Podcasts about policy manager

In this mini edition of Waterfall, Mike and Karen are joined by our Policy Manager, Janine Shackleton, for a chat on the help available for those in vulnerable circumstances regarding their water use.

Title: Episode 77: Demystifying FSC Chain of Custody audits, Featuring César Gonçalves, Policy Manager for FSC CoC/CW, FSC International Author(s): Worm, Loa Dalgaard Description: In this episode of Forest for the Future, we go back to basics and dive deep into one of the most common—and critical—questions in FSC: How do Chain of Custody audits actually work? Host Loa Worm is joined by César Gonçalves, Policy Manager for CoC/CW at FSC International. With experience both as an FSC auditor and a certificate holder and as the current content owner for the FSC CoC standards inside FSC, César offers a rare tripple perspective on what really happens during an FSC audit. 💬 Tune in as we explore: • What companies need to do before and during an audit • The role and purpose of FSC audits and what's at stake • Common mistakes and how to avoid them • What auditors are really looking for—and how to prepare • Why transparency and simplicity are key to success Whether you're preparing for your first audit or just want to better understand how FSC ensures the integrity of its system, this episode is packed with real-world insights and practical advice.

Where is the UK data protection reform headed? How are we to deal with behavioural advertising in the context of sports betting and gambling? Will the UK stay clear of regulating or supervising AI à la EU?  Tim Turner has worked on Data Protection, Freedom of Information (FOI) and Information Rights law since 2001. He started at the Information Commissioner's Office as a Policy Manager on FOI issues. After that, he was a Data Protection & FOI Officer for two councils and then an Information Governance Manager for an NHS (National Health Service) organisation. He has been offering data protection training and consultancy since 2011. Also, Tim is the author of the very popular DPO Daily newsletter and LinkedIn feed.  References: Tim Turner on LinkedIn 2040 Training The DPO Daily on LinkedIn ICO: Action taken against Sky Betting and Gaming for using cookies without consent UK betting giants under fire for ads targeting at-risk gamblers (The Guardian) UK Data Reform: What's Proposed (Bird & Bird) Stephen Almond (ICO): data protection laws as a primary tool for AI governance (Masters of Privacy)  

The Research Lead with Agrifood Economic Systems suggests Canadian agricultural organizations and government need to come together quickly and act decisively in response to the threat of U.S. tariffs on Canadian imports.Agrifood Economic Systems has released a Policy Advisory Note which examines Canada's one month reprieve on U.S. tariffs and how the agri-food sector should use that time.Dr. Al Mussell says Canadians are suddenly faced with a generational event.The Saskatchewan Cattlemen's Association has a new Chief Executive Officer.During its Annual General Meeting, it was announced Christina Betker will be taking over from Grant McLellan, who is pursuing other opportunities.Betker has been with the Association for 10 years as a Policy Manager and has experience in the agriculture sector along with time working in the Canadian and U.S. governments.Her plan for the organization includes dealing with current issues, such as the tariff situation with the U.S. and enhancing their communication with the public AND the organization's decision to change its name.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In episode 91 Andy McClenaghan is joined by Abigail Gagen, Emily Hindle and Angie Button to discuss how dementia affects people's lives and explore how social workers and social care workers can meet the needs of people with dementia and their families.Emily is Policy Manager with the Alzheimer's Society and Abi is a social worker who works as a Team Manager at North Yorkshire Council and is also a member of BASW England's Adults Social Work Thematic Group. Angie is Operational Social Work Lead at Humber Teaching NHS Foundation Trust and Chair of the BASW England Social Workers in Health Group. During the conversation reference is made to the Alzheimer's Society report Because we're human too and the blog Someone to Safeguard by social worker, Rob Mitchell. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Welcome to Season 5, Episode 7! Today's guest is Fajer Saeed Ebrahim, a Senior Policy Manager at the National Asian Pacific American Women's Forum, AKA NAPAWF. If you're a longtime listener, then you'll remember we were fortunate enough to bring in Sydelle Barreto, the Policy Manager NAPAWF to talk about Clocking Inequality back on Season 4, Episode 39! NAPAWF has been hard at work with their latest report entitled “Sexual and Reproductive Healthcare in the Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Community: Understanding Barriers to Access in Georgia”.  Fajer is a skilled legal advocate with substantial experience in organizing, policy, and legislative advocacy related to reproductive rights and justice, racial equity, survivor justice, and immigrant healthcare. Prior to her work with NAPAWF, she was a senior advisor with the Coalition to Expand Contraceptive Access; a consultant with the White House Initiative on Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders; a consultant with the Center for Reproductive Rights, as well as other stops.  NAPAWF is the only organization dedicated to uplifting and building power with AANHPI women and girls in the US. Employing a reproductive justice framework to guide their work, they use organizing, advocacy, and communications strategies to assert full agency over our lives, our families, and our communities. Working with the Emory University Center for Reproductive Health Research in the Southeast (RISE), this latest report by NAPAWF seeks to uncover the systemic barriers Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander (AANHPI) women and gender-expansive individuals face in accessing sexual and reproductive healthcare (SRH). We recommend you read the full report, donate to NAPAWF, stay informed, and take action. If you like what we do, please share, follow, and like us in your podcast directory of choice or on Instagram @AAHistory101. For previous episodes and resources, please visit our site at https://asianamericanhistory101.libsyn.com or our links at http://castpie.com/AAHistory101. If you have any questions, comments or suggestions, email us at info@aahistory101.com.

Darick and Logan welcome their dear friend and Rules and Policy Manager for #fabtcg Joshua Scott back to the show! In this MEGASODE the crew discusses the rules changes in relation to The Hunted, touch on the Zephyr Needle ban, and have a frank discussion about vegetables.Subscribe to our Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/fleshandpodCheck us out on Spotify: https://spoti.fi/3lWbhCfWe're available on Apple Podcast: https://apple.co/3dF4IQ3Join our Discord here: https://discord.gg/nrGegbag4uQuestions and comments can be sent to @fleshandpod.bsky.social on BlueSky, as well as fleshandpod@gmail.comPod BlueSky: @fleshandpod.bsky.socialDarick BlueSky: @charm3r.comLogan BlueSky: @loganpetersen.bsky.socialJoshua BlueSky: @jjscottnz.bsky.social***Editing and thumbnail by Greiner Productions***

Season 6 Episode 2 Andrea is an advocate, writer, and fearless leader who turned her passion into purpose. She's the Communications and Policy Manager at Health by Design, a consultant, and co-founder of Nonprofit Girl Gang. But she's also a brave badass who made headlines with her courageous op-ed in the Indianapolis Star, calling out systemic harassment and abuse of power in politics.   Andrea has seen firsthand how toxic dynamics can poison workplaces, silence voices, and block progress. In this episode, she opens up about her experiences and delivers bold, actionable solutions for building safer, more equitable spaces in local and state politics. Click here to read Andrea's Op-ed

In honor of the New Year, Nick shares his mission statement for Bike Talk, and compares his acting career with Taylor's (0:35). Taylor interviews a Costa Rican mountain biker on his recent trip to Costa Rica (4:15)... and shares his mission statement for Bike Talk (8:30). News: On Day 1 of Congestion Pricing in NYC, Transportation Alternatives Communications Director Alexa Sledge shares her observations (9:38). A new California law defines "e-bike" (17:26). Studies: Listener "Big E" emails Bike Talk about his bike, or "errand machine," and links to a study showing 52% of trips in the US are less than 3 miles (18:20). Another study shows that relying on a car for more than 50% of the time out of the house results in a decrease in life satisfaction (20:01). A United Kingdom charity, Wheels for Wellbeing, helps people who are disabled get on and enjoy riding bikes of all shapes and sizes. With Dr. Kay Inckle, Campaigns and Policy Manager (22:08). Blind Tandem Bicycling With Frank Nemiroff and Sonya Chapnick (40:05). Stacey's Bike Thought (55:37).

In this episode, Mike and Karen are joined by Steve Grebby, Policy Manager at CCW and Jacob Larkin, who is the Campaign Coordinator Unblocktober to talk about the issue of FOGs – Fats, Oils and Greases and the consequences for households and the environment if not disposed of correctly. The team also shares the simple things we can all do to keep are FOGs at bay and our drains clear.   Get in touch with the show with any of your questions or comments: podcast@ccwater.org.uk   Timestamps 01:00: Introductions and welcomes 01:38: What are FOGs? 05:32: What should we put in the dishwasher? 06:58: What are the consequences of not disposing FOGs correctly? 10:47:Unblocktober campaign 15:43: Environmental impact of FOGs 21:03: CCW's Sink Sense research   Show notes Unblocktober CCW Sink Sense Research

Welcome back to the third and final episode of a three-part podcast miniseries in partnership with TikTok. Over the course of three episodes, IAB UK's CMO James Chandler is joined by guests from TikTok to explore three of its big priorities: measurement, creative performance and policy & brand safety. We've already covered measurement and creative performance, which means today's episode is focused on policy and brand safety. Joining James in the studio is TikTok's Senior Government Relations and Policy Manager, Giles Derrington. Together they discuss the relationship between trust and business outcomes, public policy changes and what ‘Project Clover' means for TikTok users and their data. Watch the video version of this episode via our YouTube channel: https://youtu.be/Vjz2SpoIdzQThat's it for this miniseries! If you missed them, our two previous episodes are available on our YouTube channel and via all good streaming platforms. Discover about TikTok here: https://www.tiktok.com/about?lang=en Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Salt Lake City is helping renters to pay their deposits through a new program. Ruedigar Matthes, Policy Manager for the Department of Community and Neighborhoods, joins Dave and Debbie to discuss what this new program aims to do and how you can find some help with your rent. 

The Bar Standards Board has launched a consultation on proposed amendments to the Equality Rules. The consultation runs until 29 November 2024. The BSB is gathering views on proposed rules to advance equality, diversity, and inclusion at the Bar, and is keen to hear a wide range of views and welcomes all contributions to the ongoing consultation. As the BSB gathers views of barristers and chambers on proposed amendments, they welcome all contributions to the ongoing consultation. Hear from the Bar Standard Board's Policy Manager for Equality and Access to Justice, Poornima Karunacadacharan and VinciWorks compliance experts on what you need to know about the proposals, and listen to the questions you posed answered by the BSB. The consultation is open until 29 November 2024. Guest speakers: Poornima Karunacadacharan, Policy Manager, Equality and Access to Justice, The Bar Standards Board. Poornima Karunacadacharan is the Policy Manager for Equality and Access to Justice at the BSB. She has been leading on the drafting of the Equality Rules, as well as ensuring equality, diversity, and inclusion is embedded in all areas of BSB regulation. She has over 20 years' experience working in the Charity Sector and as a consultant for public sector organisations on equality and human rights issues. Poornima has expertise in training public, private, and voluntary sector organisations on the Equality Act 2010 and the Public Sector Equality Duty.

Abigail Franks who is the Membership and Policy Manager and Alexander Easdale who is the Executive Director at Southeast Climate and Energy Network.  The Southeast Climate and Energy Network has a mission to confront the climate crisis by creating strategic alignment, growing capacity, and building power among member organizations and their communities in the Southeast. They have a huge focus on grassroots work that prioritizes and uses the knowledge that southerners already have. They know that there are challenges in the South, but there are people on the ground who have the solutions. Contact: abigail@scen-us.org and alex@scen-us.org  All the information we talked about can be found: https://www.scen-us.org/

An erosion of LGBTQ+ rights seems to be the latest casualty of America's deepening polarization. This week's panel takes stock of the trajectory of LGBTQ+ rights and what the future may hold for LGBTQ+ Ohioans and their families. Featuring:  The Honorable Nickie J. Antonio, Ohio State Senate Democratic Leader  Karen Hewitt, Founder and CEO, K Hewitt Consulting, and Co-Founder and COO, The Ohio REST Collective Cam Ogden, Policy Manager, Equality Ohio  Ken Schneck, Editor, The Buckeye Flame  The moderator was Ronald Murray, Associate Director of Health Advocacy at Equitas Health, and Community Engagement Liaison, Stonewall Columbus.  This forum was sponsored by the Lynn Greer Legacy in Civic Engagement Fund Celebrating Inclusion & Equity for the LGBTQ Community, Huckleberry House, and Encova Insurance. The livestream presenting sponsor was The Center for Human Kindness at the Columbus Foundation. The livestream partner was The Columbus Dispatch. It was supported by Vue Columbus.  This forum was recorded before a live audience at Vue Columbus in the Brewery District on October 9, 2024

The Exploding pagers in Beirut last week neutralized dozens if not hundreds of Hezbollah operatives. This attack was followed by the killing of their leader Hassan Nasrallah. Now without a secure communication method, has Hezbollah been rendered inoperative ?

The Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD) recently assessed social media platforms' policies, public commitments, and product interventions related to election integrity across six major issue areas: platform integrity, violent extremism and hate speech, internal and external resourcing, transparency, political advertising and state-affiliated media. Justin Hendrix spoke to two of the report's authors: ISD's Director of Technology & Society, Isabelle Frances-Wright, and its Senior US digital Policy Manager, Ellen Jacobs. ISD's assessment included Snap, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, YouTube, and X.

Digital consent models, language barriers, and cultural differences are just a few factors that can exclude people from participating in genomic research. In this episode, our guests discuss these issues, and explore alternative methods such as in-person discussions and the use of trusted community figures to engage with their communities to increase awareness of genomic research. They also highlight the importance of communicating consent in ways that respect cultural dynamics, such as family involvement in decision-making. Our host, Naimah Callachand is joined by Maili Raven-Adams, researcher in bioethics and policy at Nuffield Council on Bioethics, Niharika Batra, Community Projects Manager at Southall Community Alliance and Trupti Patel, Policy Manager at Genomics England.   "I think it is about finding language to involve people, and figure out how the benefits of them donating data can relate to them and their community"   You can read the transcript below or download it here: https://www.genomicsengland.co.uk/assets/documents/Podcast-transcripts/How-can-we-ensure-equitable-access-to-genomic-medicine.docx   Niharika: People are usually comfortable giving their data when they feel that there is transparency from the data collector, they're being completely transparent, they come with you with clear benefits, how it's going to benefit the community.  And you are equally sort of agent of your own data and you feel involved in the research and you feel that you have power to give out your data and have control over the journey of that research. Naimah: My name is Naimah Callachand, and I'm the Head of Product Engagement and Growth at Genomics England. On today's episode, I'm joined by Maili Raven-Adams, researcher in bioethics and policy at Nuffield Council on Bioethics, Niharika Batra, Community Projects Manager for Southall Community Alliance, and Trupti Patel, Policy Manager at Genomics England.  Today, we're going to be discussing some of the ethical, legal and social implications of genomics research for diverse communities, and how we might overcome them to address the challenge of diverse communities health needs.  If you enjoy today's episode, we'd love your support, please like, share and rate us on wherever you listen to your podcasts.  First of all, I'm going to ask each of our guests to briefly introduce themselves. Maili: I'm Maili Raven-Adams, I lead on work at the Nuffield Council on Bioethics to do with genomics.  This has predominantly been looking at how to develop a best practice approach for genomics, and looking at the ethical implications of AI and genomics when they're used together in healthcare.  Before here, I worked at the Global Alliance for Genomics and Health, where I developed policies related to diversity in datasets and genomic discrimination, so I have a particular interest in this area. Naimah: Niharika, can we come to you? Niharika: Hello, everyone, I'm Niharika Batra, I'm the Community Projects Manager at Southall Community Alliance.  We are a charity based in Southall.  Prior to joining the charity, I was working as a Youth Community Engagement Assistant in United Nations Development Programme in India, and I have a background in gender and development.  I also bring with me lived experience of being a South Asian immigrant woman, and I'm really passionate about working with the immigrant communities in the UK. Naimah: It's lovely to have you.  And Trupti, can we come to you? Trupti: Hi, I'm Trupti Patel, I'm a Policy Manager at Genomics England.  I work primarily within the diverse data initiative and I lead the equity in health research workstream.  My background is in responsible research and innovation, as well as co-production, and more ethical ways in which members of the public can shape the direction of scientific advancements. Naimah: So, first of all, Trupti, can we talk about the challenges around equity in data, and what this means for diverse groups in the context of genomics? Trupti: Yes, as I mentioned, I lead the equity in health research workstream.  Now we talk very specifically about equity in health data.  As Genomics England, we are a biobank, and we hold health data on individuals who have consented to be a part of genomic research. When we talk about equity, primarily we're talking about those of non-European ancestry, and there are very specific reasons as to why that is.  So firstly, there's a wider issue about representativeness within health datasets more widely.  We know that across all health data sets that are located within Global North countries, the data held within them tends to not be representative of their populations. And what I mean by that is that they tend to overrepresent those of European ancestry, and underrepresent anyone who is not of European ancestry.  The consequences of this is that healthcare innovation might stand to leave these population groups behind. One of the other reasons that we talk about equity specifically, as opposed to things like equality, is that we're also aware that if we look at research on a global level, the majority of research funding is given out through grant bodies located in Global North countries.  So we already know that research portfolios can actually be quite skewed towards population groups who live in those countries themselves.  We know that there's a lack of financial investment as well within developing economies.  So it's natural to assume that health innovation projects which address the needs of these communities are more likely to be conducted by researchers who are based in developing economies.  However, their access to funding is very limited, and on top of that they tend to have much smaller life sciences sectors, so their access for private funding, as well as opportunities to collaborate with industry can actually be quite limited in itself as well. Another reason that we care about equity is that we actually know that there are some sub-populations that are very diverse within themselves.  So a good example is the genetic diversity of Africa as a whole is much larger than those who live outside of Africa itself.  And for that reason there tends to be a focus on actually oversampling from people who are of these ancestries.  And another example being South East Asians as well.  The final challenge when it comes to equity is that we also know that there has to be a need for medical innovation for these population groups, and a desire for people to actually buy this type of innovation.  So there's a need for demand for these therapies and medications.  Now if we already know that developing economies might be less likely to be able to afford these medications, then the demand will always be lower for these population groups.  And therefore the demand for innovation might also be lower population groups.  But as a country, because we would want to make sure that we're able to provide medication to everyone equally, we need to take an equitable approach. So one thing about the lack of diversity within datasets actually means that we can't always accurately predict whether or not someone does or doesn't have a condition.  So we're still at the stage where accuracy is not as good for these population groups as it is for others, and it leads to things that we call false positives and false negatives.  So where we think that someone does or doesn't have a condition, and in fact, they might or they might now.  The incidence rates of that happening for anyone of non-European ancestry are higher.  That's one of the tensions that we're playing with at the moment, especially when it comes to providing genomic healthcare via a healthcare service.  Understanding people's cultural background and nuances I think is really important.  For example, a lot of those cultural practices can actually play into whether or not someone decides to receive or not receive a form of healthcare.  And it's also important to understand things like timing, so the decision around whether or not someone decides whether or not they're going to take a preventative medication might be based upon cultural timings around things like giving birth or something. Naimah: How can we ensure equitable access to genomic medicine for all of these communities? Maili: So I think we need to understand that there are several understandable reasons that people might not have been involved in genomic research to date.  Efforts have been made to engage with different communities, but this has sort of been piecemeal and we need to see how that engagement can feed into research practices. So that people feel as if their information that they've given has been taken on board, and that those research practices have been co-developed, and they feel more willing to engage so that that representation can increase.  There's also been examples where research has been actively untrustworthy in the past.  You know, there's well known stories of Henrietta Lacks, whose cancer cells were taken without her consent, and then used to develop research.  And there's different examples across the globe that kind of mirror that sort of exploitation.  So we kind of need to take note of these, and understand why people aren't there, and then allow that to inform engagement practices.  So that research practice can change over time and be more inclusive and encourage people to get involved and give good reason for them to get involved in that. Niharika: Also, to add on to what Trupti and Maili mentioned.  First of all, why this data gap exists, why is there inequity in genomic data?  It's because historically South Asian communities or the marginalised communities have been used to extract a lot of data, be it social research or medicine research.  So when a researcher approached them or a data collector approaches them, they feel that they're just going to collect the data and there will be no feedback process, or it might not benefit the community.  The communities do not understand what the clear benefits of these researches are.  And in terms of genomics, when we talk about medicine research, historically these communities have been exploited.  There has been information asymmetry, and we have observed a case in 1960s where in Coventry Punjabi women, or South Asian women, were given radioactive rotis, and they weren't even aware what they were consuming.  And it was in the name of research.  So there's always this hesitancy when it comes to medicine research. One way to tackle the problem of the data gap in genomic research is by co-production . So when you're approaching the communities, it sort of helps who is collecting the data, there is no skewed power dynamic involved.  People are usually comfortable giving their data when they feel that there is transparency from the data collector, they are being completely transparent, they come with you with clear benefits, how it's going to benefit the community.  And you are equally sort of agent of your own data, and you feel involved in the research, and you feel that you have power to give out your data and have control over the journey of that research. So it is also important how you frame the message when you're collecting the data.  In our communities, the idea of sevā or Kismet is very embedded in the communities, which mean either giving out your services or your time for the benefit of the communities.  So it's not just donation, but it's just spending more time or just working with the communities for a common or a collective benefit.  So when the message is framed in such a manner that you are doing a sevā or you are helping your communities bridge the health inequalities and there might be a collective benefit for the communities, people are more motivated to give their data.  But when the word donating data is used, then it puts a sort of emotional burden on the participant.  So it all depends on the messaging, how you frame your messages when you're collecting the data, and it's important to be cognisant of the cultural sort of ideas.  And this is something that can be used with South Asian communities, sevā and giving back to the communities. Maili: I was just going to say, I completely agree with that, like 100%, it's really important as well that the global majority don't feel pressurised into giving that data because of the language that's being used.  You know, the global majority are not represented in these datasets, so it could be that the language used might put pressure on people to donate that data to fill that gap, but that's not the right language.  I think it is about finding language to involve people, and figure out how the benefits of them donating data can relate to them and their community, so it just wanted to say that.  And also, it's important when we're using language like genetic ancestry that those aren't conflated with things like race or ethnicity, which are social uses of that language.  So I think this is just another area where it is really important to think about language and work with communities, to figure out what the right language to use it, and understand the benefits of using certain types of language. Naimah: And it just kind of highlights how many different nuances there is, and areas that need to be considered. Maili: Yes, I was just going to say, within that, we need to think about barriers to participation as well that might affect certain communities.  You know, there might be some language barriers, to making sure that we've got translators, or there's investment in making sure that the resources are there to make the engagement and also the research accessible to people.  There's things like people have lives, they have childcare, they have jobs, so making sure that they can donate data if they want to, at times that work for them and environments that work for them.  And things like transport costs and that sort of thing might be covered by a research organisation, so that people are empowered to get involved, and there's not too many barriers to become involved if they want to be.  I think that's really important to address as well. Naimah: Trupti, did you have something to add? Trupti: Yes, I was just going to say, I think it was really interesting that Niharika actually framed the benefit around community benefit.  Because within the policy sphere, and actually even within wider conversations on data and health, people use frame benefit in terms of patient benefit specifically.  And what we find is that when we engage with diverse communities, most of their concerns around harms are actually not harms necessarily to themselves specifically, but harms around their whole community.  And I do wonder whether there needs to be a slight reframing in how we talk about benefit when it comes to genomics in particular.  Because most people when they donate their data they know that it has consequences for those who are related to them. Naimah: So I wanted to talk about research governance as well.  And in the context of history of medical racism, with medical innovation now heading towards personalised healthcare, what are they key considerations we should have when it comes to rules around access to data? Trupti: So, I mean, one of the rules that we have within our biobank, when it comes to access to data, is that we don't want it to lead to any discrimination, and we won't allow access for things, for research projects, that do lead to discrimination.  However, we already know that there are lots of unintended consequences when it comes to research in general.  And when it comes to medical research in particular, and thinking about genomics in particular, lots of communities are aware that because in the past there has been a lot of research outputs have been used in ways that actually don't benefit these communities, and actually have negative consequences for these community groups, it means that the barrier to encourage people to take part is actually quite high.  When it comes to genomics in particular, obviously there's been a history of eugenics, and at the moment, that's quite a big area that lots of universities, especially in the UK, are going through eugenics inquiries.  It has effects upon people's perceptions of genomics as an area, and whether or not people can be confident that those types of research won't be repeated, and the types of research that will happen will actually benefit them. I mean, there's a good example that one of the community members gave, not directly to do with genomics, but actually they knew that if you're first name is Mohammed, your car insurance is actually much higher, your premiums are much higher.  And so they were concerned that if you were grouping people within genomic ancestries, or genetic ancestries, what consequences that has for them can be quite nuanced in the first instance.  But in the long-term it would actually mean that people might be grouped within these ancestries and policies and things that are created as a consequence were quite concerning for them. Naimah: And Maili, I wonder if you could tell me how people might feel more comfortable in the ways in which their data is being used? Maili: I guess if there's transparent governance mechanisms in place and they can understand how their data is being protected, you know, that goes right through data access committees.  There's one at Genomics England that as Trupti said reviews data.  So if they can understand what sorts of considerations that committee are thinking about in respect to genetic discrimination, and they can understand that certain considerations have been taken into account when their data is being used, that's one thing.  Another could be through consent processes.  So there's different sorts of consent models that could be explored with communities to figure out which one they'd be more comfortable with.  So broad consent I think is the one that's used at Genomics England at the moment.  So that means that people give their consent once, and then that data can kind of be used for a broad range of purposes.  But it's not always clear to people what those purposes are, or where that might be used over time. So there's different sorts of mechanisms that could be explored, like dynamic consent, where people are updated over time about what their data is being used for, and they can either opt out or opt in to those research practices.  Or forms like things like granular consent, where when people give their consent there's different options of people that they'd be happy for their data to be shared with.  So we know that people are less trusting of private companies, for example, so people might be able to say, “Yes, my data can be shared with nonprofit organisations or research organisations affiliated with universities or the government, but I don't want my data to be shared with private companies.”  And that might make people feel more comfortable in donating their data, because they might feel like they have some more control over where that is ending up.  And I think transparency there is really important, so people can understand when they give their data or they donate their data, they can understand what benefit might be coming from that.  And that might encourage people to get involved as well. Trupti: I was just going to add to that comment about dynamic consent.  So actually an interesting thing that Niharika mentioned earlier was this feeling that the people that we engage with actually really wanted a sense of control over their own data still.  Obviously when you give broad consent, your giving your consent, as Maili said, to a wide range of research that will happen or can happen in the future.  But interestingly, dynamic consent, I think culturally it is really valuable for some population groups, partly because it fits in very nicely with the idea that your biological data is actually a part of who you are. And that cultural philosophy can still exist within a lot of these communities that we're engaging with and a lot of these communities that we're trying to encourage to actually provide us with data.  Do you ever think that there could be like a medium position, where it was actually dynamic withdrawal? Maili: Yes, I guess that is something that could be explored, and I think that's one of the models that sometimes is talked about in academia or in these sorts of forums.  I think if people were dynamically kind of withdrawing, it might be interesting to understand why they're withdrawing and their reasons for that, so that research practice can change and take account of why people maybe no longer want to get involved in a certain type of research.  And I know that's something that you've spoken about in your community engagement groups. Naimah: Niharika, do you have something you want to add? Niharika: Yes, so when we were engaging with our communities, we primarily engaged with Hindi speaking people from Indian origin, Punjabi speaking people from Indian origin, and Urdu speaking people from Indian origin, and we spoke to them about genomic research.  We also spoke to them about the branches of genomic research and how their data could be used.  So while their data could be used for innovation in pharmacogenomics, which seemed to be more palatable for the people as this is an extension for treatments they've already been using.  For example, treatment for a chronic condition like hypertension or diabetes.  Whereas they were quite reluctant when it came to their data being used for gene editing.  So in Hindu religion, humans are considered the creation of Brahma, who is one of our main Gods.  And similarly in Islam, humans are called (Islamic term), which means God's greatest creation.  So when it comes to gene editing, some people believe that it means you are playing God, it means that you're tampering with the DNA, you're tampering with God's creation.  So they were really reluctant in providing their data for an innovation that entails gene editing or genetic screening or gene therapy. And when it comes to consent, I know Genomics England takes a broad consent, and there's scope of dynamic consent.  Where people are constantly engaged on where their data is being used, how their data is being used, which innovation their data is being used for, which research their data is being used for.  And they have an opportunity to withdraw their data if they're uncomfortable with any aspect of research. Maili: I was just going to say something else about consent models.  When we're thinking about different forms of consent, like dynamic consent, it's also important to consider the accessibility of those, lots of those models would rely on the internet and people having access to laptops or phones.  And so when we're exploring those models, we need to make sure that people have access, and if they don't have access that there's other ways that that sort of consent model might be able to be replicated, or there is an alternative way, so that people aren't excluded through that. Naimah: Is there a question around language barriers as well with the consent models? Maili: Yes, when verbal consent is taking place, the same problems of language barriers are there within the online version.  You know, how do you make sure that things that are translated, and translated well as well?  Because genomics is a complicated area with lots of jargon and complex language.  So how can we make sure that we translate that language in a way that's done, where the meaning is kind of translated as well. Trupti: The language thing was something that came up within some of our community workshops.  And I think one of the things that really came out was that genomics research itself has so much technical language that often you simply cannot translate the word into other languages.  And different ways in which you can convey information, so that you're still making sure that you're getting informed consent from participants I think is really important for these groups, beyond simply translating written material.  Whether that's through analogies or visuals that convey information, I think that's quite an underexplored area actually, within research more generally, but as a starting point genomics. Naimah: And did any of those community groups identify any preferences for what way they wanted to be communicated with, for consent and things like that? Trupti: I mean, certainly having online consent was a huge barrier.  So the idea that you log into a platform online in order to provide your consent to something wasn't something that people were that comfortable with.  Especially since these participants are often very reluctant to take part in the first place, so you're almost creating a barrier to them as well, it's an extra thing that they have to do.  They did feel that consent should really be in person.  They also preferred the idea of being able to discuss genomics widely within less formal settings, so outside of healthcare settings, or outside of research settings.  Because it meant that they felt that they were primed for the questions that they might have. One of the things that I was going to add is actually for genomics in particular, I mean, I mentioned before about when people decide whether or not they would like to consent to take part in genomic research..  They feel like they're not just consenting for themselves, they're also consenting for people within their network.  And so these are people that they would consult probably as to whether or not they should or shouldn't take part.  And so when you are making that decision and you're having those consenting conversations, whether that be within a research setting or a healthcare setting, it's important I think for people to understand that those decisions have been taken not just by an individual, they are actually reaching out to a much wider range of people within their own communities. Naimah: And is there something around that these decisions are often made with family members as well? Trupti: Yes.  So in situations where there are people from some cultures who are much more likely to take part in cousin marriages, these particular populations have scientifically been shown to have much higher likelihood to develop genetic conditions.  Now if that is the case, that can lead to a lot of stigmatisation, and it can proliferate a lot of discrimination that these population groups might be facing already.  So I think that's something to be considerate of.  And it might influence their decision making as to whether or not they or their family members should or shouldn't take part. Niharika: Yes, just to add onto what Trupti and Maili actually said, while language plays a very important role in terms of consent, how consent is being taken, it also depends on the setting.  In our areas where we engage with communities, usually the consent, or consent regarding medical research or genomic research is taken via the GPs.  And the GP services here in our areas are so overwhelmed at the moment, there are long waiting lists, like three months.  And when people actually get through the waiting list and go to their GP, they're so done with the process of waiting that when their GPs ask them for consent, they just either feel that they need to succumb to the pressure of, okay, giving the consent.  Because there's this skewed power dynamic over them as their white man or white doctor asking for the consent.  But also, they don't know what exactly to do in that moment, they're very frustrating from the long waiting line.  And they feel they're okay, they might need a little time to sort of cool down, go back home, look at the consent form, what is it about?      And in South Asian settings usually the decision making is done in family setting, where you consult your families.  And when we spoke to older South Asian women and asked them how would they give their data and why would they give data, they mentioned that they would give data because their children or husbands have advised them to do so.  So yes, it's important to see the setting of where the consent is being taken, who is taking the consent, and if they have enough time to think about it and go back and give their consent.  Also, it came up during the workshops that it helps if the consent is being taken by someone the communities already trust.  So having accredited community champions seek the consent.  So once they're trained, once they have enough knowledge about genomic research and how it can benefit their communities, they're able to better bridge the gap between the researchers or the research organisations and the communities.    Maili: Yes, I completely agree.  And I was just going to add that it's important that healthcare professionals are properly informed and open and aware of those different cultural or contextual dynamics within those consenting conversations.  So that they can properly listen and understand where people are coming from and give that time.  And I get that that's difficult in pressurised situations, where healthcare professionals are under a lot of time pressure.  But that needs to really be built into that healthcare professional training over time so that carries on and people can talk about genomics in a really accessible way.  And that carries through as well to genetic counsellors who give results to families, they need to be able to do that in the right sort of way.  And they need to ask the right questions and understand the patient that they're talking with so that that information can be translated or got across in the best possible way.      And that's even more important I think where there is a lack of diverse data that's informing research and informing healthcare outcomes.  I think healthcare professionals should be transparent with patients about some of the accuracy of certain things or how different results might mean different things for different people.  And it's really important that those conversations are had very openly and for that to happen, healthcare professionals also need to get the training to be able to do that.    Naimah: Okay.  So we're going to move on to talk a bit about developing countries.  Niharika, I wanted to come to you for this question.  Why would diverse communities benefit from research being more collaborative with developing countries?    Niharika: So in recent times, we have witnessed growing diaspora in the UK.  And when it comes to collaboration with developing countries, there's increased collaboration with these developing countries.  It can be a win-win situation for both the countries, for example, there can be increased innovation for these developing countries in exchange of information.  And at the same time, people in the developing countries, if they provide their data, they have the sense that they are helping their own communities who are living abroad.    Naimah: You've touched on a few points already, but, Trupti, I wonder if you could talk about the considerations we should have when considering international partnerships?    Trupti: Yes.  So one of the things that Genomics England has tried to do in the past and is still trying to do is increase the number of international academics that can have access to our biobank.  Now we already know that internationally, especially in developing economies, there's often a lack of data purely because the resource to do things like whole genome sequencing is so expensive.  The resource to even have or host a biobank itself is so costly that the barrier to even developing the infrastructure is so high.  So one way that we're looking to encourage innovation within those settings is actually to allow access through particular partnership agreements to academics who are based abroad.  Now obviously that means that there's a benefit for them in terms of being able to do the research in the first place.  But one of the things is that as a biobank we're also known for being a very highly secure biobank, compared to others.  So that's something that as a data store people actually highly respect, and in particular, a lot of the data regulation within the UK is highly respected by other countries.      One of the things that we have seen happening recently is that essentially some of our data security laws and data protection regulations are being reproduced in other countries as a way to ease working with research datasets across geographic political boundaries.  When it came to engaging members of local primary communities they have three primary asks when it came to the international partnerships that we might be developing in the future.  One of them was that at the very least there would be tiered pricing.  If we ever came to a situation where we were charging for access to our data, that pricing should be tiered to address the fact that if you are someone based in a developing economy, your access to financial resource to do research is much lower.      The second ask was that there'd be some way for us to foster collaborations.  Now, whether that be led by an academic who is based abroad or an academic based in the UK was up for debate.  It was more that those collaborations have to continue and have to be enabled in some capacity.  And then the third thing that was a big ask was actually around IP sharing.  So what happens to the financial benefits of doing this type of research?  And also, more equitable basically knowledge sharing across these regions was what was asked.  So what we're looking at in the near future is whether or not these principles could be used in order to guide some of our international partnerships' work.    Naimah: And I think just on that point you raised about fostering collaborations, Maili, I wonder if you could comment on how we could foster collaborations between the researchers and the communities that they serve?    Maili: Yes.  I think here is when engagement is really important, and we need to get researchers and communities speaking to each other, to have some sort of meaningful dialogue that doesn't just happen once but is embedded into whole research practices.  So there's many different opportunities to feed in and that practice is shaped based on the feedback the researchers receive.  I think engagement is a really amazing thing, but it does need to be done well, and there needs to be clear outcomes from that engagement.  So people need to feel that the information that they're giving and the time that they're giving is respected, and that those practices do change as a result of that.  So I think we really need to make sure that engagement and practices are done well.  And I was just going to say something on collaboration between different researchers.  When researches are happening across borders, it's really important that that's done in a really equitable way, and that those conversations are had between different researchers to figure out what's going to work well.      We need to avoid instances of things like helicopter science, and sometimes it's called other things.  Where researchers for example from the UK would go into a developing country and undertake research and then leave, taking all the benefits with them and not sharing them.  And that's something that we really need to avoid, especially in the UK, we don't want to exacerbate colonial pasts.  And I think it's really important in this context that those benefits are shared with communities.  And again, we can do that through engagement and understanding that relationship and making sure that collaboration really is collaboration, and that we can provide things that maybe others need or want in the right sort of way.    Niharika: Just to reiterate our communities are still haunted by the colonial pasts.  There's always this constant fear that our data might be misused, there might be data breaches and we won't be protected.  And your DNA data contains a lot of personal information, so there's constant anxiety around your DNA or genetic data.  So it's important that the researchers maintain utmost transparency.  There's a constant focus on flattening the hierarchies, where you sort of bridge the power gap between the researchers and the communities.  And it can be done through, again, as I mentioned before, having community champions on board who understand the communities better, who are constantly in touch with the communities.  And they provide that sort of semi-formal settings, where they know that where they're in constant touch with the authorities or the GPs or NHS, but also at the same time have very good relationship with the communities.  So this is something that should be taken into consideration.  And then just be cognisant of the cultural values, and not have very imperial ideas when you sort of approach communities.    Maili: I think this becomes even more important as genomics continues to evolve and new genomic techniques are developing.  For example, with things like polygenic scores, where we can look at people's genomic data and predict how susceptible someone might be to developing a certain disease or trait or outcome, in relation to the rest of the population.  Those are developing, and people are interested in them, but the data that they're based off again is that European genetic ancestry data, and therefore is not accurate or applicable to lots of communities.  And it's not just genes that we need to be aware of, it's people's environments, and that data is really important to integrate with things like polygenic scores.  I think we need to really address these issues now and make sure that as genomics develops that these things aren't perpetuated and existing health inequalities aren't continued to be exacerbated.    Naimah: Okay, we'll wrap up there.  Thank you to our guests, Maili Raven-Adams, Niharika Batra and Trupti Patel, for joining me today as we discussed the ethical, legal and social implications of genomics research for diverse communities.  If you'd like to hear more like this, please subscribe to Behind the Genes on your favourite podcast app.  Thank you for listening.  I've been your host and producer, Naimah Callachand, and this podcast was edited by Bill Griffin at Ventoux Digital.

Welcome to Season 4, Episode 39! Our guest today is Sydelle Barreto, the Policy Manager of The National Asian Pacific American Women's Forum. The NAPAWF (pronounced “NAP-off”) is the only multi-issue, progressive, community organizing and policy advocacy organization for Asian American and Pacific Islander women and girls in the United States. Founded in 1996 by a group of 100 AAPI women, these “founding sisters” came together to establish an organization that would amplify AAPI women's stories and experiences. They recognized that the voices of AAPI women all too often went unseen and unheard, so they founded NAPAWF to center their lived experiences within the broader public narrative. NAPAWF focuses on four key issues that include: Reproductive Health and Rights, Economic Justice and Equal Pay, Immigrant Rights, and Racial Justice. They recently published a report called Clocking Inequality: Understanding Economic Inequity, the Wage Gap, and Workplace Experiences of Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander (AANHPI) Women. It's amazing what you discover when you disaggregate the data on the AANHPI community when you're researching wage gaps. In this conversation, we talk to Sydelle about her journey to NAPAWF, the Clocking Inequality report, some of the key details, the policies we can adopt at the federal and local levels to support the AANHPI community, and what we can do as individuals to support change. To learn more, read the Clocking Inequality report, visit the NAPAWF website, and follow them on Instagram @napawf. If you like what we do, please share, follow, and like us in your podcast directory of choice or on Instagram @AAHistory101. For previous episodes and resources, please visit our site at https://asianamericanhistory101.libsyn.com or social media links at http://castpie.com/AAHistory101. If you have any questions, comments or suggestions, email us at info@aahistory101.com.

Logan receives the best birthday present ever when the legendary Rules and Policy Manager for @fabtcg Joshua Scott joins the desk this week! The crew discuss the Rules Reprise for Rosetta, some of the more niche cases within the Rules of Rathe, and breakdown their first foray into Rosetta limited! Find out who's Team Earth, who's Team Lightning, and what card or cards Joshua would delete from the game if given the chance!Subscribe to our Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/fleshandpodCheck us out on Spotify: https://spoti.fi/3lWbhCfWe're available on Apple Podcast: https://apple.co/3dF4IQ3Join our Discord here: https://discord.gg/nrGegbag4uQuestions and comments can be sent to @FleshPod on Twitter, as well as fleshandpod@gmail.comPod Twitter: @FleshPodCharm3r Twitter: @thatCHARM3RLogan Twitter: @LoganPetersenJoshua Twitter: @jjscottnz~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Edited by:  @darth_prentiss  www.greinerproductions.com

In a live edition from the BBC Radio Theatre in London, Woman's Hour examines how children with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities, or SEND, as it is called in England, are supported in school. In Scotland the system is called ASN, Additional Support Needs; In Wales it's ALN, Additional Learning Needs; In Northern Ireland it is known as the SEN register, that is the Special Educational Needs Register. The programme is about children and young people who need extra support to learn, and the mothers trying to access it for them. The children may be autistic, have ADHD, or be a wheelchair user. Some may have learning disabilities, or be blind, deaf, or dyslexic. They all have a legal right to an education just like any other child. Woman's Hour had an overwhelming response from the mothers of these children to say that the system is beyond broken. That has led to a crisis in their, and their children's lives. Carolyn Atkinson, Woman's Hour reporter, shares the results of a poll specially commissioned for the programme. Nuala McGovern talks to Kellie Bright, an actress in EastEnders who is also mum to a child with SEND; Katie, a 17 year old girl with SEND who feels she was let down by the system and is now campaigning for a better one; Catriona Moore, Policy Manager from IPSEA (Independent Provider of Special Education Advice); Catherine McKinnell, Minister for School Standards; Marsha Martin, the founder and CEO of Black SEN Mamas; Chloe Davies, a SEN teacher in a state special school in the Vale of Glamorgan and who previously worked in a mainstream school; Children's Commissioner Dame Rachel de Souza; and mums of children with SEND Samantha and Kirsti.Presenter: Nuala McGovern Reporter: Carolyn Atkinson Producer: Carolyn Atkinson and Rebecca Myatt

There are so many definitions of what it means to be an authentic leader. My guest, Melina Georgousakis, shares what it means for her.In today's episode my fabulous guest, Melina Georgousakis, is talking about authenticity in leadership by sharing her own career journey with us: from working in a research lab to informing health policy, and then going on to found Franklin Women, an incredible vibrant community for women in STEM in Australia. She has also taken to the TEDx stage: you can watch her speak here, How to Turn One Big Idea Into a Social Enterprise. Links:  Check out Franklin WomenWatch Rebecca's FREE Masterclass and learn how to back yourself at work and set yourself up for a senior leadership promotionAnother ep: Learn to Love What it Takes to Become a Senior LeaderGet Rebecca's free GUIDE:  The 7 Habits of Female Execs Who Get PromotedFind Rebecca at her websiteAbout Melina:Melina Georgousakis is a research scientist, a social entrepreneur and champion for an inclusive health and medical research sector. After a career in the lab researching novel vaccines against group A streptococcus she transitioned into a health policy career providing technical support to the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation. Melina later joined the Bupa Health Foundation as their Research and Policy Manager responsible for building and investing in partnerships to improve health outcomes of the Australian population.She is the founder of Franklin Women, a social enterprise which aims to create a science sector where women thrive and is currently leading the organisation as its Director and in 2019, she shared her story on the TEDx stage.Melina has been recognised through awards such as The Edna Ryan Awards, the Eureka Prize for Outstanding Mentor of Young Researchers, ProBono Australia's 25 People of Impact, and Women's Agenda Leadership Award. About Rebecca:Rebecca Allen is an Executive Coach and Personal Brand expert who helps corporate women attain senior leadership positions. Her clients come from a range of industries and companies including Aquila Capital, Reserve Bank of Australia, Goldman Sachs, Ministry of Defence, KPMG, J.P. Morgan and Coca-Cola Amatil. Rebecca's favourite work day was recently: her client sent her a photo of a card her son had written her. In his note, he praised his mum for chasing her career goals down, getting promoted and putting her needs first. Rebecca loves that her work impacts not just the women she coaches, but their families too.

Good morning and happy Thursday! Today is a special day, we have new footage to show you and a great talk about the RAICES conference coming up, part of our meeting and discussions with the ILLCF (Illinois Legislative Latino Caucus Foundation). Our friend Marcelo brought us in and introduced us to Kimberly Fair, Policy Manager for the ILLCF and Osvaldo Alvarez, Executive Director of the ILLCF. We learned a lot about the ILLCF and had a great chat with Osvaldo, check it out! Let's get ready to learn, here's the news: - Our friends at NAMI KDK are currently hiring for 3 great positions! Part-time coordinators for youth and family, as well as a Manager of Development and Fundraising are being sought and interested candidates can apply online. NAMI KDK is very active in our community addressing mental health with solutions and advocacy, now is your chance to join an amazing organization. Visit the website here to apply and learn more about a future with NAMI KDK: https://www.namikdk.org/volunteer-1 - The Kids Expo hosted by the Office of State Representative Stephanie Kifowit will be Saturday, September 14th from 10 am to 4 pm at Phillips Park Aquatic Center! Our team will be there delivering helpful information and resources for families as well as our partners of the Aurora Financial Empowerment Center. Admission is free for this event and there will be many emergency vehicles for kids to explore as well as food and more! See the flyer for more details, see you there! - There's a new sweet business doing amazing things with the best Italian Ice around. Check out the menu of Dolci Chillz and be sure to visit them. Follow the page here on Facebook and stay tuned for more. Friends of ours. Have a great rest of the day! Good Morning Aurora will return with more news, weather and the very best of Aurora. Subscribe to the show on YouTube at this link: https://www.youtube.com/c/GoodMorningAuroraPodcast The second largest city's first daily news podcast is here. Tune in 5 days a week, Monday thru Friday to our FB Live from 9 am to 10 am. Make sure to like and subscribe to stay updated on all things Aurora. Threads: https://www.threads.net/@goodmorningaurorail Instagram: goodmorningaurorail Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/6dVweK5Zc4uPVQQ0Fp1vEP... Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/.../good-morning.../id1513229463 Anchor: https://anchor.fm/goodmorningaurora ACTV (Aurora Community Television): https://www.aurora-il.org/309/Aurora-Community-TV #positivevibes #positiveenergy #downtownaurora #kanecountyil #bataviail #genevail #stcharlesil #saintcharlesil #elginil #northaurorail #aurorail #auroraillinois #cityofaurorail #auroramedia #auroranews #goodmorningaurora #news #dailynews #subscribe #youtube #podcast #spotify #morningnews #morningshow #thursday #illinoislegislativelatinocaucusfoundation --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/goodmorningaurora/support

When the average person thinks of nuclear energy, there's a good chance they're thinking in terms influenced by pop culture—Homer Simpson's union job at the Springfield plant, or the HBO miniseries Chernobyl, which dramatized the world's biggest meltdown.For all its promise in the mid-20th century, U.S. nuclear energy largely stalled in the 1970s and 80s. While public anxiety over its safety played a role, experts have pointed to the hefty cost of building plants and poor regulatory/policy decisions as having more impact. But in recent years, as demand for low-carbon energy surges and companies like OpenAI, Microsoft, and Google are burning through energy to train artificial intelligence, there is a renewed interest in making nuclear work in this century.But concerns over cost and safety remain, and even among proponents of nuclear energy, there is a robust debate about exactly how to approach future builds, whether to rely on conventional methods or hold off until new research potentially yields a smaller, more cost-effective method of unlocking atomic energy. What is the state of nuclear power in the U.S. and around the world today? What policies could shape its future? And how might AI, other market dynamics, geopolitics, and national security concerns impact the debate and its outcomes?Evan is joined by Emmet Penney, the creator of Nuclear Barbarians, a newsletter and podcast about industrial history and energy politics, and a contributing editor at COMPACT magazine. Thomas Hochman, Policy Manager at FAI, is also joining. You can read Emmet's recent piece on how why nuclear energy is a winning issue for the populist GOP here. You can read Thomas's piece for The New Atlantis on “nuclear renaissance” here, and his writeup of the ADVANCE Act here.

In this special episode, our host, Sarah is joined by Ellen Finlay, Development & Policy Manager at Samaritans NI.    The 24/7 Helpline is confidential and free. You can call or text any time at 988.

It is time for the ninth episode of our newest feature on Morning Focus, Energising Clare. This new feature will be about educating you, the listener, on renewables. On this week's episode, Alan Morrissey was joined by Policy Manager with Wind Energy Ireland Caoimhe McCarthy, to discuss offshore wind energy.

In Today's special live-to-tape episode of Moment of Truth, Saurabh sits down with Thomas Hochman, Policy Manager at the Foundation for American Innovation and 2023 American Moment Fellow alongside Santi Ruiz, Senior Editor at the Institute for Progress, and Mark DiPlacido, Policy Advisor at American Compass, to discuss environmental overreach and excessive regulations inherent to NEPA and their consequences for industry, innovation, and national security.Read Thomas Hochman's piece in American Affairs Journal: https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2023/11/its-not-just-nepa-reforming-environmental-permitting/#ThomasHochman #AI #Chips #Semiconductor #Environment #NEPA #EPA #Economics #NationalSecurityThomas Hochman is a Policy Manager at the Foundation for American Innovation, where he works on regulatory and infrastructure policy. His research and writing has appeared in American Affairs, The Hill, National Review, The New Atlantis, The Oxford Institute for Energy Studies, and elsewhere. He holds a B.S. in Mathematical Sciences from the University of Vermont.https://www.thefai.org/profile/thomas-hochmanhttps://x.com/thomashochmanSanti Ruiz is the Senior Editor at IFP and author of the Statecraft newsletter.https://ifp.org/author/santi-ruiz/https://statecraft.pub/Mark DiPlacido is a Policy Advisor for American Compass.https://americancompass.org/about/#team-careersBecome a 'Truther' or 'Statesman' to get access to exclusive perks. Watch ALL EPISODES a day before everyone else, and enjoy members-only bonus content: youtube.com/channel/UC4qmB5DeiFxt53ZPZiW4Tcg/join––––––Follow American Moment across Social Media:Twitter – https://twitter.com/AmMomentOrgFacebook – https://www.facebook.com/AmMomentOrgInstagram – https://www.instagram.com/ammomentorg/Rumble – https://rumble.com/c/ammomentorgAmerican Moment's "Moment of Truth" Podcast is recorded at the Conservative Partnership Campus in Washington DC, produced by American Moment Studios, and edited by Jake Mercier and Jared Cummings.Subscribe to our Podcast, "Moment of Truth"Apple Podcasts – https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/moment-of-truth/id1555257529Spotify – https://open.spotify.com/show/5ATl0x7nKDX0vVoGrGNhAj Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Welcome to the first episode of our three-part summer forestry series! Dropping each week in June! Today we talk with Amanda Sullivan-Astor, Forest Policy Manager for Associated Oregon Loggers. We learn about her role at AOL, and discuss the 70 year Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) on the Department of Forestry Statelands in Oregon. Amanda Sullivan-Astor serves as one of six managers for the association where she acts as a liaison for AOL's forest contracting members with federal and state environmental regulatory agencies. She also works with partners to promote sustainable forest management across the state that enhances the forest contracting workforce and forest sector infrastructure as a whole. Amanda consistently advocates for legally sound and science-based management practices that acknowledge environmental and economic tradeoffs. She also proactively pursues new opportunities for the forest contracting sector through policymaking and program development. Amanda is a Society of American Foresters Certified Forester and actively engaged in the Oregon chapter. She obtained undergraduate degrees in Forest Management and Forest Biology from Colorado State University and a Graduate Certificate in Forest Carbon Science, Management and Policy from Michigan State University. Resources: About HCP: www.oregon.gov/odf/aboutodf/page…p-initiative.aspx Associated Oregon Loggers: oregonloggers.org/ Forest Policy Questions? aastor@oregonloggers.org All thoughts and opinions are our own and do not represent those of our employers, or anyone mentioned in this podcast. Questions of Comments? lumberslingers@gmail.com

IT'S A MEGASODE!!! This week, Darick and Logan welcome Rules and Policy Manager for @fabtcg Joshua Scott to the desk! The crew discusses the most recent Rules Reprise and Back Alley Oracle articles, talk about their shared love for the Oxford comma, and dive into a bevy of listener questions! It's a can't miss marathon of pure Flesh and Pod goodness!YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCoLSSfLUQQ___-M9sNVUJFwSubscribe to our Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/fleshandpodJoin our Discord here: https://discord.gg/nrGegbag4uMerch Link: https://www.berrygoodembroidery.com/fapThe Realm Brawl Tickets: http://tinyurl.com/3rjnm386 Questions and comments can be sent to @FleshPod on Twitter, as well as fleshandpod@gmail.com, or dropped in our Discord! Pod Twitter: @FleshPod Charmer Twitter: @ThatCHARM3RLogan Twitter: @LoganPetersen Josh Twitter: @jjscottnzThe Realm Twitter: @TheRealmGames1*Editing & Thumbnail: @darth_prentiss www.greinerproductions.com *

Ep. 071: Into the Wild: Life in the Mat-Su Valley of Alaska Sarah Montalbano is the Policy Manager for the Alaska Policy Forum and a senior fellow with the Independent Women's Forum. She was born and raised in Wasilla, AK, and her family has roots in the state from the era before Alaskan statehood. Sarah joins the Forgotten America podcast to share about the culture, natural beauty, and economic growth of the state. Garrett & Sarah discuss public policy challenges Alaska faces, art and culture, and the history of the native population as well as how Alaskans handle issues of conservation and responsible land development.   Follow @SarahMontalban0 and at IWF, Young Voices, and Alaska Policy Forum.  Additional Resources for This Episode Wasilla, Alaska: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wasilla,_Alaska Alaska Policy Forum: https://alaskapolicyforum.org/author/sarahm/ Mat-Su Valley: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matanuska-Susitna_Valley Alaska Permanent Fund: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Permanent_Fund Endless Wall Trail in West Virginia https://www.nps.gov/places/endless-wall-trail.htm Hatcher Pass Alaska https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatcher_Pass 229 federally recognized federally recognized Alaskan native villages. Alaska Federation of Natives: https://www.nativefederation.org/ Alaska Native Corporations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Native_Claims_Settlement_Act 13 regional corporations that generate revenues and distribute them to shareholders Denali National Park: https://www.alaska.org/destination/denali-national-park Hobo Jim State Balladeer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobo_Jim Bus 142 from Into the Wild: https://www.uaf.edu/museum/collections/ethno/projects/bus_142/index.php Into the Wild (book): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Into_the_Wild_(book) Firecracker Boys (book): https://www.amazon.com/Firecracker-Boys-Dan-ONeill/dp/0465003486   Garrett Ballengee, Host President & CEO - @gballeng Cardinal Institute for West Virginia Policy   Amanda Kieffer, Executive Producer Vice President of Communications & Strategy - @akieffer13  Cardinal Institute for West Virginia Policy   Nate Phipps, Editor & Producer Communications & Social Media Associate - @Aviv5753 Cardinal Institute for West Virginia Policy   Follow: YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, Instagram Support: Patreon, Donate, Newsletter

 Amanda Gorman joins the show today, and through her own two birth and postpartum experiences, she made a career change to share her perinatal knowledge with other moms and families.  She is a Birthing From Within childbirth education instructor, a doula, and is the Program and Policy Manager with Postpartum Support International Georgia Chapter.  We go in-depth with how her births led her to become a childbirth educator, how her own postpartum struggle with mood disorders led her to create a podcast to spread awareness and knowledge, and how all of that ultimately led to her doula work and her work with PSI Georgia. Connect with Amanda:WebsitePodcast InstagramTikTokSupport the showWant to show your support? Want to help us continue doing this important and impactful work: Support the Show (we greatly appreciate it!)Don't miss new episodes: Join the Aligned Birth CommunityInstagram: Aligned Birth Email: alignedbirthpodcast@gmail.com Find us online:Sunrise Chiropractic and Wellness North Atlanta Birth Services Editing: Godfrey SoundMusic: "Freedom” by RoaDisclaimer: The information shared, obtained, and discussed in this podcast is not intended as medical advice and should not be relied upon as a substitute for professional consultation with a qualified healthcare provider familiar with your individual medical needs. By listening to this podcast you agree not to use this podcast as medical advice to treat any medical condition in either yourself or others. Consult your own physician for any medical issues that you may be having. This disclaimer includes all guests or contributors to the podcast.

Emma Klatman, who has T1D herself, and is Global Advocacy and Policy Manager for Life of a Child, joins the pod. She and Rob discuss: * Her work with Life of a Child * Global advocacy * The difference between advocacy focuses in the west vs. in other parts of the world * There is no single organization doing all of the work * Type 1 Diabetes is not equal everywhere * The different rungs on the advocacy ladder * The cost of diabetes management varies by the country's infrastructure * Technology and the gaps between the haves and the have-nots * Having diabetes and becoming a policy manager * Getting more comfortable advocating for yourself and for others * Being uncomfortable being the “token patient” voice * The resilience and problem-solving skills that people with diabetes have

Excited to talk today with Sarah Montalbano about two recent articles she wrote about education -"How We Spend Matters More Than What We Spend""Charter Schools Are Public Schools"Sarah hails from Wasilla and is the Policy Manager for Alaska Policy Forum. where she writes about education, healthcare, state fiscal issues, and more.She is a visiting fellow at the Independent Women's Forum and also the Northwest Regional Leader and writer with Young Voices. Graduating from Montana State University with a B.S. in computer science with minors in economics and data science, she was a 2022 Robert L. Bartley Fellow in editorial features at The Wall Street Journal.Her work has appeared in The Wall Street Journal, the Washington Examiner, and The American Spectator.Support the show

Rodrigo Seira (@RSSH273) is Special Counsel at Paradigm. Prior to joining Paradigm, he was outside counsel to crypto investors and entrepreneurs at Cooley LLP. Brendan Malone (@brendanpmalone) is a Policy Manager at Paradigm. Prior to joining Paradigm, Brendan worked at the Federal Reserve where he focused on policy issues for financial market infrastructures. Rodrigo and Brendan launched the Paradigm Policy Lab. The goal of the Lab is to be a gathering place for academics, policy experts, lawyers, and technologists to study how to address the biggest policy challenges in crypto. In this conversation, they share the origin story, goals and projects underway at the Lab. Rodrigo mentions this book: Technological Revolutions and Financial Capital: The Dynamics of Bubbles and Golden Ages is an academic book by Carlota Perez. Disclaimer: Jacob Robinson and his guests are not your lawyer. Nothing herein or mentioned on the Law of Code podcast should be construed as legal advice. The material published is intended for informational, educational, and entertainment purposes only. Please seek the advice of counsel, and do not apply any of the generalized material to your individual facts or circumstances without speaking to an attorney.

Why are critical and emerging technologies at the forefront of geopolitical competition? Can the Quad play a part in standard setting without stifling innovation? And how can the Quad help diversify technology supply chains without creating an ‘international cartel'? In this episode of the National Security Podcast, Dr Raji Rajagopalan, Dr Akira Igata and Dr John Hemmings join David Andrews to discuss one of Quad's central pillars – critical and emerging technologies. Dr Raji Rajagopalan is the Director of the Centre for Security, Strategy and Technology, Observer Research Foundation. Professor Akira Igata is a Project Lecturer and the Director of the Economic Security Research Program at the Research Center for Advanced Science and Technology (RCAST), The University of Tokyo. Dr John Hemmings is the Senior Director of the Indo-Pacific Foreign and Security Policy Program at the Pacific Forum. David Andrews is Policy Manager at the ANU National Security College. Show notes: ANU National Security College academic programs: find out more Find out more about the Quad Tech Network A strategy for Quad biotechnology collaboration, Dirk van der Kley and Daniel Pavlich: read more We'd love to hear from you! Send in your questions, comments, and suggestions to NatSecPod@anu.edu.au. You can tweet us @NSC_ANU and be sure to subscribe so you don't miss out on future episodes. The National Security Podcast is available on Acast, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and wherever you get your podcasts. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Why is biotechnology so strategically important? How can the Quad successfully compete with China to harness the opportunities it presents? And what is at stake if ethical leadership in this field falters? In this episode of the National Security Podcast, Dirk van der Kley joins David Andrews to discuss the strategic importance of biotechnology and tangible ways the Quad can deliver collaborative leadership in this crucial area. Dr Dirk van der Kley is a Research Fellow at the ANU National Security College who specialises on technology competition and innovation between the US and China, with a particular interest in biological technologies. David Andrews is Policy Manager at the ANU National Security College. Show notes: ANU National Security College academic programs: find out more A strategy for Quad biotechnology collaboration by Dirk van der Kley and Daniel Pavlich: read more Quad Tech Network: find out more We'd love to hear from you! Send in your questions, comments, and suggestions to NatSecPod@anu.edu.au. You can tweet us @NSC_ANU and be sure to subscribe so you don't miss out on future episodes. The National Security Podcast is available on Acast, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and wherever you get your podcasts. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The horticulture industry is welcoming a new policy on water storage with open arms.   National's promising that farmers will not need a resource consent to build a water storage pond in most cases unless wetlands or Significant Natural Areas are affected.  It's a plan they say cuts red tape around food production.   Horticulture New Zealand Policy Manager Michelle Sands says it's a positive policy.   She told Mike Hosking that most growers are conscious of managing their environmental effects, but there are rules being developed that create costs for them without achieving any benefits.  LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

How has rapid technological advancement influenced the way the Australian Federal Police approaches forensic science? What is the difference between forensics conducted at a national level and that of state police forces? And how does the AFP proactively use forensics to protect and serve Australians? In this episode of the National Security Podcast, Dr Simon Walsh joins David Andrews to discuss the evolving world of forensic science and its implications for policing and national security. Dr Simon Walsh is the Chief Scientist, Forensics at the Australian Federal Police. David Andrews is the acting Policy Manager at the ANU National Security College. Show notes:   ANU National Security College academic programs: find out more   We'd love to hear from you! Send in your questions, comments, and suggestions to NatSecPod@anu.edu.au. You can tweet us @NSC_ANU and be sure to subscribe so you don't miss out on future episodes. The National Security Podcast is available on Acast, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and wherever you get your podcasts.   Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

What are the common misconceptions some Americans have about Australia? How has the Australia-United States alliance been affected by the changing international order? And what might the future of this relationship hold, given increasing collaboration between the two nations? In this episode of the National Security Podcast, Charles Edel joins David Andrews to examine the Australia-United States relationship. Charles Edel is a senior adviser and the inaugural Australia Chair at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. David Andrews is the acting Policy Manager at the ANU National Security College. Show notes: ANU National Security College academic programs: find out more Australia can be America's green power hub in the Indo-Pacific, James Carouso and Charles Edel: read more We'd love to hear from you! Send in your questions, comments, and suggestions to NatSecPod@anu.edu.au. You can tweet us @NSC_ANU and be sure to subscribe so you don't miss out on future episodes. The National Security Podcast is available on Acast, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and wherever you get your podcasts. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Dr. Laura O'Philbin, Research and Policy Manager at the Alzheimer Society of Ireland, reacts to studies showing a new drug called Donanemab can slow the progression of Alzheimer's.

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: [Job post] API is looking for a Policy Manager in New Zealand, published by Rainer Kravets on June 27, 2023 on The Effective Altruism Forum. Summary Animal Policy International seeks a part-time Policy Manager in New Zealand to support the organisation's policy and communications work. Role description is available here. Apply before July 7 by filling the form. About the role Animal Policy International (API) is looking for a Policy Manager based in New Zealand. By working closely with the Government, farmers and NGOs, the Policy Manager will help drive forward our ask of legislative change in imports. The Policy Manager will contribute to the work of API by delivering advocacy and communications work - and in particular represent the organisation at meetings and events with varied external stakeholders, in person in New Zealand. The Manager will need to be comfortable talking to a diverse range of stakeholders - from politicians and civil servants and to farmers and NGOS. The Manager may also organise events, prepare briefings, position papers and may contribute to public consultations. With the role being flexible it may suit someone who already works full time in another role and would like to do some additional policy work. Position Summary Application Deadline: 7 JulyStart Date: July/AugustDuration: 6 months (will likely be extended)Hours: 4 hours a week average (flexible, tailored to organisation's needs and availability of Policy Manager)Compensation: NegotiableEmployment type: ContractorLocation: Remote, preferably WellingtonProcess: There will be an interview and 2-hour test taskTo apply please fill in the form. About Animal Policy International Animal Policy International is a Charity Entrepreneurship incubated organisation working in cooperation with farmers, NGOs and policymakers towards responsible imports that uphold standards in higher welfare regions, advance fair market conditions, and help promote higher standards in low-welfare countries. Read our intro post here. If you have any questions about the position, please reach out to Rainer Kravets at rainer@animalpolicyinternational.org. If you know any people who might be interested, then please don't hesitate to share this post with them! Thanks for listening. To help us out with The Nonlinear Library or to learn more, please visit nonlinear.org

World Refill Day is a global day of action to prevent plastic pollution and help people live with less waste. Last year the campaign reached 80 countries and 100 million people, and for this year's event on June 16th, UK-based City to Sea and partners are aiming even higher: launching the Global Reuse Summit and envisioning a circular future where reuse & refill are the norm. Join City to Sea's veteran campaign leads Jo Morley, Head of Marketing and Campaigns, and Steve Hynd, Media and Policy Manager, to learn more about the origins and mission behind World Refill Day—then heed their advice and head to the pub to celebrate with the age-old reuse system of a good pint!Resources:World Refill DayGlobal Reuse SummitThe Refill appCity to Sea

Ian Appleyard PhD is the Research & Policy Manager for the British Acupuncture Council. His PhD, Acupuncture and moxibustion for osteoarthritis of the knee: a component analysis approach, was completed in 2018. He has a particular interest in the methodological challenges of researching acupuncture and placebo.Ian originally studied acupuncture at Westminster University. Further clinical training included studying with a private practitioner in Japan; clinical training in Shu Guan Hospital and the Meridian Research Institute in Shanghai; a year at the Jiangsu Provincial Hospital of TCM, Nanjing, the Meridian Research Institute in Shanghai; and a year at the Jiang-su Provincial Hospital of TCM, in Nanjing.  He has worked as a private practitioner in Hove and Kendal. He was course director for Acupuncture at London South Bank University from 2008-2018.Our Sponsor: Raised Spirit CBDDiscount Code:  ACU10Key reference papers:Acupuncture for chronic pain: update of an individual patient data meta-analysisOther Links:British Acupuncture CouncilThe ACU-Track Clinical Registry

The internet can be a minefield of financial scams, but you don't have to navigate it alone. Arm yourself with knowledge and stay protected from online fraud. Bio LinkedIn Instagram   Sean Davis is a privacy lawyer based in Washington, D.C. and Senior Analyst at the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF).  Previously, he was with Engine.org, the small business advocate, where he served as Policy Manager. Prior to that Sean was with Wikimedia Foundation and Public Knowledge. He earned his JD from George Washington University School of Law and his Bachelor's in English from Mount St. Mary's.   Resources   Staff, the P.N.O. and Nguyen, S.T. (2023) New FTC data show consumers reported losing nearly $8.8 billion to scams in 2022, Federal Trade Commission. Available at: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/02/new-ftc-data-show-consumers-reported-losing-nearly-88-billion-scams-2022 (Accessed: March 6, 2023).    

On today's midweek show, Kelly Olson and Cyril Walrond of the Washington Voting Rights Restoration Coalition join Crystal to talk about the importance of voting rights and the successful effort in the 2021 legislative session to pass HB 1078, which restores those rights to all formerly incarcerated people in Washington and took effect on January 1, 2022. They discuss the impacts that historic disenfranchisement has had on marginalized communities, how democracy that purports to represent all people needs to hear all people's voices, and how the coalition lived that philosophy by including impacted people in their leadership. Kelly and Cyril provide insight into the effective strategy used in navigating the convoluted legislative process, the critical need for education about voting rights restoration, and what we need to fight for next. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Follow us on Twitter at @HacksWonks. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii and find information about the Washington Voting Rights Restoration Coalition at freethevotewa.org/. Kelly Olson Kelly Olson is Policy Manager and a member of the Leadership Team for the Washington Voting Rights Restoration Coalition. Cyril Walrond Cyril Walrond is a member of the Leadership and Steering Committees for the Washington Voting Rights Restoration Coalition. Resources Washington Voting Rights Restoration Coalition   HB 1078 - Restoring voter eligibility for all persons convicted of a felony offense who are not in total confinement under the jurisdiction of the department of corrections   “Washington must allow everyone in the community to vote” by Sarah Eichhorn from Real Change Opinion   “WA Senate must restore voting rights for formerly incarcerated people” by Christopher Poulos from Crosscut Opinion   “Washington State Senate Passes Voting Rights Restoration Bill” by abigail from Washington Voting Justice Coalition   “Bill restores voting rights to Washingtonians with felonies upon release from prison” by Joseph O'Sullivan from The Seattle Times   “What It Feels Like to Have Your Voting Rights Restored” by Alyssa Knight from The Stranger   Questions about how to vote after a felony conviction? Resources - Washington Voting Rights Restoration Coalition   “A guide to voting after a felony conviction in Washington State” from ACLU of Washington   Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington State through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes.  I am very excited about this show that we're doing today - it's about a very important issue. We talk about campaigns, we talk about issues, but really - people being able to make their voice heard is the most important fundamental right that we have. And we have guests today from the Washington Voting Rights Restoration Coalition that I am just thrilled to have - so we have Kelly Olson, who's a Policy Manager and member of the Leadership Team, and Cyril Walrond, who is also on the Leadership Team and a member of the Steering Committee, with us today. Welcome!  [00:01:14] Kelly Olson: Thank you - it's good to be here.  [00:01:15] Cyril Walrond: Yeah, thank you - glad to be here with you today.  [00:01:17] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. So I guess starting with Kelly - who is the Washington Voting Rights Restoration Coalition? What work do you do? And for both of you, what brought you to this work? We can start with Kelly.  [00:01:30] Kelly Olson: So the Washington Voting Rights Coalition is, as the name implies, a coalition of a bunch of different organizations and individuals who are interested in voting rights and making sure that everybody has their right to vote. And in particular, we were focused on restoring the right to vote for people who have been formerly incarcerated. And so this group came together a couple years ago to work on restoring the right to vote for - the way that it works in Washington State, or the way it did work, is that for those - once you leave incarceration and as long as you're paying on your fees and fines, you have the right to vote unless you are under community custody. So if you get out and are in work release or have some sort of probation or community custody officer, you did not have your right to vote restored until you are off community custody. So the coalition came together and felt that people who are out there in the community and working really should have their right to vote. We actually believe that the vote shouldn't be - the right to vote shouldn't be taken away in the beginning. But we're started with this and so - I, myself, am formerly incarcerated and left prison in 2007. And that's a big reason why I am involved in this and other justice, criminal justice-related causes - is to break down that stigma and the barriers that we face as we're released. [00:03:09] Crystal Fincher: Excellent. And what brought you to this work, Cyril?  [00:03:12] Cyril Walrond: What brought me to this work is that I too am a directly impacted person. I was incarcerated for almost 17 years - since the age of 17 - and so I was incarcerated before I had the opportunity to engage in our democracy or even allow my voice to be heard, particularly on things that directly affect me and my community. And so when I think about the impact that this had on myself, as one who was incarcerated at such a young early age - I realized that we as a community too often give our power away. And the way for us to reclaim our power is by taking our power back by our voice, and making sure that our voices are heard and represented at these decision-making tables. And furthermore, to create tables for ourselves. But when I think about that, I just want to make sure that through this work and through my engagement with it, that others can see themselves in this work - other young people, young Black men who have been captured within this system, the criminal justice system, to realize that their voice matters, their experience matters. And for other BIPOC people to realize that we don't need to continue to allow ourselves to be marginalized by a system that been set up to marginalize us, but we have ownership and stake that we can put in at wherever we are and whatever our experiences may be.  [00:04:23] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely - it's so important. And one thing I think is that a lot of people don't realize how many people are currently and formerly have been incarcerated.  [00:04:34] Cyril Walrond: Oh yeah, for sure.  [00:04:34] Crystal Fincher: And how many people are disenfranchised, have been disenfranchised - are caught up in this system. How does this impact the community and how many people are we talking about here? [00:04:45] Cyril Walrond: I believe that I saw a number that this piece of legislation that we helped to pass - House Bill 1078 - was going to restore the right to vote for about 20,000 people. And I believe that when we look at that number, that's 20,000 people who are community members that were disenfranchised. And particularly when we think about voting and elections on a municipal level or the local level, that has significant change because the margins for these votes are so small and so tight. But what's even more shocking to me is how the place that our most commonly marginalized, when it comes to the vote or the greatest disparities, are often some of the - we have epicenters of disenfranchisement within our communities and that's where the brunt of this number comes from. [00:05:37] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. Why is this so impactful to you, Kelly?  [00:05:40] Kelly Olson: The big reason for me is just understanding the racism that was involved in taking the right to vote away in the beginning. It was meant to suppress the vote of marginalized communities, specifically the Black community - and understanding that and fighting for it, I think, is really what got me interested in it. And making sure that we get the right to vote back to as many people as we can and we'll continue fighting until we can stop it from being taken away in the first place.  [00:06:14] Crystal Fincher: So that House Bill 1078, Cyril, that you talked about - passing and successfully passing through the Legislature. It is not easy to pass legislation. It is not easy to go through the creation, to go through the confusing and often dramatic process of it going between committees and all of the hearings and all of that. What was the process like for you in passing this legislation? And looking at that experience, how do you think you going through that helps you moving forward?  [00:06:47] Cyril Walrond: So for me, the experience was a learning experience. I had not been actively engaged in politics or in this arena. And typically when you have these structures of systemic power, they speak a language that excludes those who are impacted by those decisions. And so for me, being in this position and being able to have the privilege of engaging in this work, I realized that I was learning a new language, right? And through learning this new language, I was trying to share this language to my brothers and my comrades and my counterparts who were also co-laboring with me in this work. And in doing this, I was able to say, Hey, well, this language may sound one way, but in reality this is all that is saying and this is all that it means. And so really, while they're trying to push us out and exclude us through that - No, in reality, no. We speak just like this in our own language and now let us find our voices to push back.  [00:07:41] Crystal Fincher: For you, Kelly, what was this process of going through the legislative process with this effort like for you?  [00:07:48] Kelly Olson: Like Cyril said, it was a real learning experience. I did intern at the Legislature a few years after prison, and so I learned a lot about it then. And our director at my job, which is the Civil Survival Project, is a state legislator and she was the prime sponsor of the bill and also formerly incarcerated. And so I think that brought a lot of power to the bill, but also brought somebody who is from our community as far as being formerly incarcerated and somebody who really could speak to why this is so important and help us understand the process. And we had a lot of people in the community that have been around - lobbyists and other people - that really helped us understand the language, understand the unwritten rules of the Legislature - which is the hardest rules to learn - and I think just making those connections and building a network. And it did take a couple legislative sessions - so I worked on this bill for two years - two different legislative sessions to get it passed. So we learned a lot - in the first session when we pulled the bill off the Senate floor, the debate got ugly - they used horrible language. And we ended up saying, Just pull the bill - and we started over for the next session. [00:09:15] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I remember that. It was a very, very ugly debate and really showed how important it is to have people who are directly impacted and who do have experience with this to talk about how impactful it is and what it definitely means. And not this caricature that some people have in their minds from the decades of misinformation surrounding issues like this. So in this process - the process of passing legislation can be challenging. Having a legislator like Representative Tarra Simmons, who was able to understand some of the experiences that you've had and bring her expertise and experience to this has been important. But it also took community to do this. What was that effort like and what was the community effort like in passing this legislation? [00:10:07] Cyril Walrond: Yeah, I believe that the community effort in passing this legislation was relentless. There was a commitment throughout the state of different stakeholders and committed community members who were devoted to seeing the passage of this piece of legislation. As we had our coalition calls and our meetings - and in fact during this time, I was actually calling from inside of prison myself while I was still in custody - but while we're doing this work, we see regularly that people are championing within their own districts, that people are writing letters and engaging with legislators, that there was a collective push and effort to make sure that we were moving to put pressure on our individual legislators, but also to make sure that the broader work was being done. And the values and principles that the collective was standing on were very well in line, so as we got to the point of the legislative session - that we all were in agreement and alignment and knew - with clarity - where we wanted to go and how we wanted to get this done. And so that it was accountable to those who it would be impacting. [00:11:10] Crystal Fincher: And what was the experience like working with Representative Tarra Simmons?  [00:11:14] Cyril Walrond: The experience working with Representative Tarra Simmons was quite the experience. Having a representative who experienced not only incarceration, but disenfranchisement, and to have her champion this bill was an incredible asset and just a great way to leverage the bill and the momentum that community was pushing forward with this. She was able to bring in her experience and, even as a young legislator, had the zealousness behind her and just a commitment and effort to do things that many other legislators wouldn't have done. And in particular, I think about the way in which she tried and attempted to move accountably with community and for community, particularly those who are impacted by this piece of legislation. That was something that I recognized that she did. And honestly, nobody's perfect, but I believe that the way that she went about it was a shift in a new direction of how things can go and how we can move towards more accountable representation in the legislative process.  [00:12:17] Crystal Fincher: Kelly, you talked about this being a multi-session effort, that this wasn't successful on its first time. What was that process like? How did you stay organized and keep the momentum going after the setback in the prior session? And how did you organize for the successful push in this past session?  [00:12:39] Kelly Olson: Yeah, I think a big part of it was - the first year that I worked on it, I was really just a member of the coalition and not super - not quite as engaged. And in the second year, we really pushed to have directly impacted people at the leadership. And so there was actually four of us who were formerly incarcerated and then Cyril who is currently incarcerated, that took over the leadership in the second year. And I think that really helped with the grassroots organizing and getting people directly involved. We also worked hard to understand who - where some of the opposition was. And we worked hard in particular to get the county auditors on board. A lot of the pushback on the opposition and some of the things that we really stood strong on was we wanted a really clean bill. We didn't want to have what's called a carveout, where we say - well, people committed of this crime are worthy to vote, and people committed of this crime are not worthy of vote. We believe that you go through the criminal justice system, you have your hearing, you get judged - and we shouldn't be judged every time where we turn around. And so one of the things that I think was also helpful was getting the county auditors on board - they actually preferred a really clean bill, which they call "a bright line" - if you wanted to carveout for certain offenses, then you have auditors having to look into people's criminal records and decide what kind of crime they have, do they qualify, do they not qualify? But early on, and Cyril was a big part of this too, we set our values and we really had held strong to - we were not going to - we didn't want to see a bill pass that had any carveouts based on a type of crime. It was either all of us, or none of us. And so that was a really big thing. And I think having the momentum of Rep Simmons in there and having that lived experience to help us on the inside helped. But as Cyril mentioned, the grassroots organizing on the outside was really important.  [00:14:54] Crystal Fincher: So as we look at - the legislation was passed, now it's been implemented - people are eligible. How are you working to get the word out to communities? Because I would think that there's still a lot of people who are just learning that they're eligible - I know I certainly learned this too long after the fact. And speaking to other people, they're still getting out. What efforts, Cyril, are being made now to make sure everybody who is eligible to vote knows that they are?  [00:15:28] Cyril Walrond: There's a number of different efforts that are taking place through the work of our coalition and in other spaces to inform community - to our returning community members, such as myself, that their voices matter and that their right to vote has been restored. For myself - real quick - I actually was released August 1st, and by August 2nd, I not only was a registered voter, but I actually had voted for the first time. And when I did that, I was able to share my experience with those who I engage with and let them know - if I can do this a day out of prison, after almost 17 years, you can do this, right? And explain to them and educate them on their rights, educate them on just the history of voter disenfranchisement, and furthermore our need to get engaged. So there is the organic and individual work that's being done by the work of the credible messengers, who was a part of this coalition and individually lived experiences, who actively engage in educating community and host different events. There's work that's being done through the Communications Committee and working on art installations and different ways of actively engaging with community artists, with those who are storytellers, on how to share this message and build the narrative on the importance of voting rights. But there's many, many things that are being done actively. Let me not forget the work that's being done around jail voting. When it comes to jail voting, many people are - they feel that they're disenfranchised pre-trial. But in reality, you still have your right to vote even before or up until you get convicted of a crime. And we are doing work to educate people - going into jails, letting them know what's taking place, how people are able to be registered while in jail, as well as once they get out of prison have their rights restored. So there's education, education, education - making sure people know and that people are learning these things at every level and every step of the way.  [00:17:40] Crystal Fincher: And that's so important. Thank you for mentioning that because it is so true - people are innocent until proven guilty. And we just recently did a show on bail reform and talked about how many people are detained pre-trial without having been convicted of a crime. So yes, they are in jail, but they have been convicted of nothing. They still have their rights, but the access to ballots, to be able to vote is so severely restricted that it is a challenge. And so thank you for bringing that up and for the work that you're doing on that. Kelly, as now you're looking, moving forward - what are other things that this coalition is advocating for? [00:18:24] Kelly Olson: Right now our focus is really on education. In addition to just educating people on this bill, there has also been a lot of misinformation that has been part of the history of voter disenfranchisement. We have talked about wanting to do full restoration. There is some research and strategy going on around that, but it's a little bit on the back burner as we focus on education up to this next election. And then I think that we'll start to talk a little bit more about what does full restoration look like. There is fighting going on at the federal level as well to do full restoration. Full restoration is a little more complicated than just passing a bill. It needs an amendment to our State Constitution, so that makes it just a little bit more complicated and something I still need to learn more about.  [00:19:19] Crystal Fincher: Cyril, looking at the work that you've done - through all of the education, through the legislative process - certainly there have been lots of misconceptions and misunderstandings that have been brought up to you. What are the most frequent misconceptions that you encounter? [00:19:36] Cyril Walrond: There are misconceptions that we, as incarcerated individuals and formerly incarcerated individuals, often deal with. First, the stigmatization of incarceration or having been justice impacted. With that, there is the belief of - lack of desire, lack of interest, or even lack of ability to be involved in a system or in the right to vote, right? To be able to go up, to show up, and to have your voice heard. Many people think that they're excluded because they don't understand how this system is worked, or how it's set up, or structured to work. But the reality is - what I found - is many people incarcerated are actually much more civically engaged and civically educated than many people that I've encountered in community in returning. And so it's many of us who are coming from incarceration that are educating community on what our experiences have been, and what some of these nuances are within the legislative process, as we have directly been impacted by it. I also think another misconception is that people who - the right to vote is something that only belongs to some, right? But I believe that the reality of this is - if we believe in a democracy that represents all people, then all people's voices should be heard. But when we intentionally, or for whatever reason, exclude the voices of some - then as Kelly mentioned before, it's all of us or none. A democracy that represents some people cannot serve the interest of all people. And making sure that through the things that we do, through this work and through the acknowledgement of those misconceptions and the educating against those misconceptions, but more importantly educating to know the reality despite those misconceptions, I believe that we're able to change the narrative and allow people to see that we are lacking in the power of community and the power of our democracy because everybody's not being represented.  [00:21:39] Crystal Fincher: Excellent points. And Kelly, what are the biggest misunderstandings that you encounter?  [00:21:44] Kelly Olson: I would say that some of the biggest misunderstandings are that, especially for those of us doing this work, that we can only speak to our lived experience as being formerly incarcerated - that that's the only voice or lens that we bring to this, where we actually have a lot of other lived experience. And so a lot of times - you might be on a panel with other experts and they might ask the lawyer the policy question when I could very well answer that same question. But the question that will come to me is something about being formerly incarcerated. So remembering that we can speak on multiple topics and have a lot of depth to us - our incarceration is just one small part of our story. And actually - maybe a big part of our story - but regardless, there's a lot more depth to us than our experience of incarceration. And so just remembering that we can speak on many levels, many topics - whether it's related to incarceration or not.  [00:22:55] Crystal Fincher: Such an important point. And I have seen that personally play out in so many meetings and panels and discussions - and they're worse off for it. So a great reminder and really useful to remember that. Is there anything else you would add to that, Cyril? [00:23:12] Cyril Walrond: I would like to add - in addition to that - that there is the belief that democracy can be monetized, that there are some who are proponents of making sure that LFO fines and different things are paid off. And I know we were able to get around that with this bill and were able to push to make sure that once an individual is returning to community, that they have their rights restored. And that was one of the areas that they really were trying to push carveouts - it's saying that legal financial obligations must be paid for. And in doing so, that goes back to and points a bright light at the racist history of voter disenfranchisement, particularly by way of Jim Crow law, Black codes, and even poll taxes. And so when we look at the origins of how there has been a history of disenfranchisement, a history of suppressing and oppressing the voices of Black and Brown people, we have to also look at how is this mechanism being done? And then question those misconceptions that are often being raised. [00:24:11] Crystal Fincher: Thank you for that - that's important and true. Now, moving forward, I guess just as we conclude here - what advice, Kelly, would you give to people organizing - whether it's with regard to voting rights or whatever is happening in their community - what advice would you give to people about how to get involved in the processes that control how their community functions and how to make their voice heard? [00:24:38] Kelly Olson: That's a great question. I think that getting involved with a local organization that's aligned with the work that you want to work on, paying attention to - a lot of times people don't get very involved in some of the smaller local elections, and I think it's important to get to know who your representatives are, not just at the state level, but at the local level. So, meet your elected officials, talk to them, find out what are the issues that they are working on. And letting them know what issues are important to you is really important. We've got an election coming up. I think it's really important to be educated about who the candidates are, getting involved if you can, research them, and then finding organizations. If you're formerly incarcerated, Civil Survival Project is - works on different legislation. You're welcome to reach out to our organization to get more involved and there's other organizations out there too. But I think one of the biggest things is getting to know your elected officials and getting to know the issues that are out there and that you want to work on. [00:25:43] Crystal Fincher: Thank you. And Cyril, what advice would you give to people who want to make a difference and make their voices heard?  [00:25:50] Cyril Walrond: The advice I would give to those who want to make a difference and make their voice heard is that you can make a difference and make your voice heard. It doesn't take much, right? When we think about just the power to impact and influence change and to be agents of change within our lives and within our communities, within this country, everybody has within themselves to do it. And what you bring to the table as an individual can very well impact the collective. I think that it's important to not do it in isolation, right? There's an African proverb says, You want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together. And making sure that you connect with organizations that are moving accountably, that are committed to this work, that are grounded in principle and particularly principles and values that are life-affirming and humanizing and recognize the value of the individuals that that they seek to serve. Many spaces come with the mindset or concept of saviorism, as opposed to being able to cultivate and share in community together. Realizing that one thing that affects one, affects the other. And so when I think about what people can do is get out, get involved, look up and research different spaces and organizations doing this work, connect with different people that are doing this work. And more importantly, understand that if it's not there in your community, if you live in a small pocket where those things don't exist, I guarantee you that there's other like-minded people who are also impacted by the same issue. That you can begin the process of mobilizing, organizing to affect change in this area and in whatever area is affecting our community.  [00:27:37] Crystal Fincher: Thank you very much for that. Thank you both - Cyril and Kelly - for joining us and sharing with us today. Very important information. You're doing excellent work educating the community. Kelly, if people want to learn more information about the coalition or get involved themselves, how can they get in contact?  [00:27:55] Kelly Olson: The best way would be through our website, which is freethevotewa.org. There's all kinds of materials on there and resources. So again, that's freethevotewa.org.  [00:28:09] Crystal Fincher: All right - thank you both and we appreciate what you are doing and we'll continue following along ourselves. Thank you very much and thanks for listening. Thank you all for listening to Hacks & Wonks. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Lisl Stadler. Our assistant producer is Shannon Cheng, and our Post-Production Assistant is Bryce Cannatelli. You can find Hacks & Wonks on Twitter @HacksWonks, and you can follow me @finchfrii, spelled F-I-N-C-H-F-R-I-I. You can catch Hacks & Wonks on iTunes, Spotify, or wherever else you get your podcasts - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get our Friday almost-live shows and our midweek show delivered right to your podcast feed. If you like us, leave us a review wherever you listen. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the episode notes.  Thanks for tuning in - talk to you next time.

2023 is the year both the legislature and the governor have made addressing Washington's housing crisis a top priority, with a slew of proposed bills. Two top experts join us to help unpack and explain some of the more prominent pieces of legislation: - Jesse Simpson, Government Relations and Policy Manager with the Housing Development Consortium of Seattle-King County - Anna Fahey, Senior Director of Communications and Campaigns with the Sightline Institute *Note: When referring to the number of housing units that the state needs to build right now, Anna means 140,000 when she says 140. Calls to Action: Create a leg.wa.gov account to keep track of your sign-in actions https://www.takeaction.network/xactions/17513?ref=51 Support transit oriented development by signing in Pro to SB 5466 https://www.takeaction.network/xactions/32342?ref=51 Support Build with low-carbon materials by Signing in "Pro" to HB 1282 https://www.takeaction.network/xactions/32326?ref=51

Today, we have two guests, Peter Minor, Director of Science and Innovation at Carbon180; and Jack Andreasen, Policy Manager for Carbon Management at Breakthrough Energy. Peter and Jack are two of the world's foremost experts in the world on carbon dioxide removal, or CDR as it's called in climate circles. They and their respective organizations influence public policy, support critical technology research and development, and offer various other forms of support for the burgeoning field of CDR.In this conversation, we're focused almost exclusively on ambient carbon dioxide removal and not on point source carbon capture, which is a separate but related technology focused on directly capturing emissions from hard-to-abate industrial applications like concrete, steel, and fossil fuel extraction. Ambient carbon dioxide removal (CDR) instead seeks to remove diffuse CO2 from the atmosphere directly via multiple methodologies, of which the most widely pictured method is direct air capture, or DAC, which looks like oversized fans that extract CO2 from the air. In addition, we also touch on a few biology-related CDR technologies like biochar that seek to lock biologically produced carbon up before it can become atmospheric.There's so much to unpack in this one. Cody, Peter and Jack talk about policy tailwinds for CDR, the categories and methodologies, commercial adoption progress and challenges, how and why buyers approach the space today, and some of the speed bumps CDR will undoubtedly encounter as it scales, including but not limited to fraud and false claims. Challenges aside, it's an exciting time in this space. CDR is still very nascent and very wide open, but it also feels light years further along than just a few years ago. In this episode, we cover: [3:08] An overview of Carbon180 and Peter's work[5:07] Breakthrough Energy and Jack's background [7:48] Policy tailwinds of the IRA[12:59] Why DAC became a policy winner and other investments in the IRA [14:36] Hybrid approaches to removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere [18:30] An overview of direct air capture (DAC) and mineralization [25:03] Enhanced rock weathering [27:46] Measuring CDR and uncertainty with open and closed systems [32:54] Variety of ocean methods compared to terrestrial  [35:11] Biochar as a scaled solution, why it's a less prominent method, and Measurement, Reporting, and Verification (MRV) [40:53] Analysis for selecting and purchasing CDR credits [43:00] The role of consulting firms for companies purchasing CDR credits [52:13] Reasons why companies are buying CDR [55:17] Biggest risks of fraud and different levels [1:03:03] Guardrails for preventing fraud and the role of government [1:06:25] Innovation needs for CDRResources mentioned in this episode: Buying Carbon Removal, Explained by ShopifyCarbon180 ResourcesCDR.fyi 2022 Year in ReviewGet connected: Cody Simms Twitter / LinkedInMCJ Podcast / Collective*You can also reach us via email at info@mcjcollective.com, where we encourage you to share your feedback on episodes and suggestions for future topics or guests.Episode recorded on January 4, 2023

Hosts Gregg Masters and Fred Goldstein meet Amelia Bedri, MHSA, Content Engineer & Policy Development Manager at NCQA (the National Committee on Quality Assurance). Serving as the subject matter expert for NCQA's Health Equity Accreditation programs, Amelia leads the development cycle and maintenance of the the core knowledge of the health care industry and regulatory environment to enhance the Standards and Guidelines. She provides policy expertise to internal teams and external stakeholders including CMS, state Medicaid agencies, managed care organizations, and care delivery organizations. We discuss the role of NCQA in advancing health equity via their traditional audience, health plans, and preview the accrediting entity's role in the health system or provider marketplace. To stream our Station live 24/7 visit www.HealthcareNOWRadio.com or ask your Smart Device to “….Play Healthcare NOW Radio”. Find all of our network podcasts on your favorite podcast platforms and be sure to subscribe and like us. Learn more at www.healthcarenowradio.com/listen

The Congo Basin is home to the world's largest peatland. Simon Lewis, Professor of Global Change Science at UCL and the University of Leeds, tells Roland how peatlands all around the world are showing early alarm bells of change. From the boreal Arctic forests to the Amazon, Simon helps us understand how they could action huge change in the climate. Simon is joined by Dr Ifo Averti, Associate Professor in Forest Ecology at Universite Marien Ngouabi in the Congo who helps us understand what this landscape is like. Hurricane Ian, which recently caused devastating damage to Cuba and the United States, may signify a growing trend of increasingly powerful storms. Karthik Balaguru, climate and data scientist at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, explains how climate change is causing hurricanes to rapidly intensify, making them faster and wetter. On Sunday 6th November, COP27 will begin in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt. Dr Debbie Rosen, Science and Policy Manager at CONSTRAIN, breaks down some of the jargon we might hear throughout the conference. We know the Earth's atmosphere is warming and it's thanks to us and our taste for fossil fuels. But how quickly is this melting the ice sheets, ice caps, and glaciers that remain on our planet? That's what listener David wants to know. With the help of a team of climate scientists in Greenland, Marnie Chesterton goes to find the answer, in an icy landscape that's ground zero in the story of thawing. She discovers how Greenland's ice sheet is sliding faster off land, and sees that the tiniest of creatures are darkening the ice surface and accelerating its melt. CrowdScience explores what we're in store for when it comes to melting ice. In the lead-up to yet another UN climate conference, we unpack what is contributing to sea level rise – from ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica, to melting mountain glaciers and warming oceans. There's a lot of ice at the poles. The question is: how much of it will still be there in the future? Research Professor and climate scientist Jason Box from the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland shows us how much ice Greenland we've already committed ourselves to losing, even if we stopped burning all fossil fuels today. His team, including Jakob Jakobsen, show us how these scientists collect all this data that helps feed climate models and helps us all to understand how quickly the seas might rise. Professor Martyn Trantor from Aarhus University helps us understand why a darkening Greenland ice sheet would only add to the problem of melting. And climate scientist Ruth Mottram from the Danish Meteorological Institute breaks down how the ice is breaking down in Antarctica and other glaciers around the world. Image credit: Getty Images

The Congo Basin is home to the world's largest peatland. Simon Lewis, Professor of Global Change Science at UCL and the University of Leeds, tells Roland how this peatland acts as a huge carbon sink and how climate change could result in these carbon stores being released. He is joined by Dr Ifo Averti, Associate Professor in Forest Ecology at Universite Marien Ngouabi in the Congo who helps us understand what this landscape is like. We'll explore how peatlands all around the world are showing early alarm bells of change. From the boreal Arctic forests to the Amazon, Simon helps us understand how they could action huge change in the climate. Hurricane Ian, which recently caused devastating damage to Cuba and the United States, may signify a growing trend of increasingly powerful storms. Karthik Balaguru, climate and data scientist at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, explains how climate change is causing hurricanes to rapidly intensify, making them faster and wetter. On Sunday 6th November, COP27 will begin in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt. Dr Debbie Rosen, Science and Policy Manager at CONSTRAIN, breaks down some of the jargon we might hear throughout the conference. Contributors Simon Lewis, Professor of Global Change Science, University College London & University of Leeds Dr Ifo Averti, Associate Professor in Forest Ecology at Universite Marien Ngouabi Karthik Balaguru, Climate and Data Scientist, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Dr Debbie Rosen, Science and Policy Manager, CONSTRAIN Image credit: Getty Images Presenter: Roland Pease Assistant Producer: Sophie Ormiston Producer: Robbie Wojciechowski