a local minor hockey league is backing a controversial plan to remove curling from the Capri Recreational Sports Complex (CPRC) temporarily. Anne Marie Schofield told CTV News while the move would be unfortunate, it makes the most sense to prioritize the majority of ice users. 'It is a common-sense response to a catastrophic event,' said the president of the Riverside Minor Hockey Association. The proposal follows a fire at the WFCU Centre in April , which could displace users of the AM800 rink for a year. In response, the City of Windsor is proposing rink users move to Rink A at the CPRC and displace the curling community, which has been there for about a year. 060225 - Capri Complex Capri Pizzeria Recreation Complex, June 1, 2025. (Robert Lothian/CTV News Windsor) According to a city report, the association uses 56 hours per week on the AM800 rink as well as 22.5 hours per week on the Green Shield rink at the WFCU for a total of 78.5 hours per week. 'This is not just about RMHA or the Riverside Figure Skating Club, this is about every major user group having to sacrifice something,' Schofield said. Due to ice-sharing policies, Schofield said if they remain at the WFCU, all 11 major ice user groups will have to evenly split the time at the two community rinks. 'Every user group will have to sacrifice a percentage of their ice so that we can fairly and equitably redistribute that loss and mitigate some of that loss,' she said. Per the report, the AM800 Rink generated $441,000 in revenue for the 2024/2025 season, compared to $155,000 at the CPRC. 'So, a one-year pause is not going to be as catastrophic for them as it would be for every other major ice user in the city, not to mention the loss of revenue,' Schofield said. Schofield also warned without the move, they would have to decrease roster sports and additional programming. She adds a move to defer the matter could risk impacting planning for the upcoming season. Windsor City Council is expected to debate the matter at its next meeting on June 9.
Free Malaysia Today
17-05-2025
- Health
- Free Malaysia Today
Govt monitoring Covid-19 amid rising cases in Thailand, Singapore
The health ministry said it requires all public and private healthcare facilities to report cases immediately to support early detection and rapid response to potential outbreaks. KUALA LUMPUR : The health ministry is closely monitoring the Covid-19 situation both domestically and abroad, particularly in light of rising cases in Thailand and Singapore. Health minister Dzulkefly Ahmad said Malaysia remains vigilant despite recording a weekly average of around 600 cases, a figure that is still below the national alert threshold. No Covid-19-related deaths have been reported this year. 'Thailand recorded 16,607 new cases and six deaths between May 4 and May 10, while Singapore reported an estimated 14,200 cases from April 27 to May 3, up from 11,100 the previous week, with 133 hospitalisations,' he said in a post on X today, citing reports from Bangkok Post and The Straits Times. He said the national crisis preparedness and response centre (CPRC) has been alerted and is conducting continuous risk assessments to ensure readiness for any developments. As of May 10, Malaysia had reported a total of 11,727 Covid-19 cases nationwide from Epidemiological Week (EW) 1 to EW19/2025, with the highest figures recorded in the early part of the year, according to the health ministry's disease control division. The peak occurred in EW1 with 960 cases, followed by 1,229 cases each in EW2 and EW3. Since then, numbers have steadily declined, reaching 210 cases in EW15. The average weekly count between EW16 and EW19 remained around 600 cases – still below the alert threshold. Covid-19 continues to be a notifiable infectious disease under the Prevention and Control of Infectious Diseases Act 1988 (Act 342). All public and private healthcare facilities are required to report cases in real time via the ministry's e-notification system, which supports early detection and rapid response to potential outbreaks. Additionally, the ministry uses a 'rumours surveillance'' system to detect unofficial reports from the public, media, and verified sources to strengthen its early warning capabilities. The public is advised to maintain health precautions, seek treatment promptly if symptomatic, and protect high-risk individuals. Vulnerable groups are also encouraged to receive Covid-19 vaccination to reduce the risk of serious illness or death. Further information is available at
Malay Mail
17-05-2025
- Health
- Malay Mail
Malaysia's Covid-19 cases remain below alert level despite regional surge; Health Ministry continues to monitor situation
KUALA LUMPUR, May 17 — The Covid-19 situation in the country remains under control and below the alert level, despite an increase in cases in several neighbouring countries such as Singapore and Thailand, according to the Health Ministry. In a statement today, the Health Ministry said a total of 11,727 Covid-19 cases have been recorded from Epidemiological Week (EW) 1 to 19 this year, with a continuous downward trend since the start of the year. 'The highest number of cases were recorded in the first few weeks of the year with 960 cases in EW1/2025 and 1,229 cases in EW2/2025 and EW3/2025. 'The daily cases showed a continuous downward trend until reaching 210 cases in EW15/2025,' said the statement issued today. For the period from EW16 to EW19, the statement said that an average of about 600 cases per week were recorded. The Health Ministry assured the public that the figures were still below the warning threshold and appropriate control measures were being implemented. The Health Ministry has stated that the National Crisis Preparedness and Response Centre (CPRC) is conducting continuous risk assessments to ensure readiness. 'Any threat to public health will be communicated by the Health Ministry from time to time,' read the statement, adding that this was in line with Madani's core value of wellbeing, to ensure that the people receive comprehensive and inclusive health benefits. The public is advised to continue to practice self-prevention measures, seek immediate treatment if symptomatic, and protect high-risk groups. 'High-risk groups are encouraged to take the Covid-19 vaccination to reduce the risk of infection, serious complications and death,' read the statement. An epidemiological week is a standardised seven-day period used in public health monitoring and research. It starts on a Sunday and ends on a Saturday, allowing for easy tracking of the disease trends across different time periods.
The Guardian
13-05-2025
- Business
- The Guardian
Energy Australia is in court accused of greenwashing. What is the case about and why is it significant?
A landmark legal case is about to begin involving one of Australia's largest electricity and gas providers, which is alleged to have engaged in 'greenwashing'. Energy Australia will appear before the federal court on Wednesday in a case brought by the Parents for Climate group, which alleges the energy giant misled more than 400,000 customers about its 'Go Neutral' product. The case is significant because it is the first one in the country to be brought against a company for 'carbon neutral' marketing. It is also the first time an Australian energy retailer has faced legal action for alleged greenwashing. Greenwashing is when a company promises or implies action to help the environment but fails to deliver, according to Erin Turner, the chief executive officer of the Consumer Policy Research Centre (CPRC). Speaking generally, Turner says the centre's research has found that some companies lie or mislead customers, while others use vague promises or green colours to imply a product is environmentally better. 'We also see greenwashing cause harm and confusion for consumers when high polluting companies or sectors advertise hyper-specific green initiatives,' Turner says. 'For example, we found the mining sector using ads on social media to boast about their clean tech.' Additionally, Turner says carbon neutral certification schemes can cause consumer confusion when they hand out their logo to highlight 'one good product or service' from a company that causes environmental harm in other parts of its operations. A survey of 446 people conducted by Parents for Climate found that 43% had experienced greenwashing from an energy provider, bank or super fund. Turner says the Australian Consumer Law protects consumers against companies that mislead customers, but it doesn't help if a company uses 'vague or woolly language' to imply green credentials. 'This is why CPRC has been calling for stronger consumer protections specifically to stop companies from claiming their products are green, eco or sustainable without doing to work to show how they're delivering on their green promises,' she says. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email The European Union has adopted what is known as the 'green claims directive', requiring member states to pass their own legislation to introduce protections against greenwashing including verification requirements for environmentally friendly claims or carbon neutral marketing. In 2023, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission released 'principles' to 'guide' businesses' environmental claims, but Parents for Climate says these are 'open to interpretation' and the federal government needs to do more. Parents for Climate launched their legal action against Energy Australia in 2023. They allege the retailer marketed its 'Go Neutral' product by telling consumers their electricity and gas would be carbon neutral because the company was buying carbon credits to offset the pollution. The lead lawyer in the case, David Hertzberg, says the key argument will be that Energy Australia allegedly engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct – in contradiction of the Australian Consumer Law – because burning fossil fuels creates emissions and offsets don't permanently remove them. Energy Australia remains a participant in the federal government's Climate Active certification scheme. Most of the carbon credits it bought were from international projects, as well as one 'carbon farming initiative' involving planned burning in Western Australia's Kimberley region. Companies that join this voluntary register report their emissions and the offsets they are buying, so they can tell customers they are certified and claim their products are carbon neutral. The Parents for Climate chief executive, Nic Seton, says the group is concerned about the scheme because companies can buy 'low-quality' offsets that don't actually reduce net emissions. The problematic offsets include 'avoidance credits', which claim to prevent potential future emissions but don't actually remove carbon from the atmosphere, Seton says. 'We argue that the way in which these companies are using offsets to make carbon neutral claims is potentially false and misleading,' Seton says. 'There's a little bit of creative marketing. The worst case scenario is it's being deliberately used as a licence to pollute.' More than 100 companies have reportedly left the Climate Active scheme in the past two years, including Australia Post, the Cbus superannuation fund, Telstra, Canva and PwC. The federal environment department says it is considering the future direction of the Climate Active program. For now, a spokesperson says the program continues to operate as usual, "certifying entities that have met the requirements". After Parents for Climate filed its legal action, Energy Australia stopped providing the 'Go Neutral' option to new customers. On its website, it says it will be 'progressively ending our Go Neutral product' for customers who have already opted into the scheme. 'We've made a commercial decision to close Go Neutral while we focus on reviewing and updating our plan to help customers reduce their emissions,' the website says. A spokesperson for the retailer says it has been working with Parents for Climate and it remained 'optimistic we can resolve this issue together'. 'Energy Australia remains committed to decarbonising by investing in and supporting assets that enable the clean energy transformation, and helping our customers to directly reduce their emissions,' the spokesperson says. Parents for Climate are seeking a court declaration that Energy Australia engaged in greenwashing and for the company to issue a corrective notice. The hearings are scheduled for eight days, with the court to make a ruling at a later date. Depending on the outcome, the case could set a precedent for future instances of alleged corporate greenwashing and prompt the government to take stronger action to stop it.
The Guardian
09-05-2025
- Entertainment
- The Guardian
Does video game monetisation harm children – and what is Australia doing about it?
Over the last decade, Dean has amassed a healthy collection of video games, from smash hits to cult classics. His digital library is like a modern day Blockbuster, all readily accessible with just a click or two. But his son, Sam, has eyes for only one video game: Roblox, the behemoth virtual universe-slash-video game that's among the most popular on the planet. The company reports that more than 97 million people log on to Roblox every day. Around 40% of those are, like Sam, under 13 years of age. In 2024, Roblox generated around A$5.6bn (US$3.6bn) in revenue, largely through purchases of 'Robux', its virtual currency, with the average user dropping around A$25 per month. While much attention has been paid to children's use of Roblox in terms of exposure to bullying, inappropriate and even abusive content, a new report has raised concerns about the impact of video game monetisation on children. Meanwhile, some experts claim Australia's current classification system does not go far enough in helping child video game players and their parents navigate confusing monetisation systems. Dark design patterns – which aim to steer player behaviour – have come under scrutiny in two new reports by Australian researchers. Such features encourage users to spend money, often obfuscating their value or using confusing virtual currencies and can be difficult for children to fully comprehend. One recent report by Monash University and think tank the Consumer Policy Research Centre (CPRC), which focused on players aged 18 years and older, highlighted that games designed with dark patterns are almost unavoidable. Of 800 survey respondents, 83% had experienced 'negative impacts' of these patterns and 46% had experienced some kind of financial detriment; more than a quarter said they felt pressured to buy something, and 30% had spent more on a game than they had intended. A separate new study, by researchers at the University of Sydney, has attempted to examine how children – who make up one-fifth of the gaming population – perceive these mechanisms and how to ensure video games are more appropriately designed for them. 'There's a tendency for issues around children's digital media use to become media-panicky and lead to policy decisions which haven't taken children's actual experiences into account,' says Taylor Hardwick, the lead author of the study. Hardwick and her team conducted interviews with 22 children, aged between 7 and 14 years of age, as well as their parents. Each child was given a $20 debit card and told they could spend it however they like – they just needed to explain what they were buying and why. Eighteen of the 22 children in the cohort played Roblox and 12 decided to spend their entire $20 in the game, buying up Robux. Another five children used it in other digital games such as Call of Duty, Fallout 76 and Minecraft. Children in the study reported being most concerned about feeing misled, frustrated or regretful of their purchases, particularly when they lose access to accounts or items without warning or recourse. Sam's father says Sam has spent around $400 on Roblox annually over the last four years. A few months ago, one of his purchases left him feeling dejected. Sam had used some of his Robux to buy a 'skin' – essentially a digital costume — of Godzilla in an extremely popular Roblox game called Kaiju Universe. But when he signed into the game, the skin had disappeared without warning. Toho, the copyright holder for the Godzilla licence, had shut down the game, leaving Sam without the digital skin. He did not receive a refund from Roblox. But it is children's engagement with 'random reward mechanisms' (RRMs) that the Sydney University researchers highlighted as one of the major problems. RRMs such as loot boxes provide players a chance to score a mystery item in a lottery or lucky-dip style 'draw'. While the children in the study 'accepted' that RRMs were part of the gaming experience, many did not like it. 'Children do not possess sufficient understanding of probability as well as risk to effectively navigate these aspects of their digital play, even if they are able to speak in the game's percentage-laden vernacular,' the authors wrote. 'RRMs and similar gambling-like mechanics are harmful and not appropriate in games for children.' They recommend removing RRMs entirely, easier access to refunds, stronger protections on children's accounts and greater transparency and flexibility with virtual currencies. Christopher Ferguson, a psychologist at Stetson University, said the study is interesting but pointed out it uses a small sample size. He was not convinced by the researchers' definition of 'harm' either; although children might feel scammed or tricked, he suggests the monetisation aspects they are encountering may be more an annoyance than a harm. 'I'm glad that researchers are actually asking kids what they think about the experience,' he says, 'but I think we ought to be a little bit more cautious about the word 'harmful'.' Sign up to Pushing Buttons Keza MacDonald's weekly look at the world of gaming after newsletter promotion Australia has attempted to keep children from monetised RRMs by implementing a new classification scheme which came into force in September 2024. Now, any game containing RRMs or loot boxes must be rated M and not recommended for children under 15 years of age. But the new rules only apply to newly classified games, and older games were not required to update their classification – unless the developer updates the game. Leon Xiao, a researcher at City University Hong Kong who studies the regulation of loot boxes, says that Australia has 'an implementation issue, rather than a problem with the law itself.' He claims some video games have been incorrectly rated after the new legislation kicked in and suggests the intent of the law to better educate consumers has failed. Preliminary research by Marcus Carter, a co-author on the University of Sydney study, suggests around 20% of the Top 100 grossing mobile games in the Apple App Store and Google Play Store do not comply with Australian regulations. Hardwick and Carter recently wrote Australia's new guidelines are 'not fit for purpose.' Roblox, with its mountains of user-generated content, is a prime example of the confusion in the ratings. Xiao argues 'Roblox most certainly should now be rated M or not recommended for players under 15.' But the game is rated PG on the Google Play Store. Meanwhile on Apple's App Store, the regional age rating is 15+. The latter also contains a global age rating, provided by Apple, of 12+. A Roblox spokesperson told Guardian Australia that creators must use its PolicyService API to ensure they are compliant in all jurisdictions and this ensures 'paid random items are accessible only to eligible users'. An update sent to developers in September 2024 would make paid random items unavailable to Australian users. 'As a user-generated content platform, we provide our developer community with tools, information and guidelines that apply to aspects of gameplay within their games and experiences, including the recent classification update in Australia relating to paid random items,' a Roblox spokesperson said. 'We take action on reports of content not following guidelines or not using our tools properly to meet local compliance requirements in Australia.' The company says it gives parents information about their children's purchasing behaviour, does not store billing information as default and issues warnings – at the first transaction – that users are spending real money. Parents are also alerted in email about high spending behaviour. 'Our parental controls feature enables parents and caretakers to receive spending notifications for their child's spending in Roblox and set monthly limits on their child's account,' the spokesperson said. Hardwick says monetisation is difficult for 'busy, underinformed and under-resourced' parents to navigate. She says they are not being given the tools to understand and approach their kids' in-game spending. Dean is doing his best to buck that trend with Sam, discussing with his son what Sam's spending his Robux on and why. He says Sam is still sore about the Godzilla skin, but has moved on to a gardening game, where he can spend Robux on buying new seeds – and where Sam assures him there's no loot boxes involved. * names have been changed
