Most Australians aren't ‘good with money'. It's time that changed
Meanwhile, in the United Kingdom, Mexico, Japan and South Africa, women's literacy on all things money isn't just as good as the gents, it's better.
But what was easily the most concerning finding was that among those aged 15 to 24, the score out of five was just 2.9. That, my friends, is a seriously mediocre C-grade.
Perhaps 50 years ago, when the choices were between a couple of basic bank products and a superannuation account, these numbers wouldn't have been so concerning.
But in a world of countless different types of specialised bank loans, HECS debt, credit cards, buy now pay later schemes, online gambling, cryptocurrency, ETFs, salary negotiations, bonus structures, stock options, and self-managed versus industry or corporate super funds, it's never been more important to ensure that everyone, especially young people, is literate when it comes to money.
Though the Australian curriculum does include financial literacy content, the way in which it is being taught and the detail within that vary greatly, leaving much room for improvement.
One country leading the way in this field is, believe it or not, the United States. According to the US' Council for Economic Education, as of 2024, 35 of the country's 50 states now require high school students to attend personal finance classes before they graduate.
Loading
That's more than two-thirds of teenagers across America having a basic understanding of money and finance before they leave home and enter the world of adulthood and employment.
The trend is also taking off at American universities, where a growing number of public and private institutions are offering personal finance courses for students as electives. These courses teach the basics, but some go further and cover the principles of investing, taxes, how to understand job offers and salary packages, as well as the psychology of why people make certain financial decisions.
As much fun as those 101 literature or psychology electives can be, this seems like a much more useful course to be aiming for an easy A in.
Aside from the fact that we live in much more financially complicated times, there are other reasons we need to care about making sure our kids understand money.
For starters, research consistently shows that the better financially educated someone is, the more likely they are to make good decisions and better judgements about their money.
We also know that the cost of being totally financially illiterate or having a poor understanding of money can have devastating long-term effects. People who are 'bad with money' are consistently shown to have a lower standard of living, and we see the wealth gap widening between the 'haves' and the 'have-nots'.
So easily, one high-interest credit card or personal loan can follow someone around for decades and impact their credit scores, their ability to make career or relationship choices, create extra stress, and make it harder to meet their basic needs. And yet, we see it happen every day, often affecting people you'd least expect.
Having a solid grasp on finances isn't just about us as individuals, either. Ensuring everyone knows the basics, especially those who are the least financially literate, is actually great for the economy broadly.
That's because it allows people to carry less debt, improves their job opportunities and earning potential, and creates new jobs in the process. To quote former assistant RBA governor Keith Hall all the way back in 2008: 'Money spent on financial education would be money very well spent.'
And while it's not as if we're doing nothing, we certainly need to be doing so much more. Because the more people who can hold their head high and say they're 'good with money', the better.
Victoria Devine is an award-winning retired financial adviser, bestselling author and host of Australia's No.1 finance podcast, She's on the Money. She is also founder and director of Zella Money.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Advertiser
32 minutes ago
- The Advertiser
Call for laws to stop harm to consumers, firms online
Australia needs new laws and regulations to prevent significant harm to consumers and businesses from the exploitative practices of US tech giants. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission issued the warning in its final Digital Platform Services report on Monday, following five years of monitoring social networks, online marketplaces, app stores and search engines. The 408-page report issued six recommendations but also raised future areas of concern including a lack of competition in cloud computing and artificial intelligence (AI) services, and risky behaviour involving online video games. The report comes six months after the federal government launched a public consultation into digital competition proposals, and after several tech firms complained to US officials about Australia's current digital media laws. The commission's tenth and final report highlighted four existing and two new recommendations to address anti-competitive and harmful behaviour from online platforms, and chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb said existing laws were not equipped to protect Australians. "While these services have brought many benefits, they have also created harms that our current competition and consumer laws cannot adequately address," she said. "This is why we continue to recommend that targeted regulation of digital platform services is needed to increase competition and innovation and protect consumers in digital markets." Existing recommendations included a ban on unfair trading practices, enforceable codes of conduct for designated digital platforms including competition protections, and mandatory processes to help consumers, including removing scams and harmful apps, verifying advertisers, and introducing a digital ombudsman to handle disputes. A consumer survey conducted for the report found more than eight in 10 Australians supported the introduction of an independent dispute resolution body to handle complaints. Support was highest for the policing of general online marketplaces, like Amazon, Temu and eBay, followed by social networks such as Facebook, Instagram and LinkedIn, and online messaging platforms. The report also recommended the continued monitoring of online services and a permanent Digital Platform Regulators Forum comprised of existing media regulatory bodies to collaborate on streamlined legal reforms. Future areas of concern for the commission included the regulation of digital video games, such as the risk of accidental in-game spending, consumer harm from paid loot-boxes, and clear purchasing contracts. The report also noted concerns about a lack of competition in generative AI services and cloud computing, which could be dominated by firms including Amazon, Microsoft and Google. "Harms to competition in the generative AI sector could hamper innovation, result in lower quality products and services, and force Australian businesses and consumers to pay more than they otherwise would to utilise this technology," Ms Cass-Gottlieb said. The report completes the inquiry called by then-treasurer Josh Frydenberg in February 2020, and the Labor government has since committed to several changes based on its recommendations, including a ban on unfair trading practices. The government's consultation into proposed digital competition changes, including laws to govern app marketplaces, online advertising and social media, closed in February. Australia needs new laws and regulations to prevent significant harm to consumers and businesses from the exploitative practices of US tech giants. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission issued the warning in its final Digital Platform Services report on Monday, following five years of monitoring social networks, online marketplaces, app stores and search engines. The 408-page report issued six recommendations but also raised future areas of concern including a lack of competition in cloud computing and artificial intelligence (AI) services, and risky behaviour involving online video games. The report comes six months after the federal government launched a public consultation into digital competition proposals, and after several tech firms complained to US officials about Australia's current digital media laws. The commission's tenth and final report highlighted four existing and two new recommendations to address anti-competitive and harmful behaviour from online platforms, and chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb said existing laws were not equipped to protect Australians. "While these services have brought many benefits, they have also created harms that our current competition and consumer laws cannot adequately address," she said. "This is why we continue to recommend that targeted regulation of digital platform services is needed to increase competition and innovation and protect consumers in digital markets." Existing recommendations included a ban on unfair trading practices, enforceable codes of conduct for designated digital platforms including competition protections, and mandatory processes to help consumers, including removing scams and harmful apps, verifying advertisers, and introducing a digital ombudsman to handle disputes. A consumer survey conducted for the report found more than eight in 10 Australians supported the introduction of an independent dispute resolution body to handle complaints. Support was highest for the policing of general online marketplaces, like Amazon, Temu and eBay, followed by social networks such as Facebook, Instagram and LinkedIn, and online messaging platforms. The report also recommended the continued monitoring of online services and a permanent Digital Platform Regulators Forum comprised of existing media regulatory bodies to collaborate on streamlined legal reforms. Future areas of concern for the commission included the regulation of digital video games, such as the risk of accidental in-game spending, consumer harm from paid loot-boxes, and clear purchasing contracts. The report also noted concerns about a lack of competition in generative AI services and cloud computing, which could be dominated by firms including Amazon, Microsoft and Google. "Harms to competition in the generative AI sector could hamper innovation, result in lower quality products and services, and force Australian businesses and consumers to pay more than they otherwise would to utilise this technology," Ms Cass-Gottlieb said. The report completes the inquiry called by then-treasurer Josh Frydenberg in February 2020, and the Labor government has since committed to several changes based on its recommendations, including a ban on unfair trading practices. The government's consultation into proposed digital competition changes, including laws to govern app marketplaces, online advertising and social media, closed in February. Australia needs new laws and regulations to prevent significant harm to consumers and businesses from the exploitative practices of US tech giants. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission issued the warning in its final Digital Platform Services report on Monday, following five years of monitoring social networks, online marketplaces, app stores and search engines. The 408-page report issued six recommendations but also raised future areas of concern including a lack of competition in cloud computing and artificial intelligence (AI) services, and risky behaviour involving online video games. The report comes six months after the federal government launched a public consultation into digital competition proposals, and after several tech firms complained to US officials about Australia's current digital media laws. The commission's tenth and final report highlighted four existing and two new recommendations to address anti-competitive and harmful behaviour from online platforms, and chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb said existing laws were not equipped to protect Australians. "While these services have brought many benefits, they have also created harms that our current competition and consumer laws cannot adequately address," she said. "This is why we continue to recommend that targeted regulation of digital platform services is needed to increase competition and innovation and protect consumers in digital markets." Existing recommendations included a ban on unfair trading practices, enforceable codes of conduct for designated digital platforms including competition protections, and mandatory processes to help consumers, including removing scams and harmful apps, verifying advertisers, and introducing a digital ombudsman to handle disputes. A consumer survey conducted for the report found more than eight in 10 Australians supported the introduction of an independent dispute resolution body to handle complaints. Support was highest for the policing of general online marketplaces, like Amazon, Temu and eBay, followed by social networks such as Facebook, Instagram and LinkedIn, and online messaging platforms. The report also recommended the continued monitoring of online services and a permanent Digital Platform Regulators Forum comprised of existing media regulatory bodies to collaborate on streamlined legal reforms. Future areas of concern for the commission included the regulation of digital video games, such as the risk of accidental in-game spending, consumer harm from paid loot-boxes, and clear purchasing contracts. The report also noted concerns about a lack of competition in generative AI services and cloud computing, which could be dominated by firms including Amazon, Microsoft and Google. "Harms to competition in the generative AI sector could hamper innovation, result in lower quality products and services, and force Australian businesses and consumers to pay more than they otherwise would to utilise this technology," Ms Cass-Gottlieb said. The report completes the inquiry called by then-treasurer Josh Frydenberg in February 2020, and the Labor government has since committed to several changes based on its recommendations, including a ban on unfair trading practices. The government's consultation into proposed digital competition changes, including laws to govern app marketplaces, online advertising and social media, closed in February. Australia needs new laws and regulations to prevent significant harm to consumers and businesses from the exploitative practices of US tech giants. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission issued the warning in its final Digital Platform Services report on Monday, following five years of monitoring social networks, online marketplaces, app stores and search engines. The 408-page report issued six recommendations but also raised future areas of concern including a lack of competition in cloud computing and artificial intelligence (AI) services, and risky behaviour involving online video games. The report comes six months after the federal government launched a public consultation into digital competition proposals, and after several tech firms complained to US officials about Australia's current digital media laws. The commission's tenth and final report highlighted four existing and two new recommendations to address anti-competitive and harmful behaviour from online platforms, and chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb said existing laws were not equipped to protect Australians. "While these services have brought many benefits, they have also created harms that our current competition and consumer laws cannot adequately address," she said. "This is why we continue to recommend that targeted regulation of digital platform services is needed to increase competition and innovation and protect consumers in digital markets." Existing recommendations included a ban on unfair trading practices, enforceable codes of conduct for designated digital platforms including competition protections, and mandatory processes to help consumers, including removing scams and harmful apps, verifying advertisers, and introducing a digital ombudsman to handle disputes. A consumer survey conducted for the report found more than eight in 10 Australians supported the introduction of an independent dispute resolution body to handle complaints. Support was highest for the policing of general online marketplaces, like Amazon, Temu and eBay, followed by social networks such as Facebook, Instagram and LinkedIn, and online messaging platforms. The report also recommended the continued monitoring of online services and a permanent Digital Platform Regulators Forum comprised of existing media regulatory bodies to collaborate on streamlined legal reforms. Future areas of concern for the commission included the regulation of digital video games, such as the risk of accidental in-game spending, consumer harm from paid loot-boxes, and clear purchasing contracts. The report also noted concerns about a lack of competition in generative AI services and cloud computing, which could be dominated by firms including Amazon, Microsoft and Google. "Harms to competition in the generative AI sector could hamper innovation, result in lower quality products and services, and force Australian businesses and consumers to pay more than they otherwise would to utilise this technology," Ms Cass-Gottlieb said. The report completes the inquiry called by then-treasurer Josh Frydenberg in February 2020, and the Labor government has since committed to several changes based on its recommendations, including a ban on unfair trading practices. The government's consultation into proposed digital competition changes, including laws to govern app marketplaces, online advertising and social media, closed in February.
The Advertiser
33 minutes ago
- The Advertiser
Voters want AFL stadium deal redo but leaders unmoved
An AFL stadium deal worth close to $1 billion is on the nose with most voters in one state but neither the premier or his would-be replacement are sniffing the electoral breeze. With a snap election weeks away, Tasmanian voters were surveyed on their attitude to a contentious deal struck with the AFL to build a $945 million roofed stadium at Macquarie Point. The Hobart stadium is a condition of the licence for the Devils' inclusion in the competition in 2028. The online poll of 842 voters, conducted by YouGov on behalf of progressive think tank The Australia Institute from June 12 to 16, indicates most Tasmanians believe the stadium deal is unfair. More than two out of three (69 per cent) support Tasmanian parliament renegotiating with the AFL to avoid constructing a new stadium. Support to renegotiate was even stronger among Labor supporters (71 per cent). Liberal voters were the most likely to disagree (38 per cent) but a majority (56 per cent) still backed the proposition. More than two-thirds of those surveyed also believed the AFL was treating Tasmania unfairly in its requirements for granting the state a licence. The AFL has been staunch in its refusal to renegotiate the deal, declaring the stadium a non-negotiable condition. The Australia Institute's Leanne Minshull said the deal was a "dud" and one of the most one-sided in Australian sport. "This state deserves to have a team in the AFL, but Tassie taxpayers don't want to be on the hook for a billion-dollar indoor stadium they don't want," she said. Some analysts have described the July 19 state election as a referendum on the stadium, but Liberal Premier Jeremy Rockliff and Labor leader Dean Winter have been unwilling to budge on their support. Mr Rockliff was sticking to his guns on Monday, dismissing the poll as "bodgey" and "anti-jobs". "This week we would've been putting forward legislation to in fact get on with the job and build the stadium ... (but) unfortunately Dean Winter and Labor forced the election," he told reporters. Mr Winter also reaffirmed his support for the stadium while criticising the way the AFL deal came together without cabinet approval or treasury advice. "This has been a problem that Jeremy Rockliff has created and it's a problem that now needs to be dealt with seriously and methodically," he said. Mr Rockliff separately revealed one of two Spirit of Tasmania replacement ships was expected to arrive in August. The vessel has been docked in Scotland for six months after his government unsuccessfully tried to lease it. The other has been undergoing sea trials in Finland, with Tasmania to officially take ownership during the week. The ferries won't be in service until late 2026, years behind schedule, because a berth has not been built in Devonport. The Spirit of Tasmania debacle was one of the reasons cited by Labor in its successful no-confidence vote against Mr Rockliff. An AFL stadium deal worth close to $1 billion is on the nose with most voters in one state but neither the premier or his would-be replacement are sniffing the electoral breeze. With a snap election weeks away, Tasmanian voters were surveyed on their attitude to a contentious deal struck with the AFL to build a $945 million roofed stadium at Macquarie Point. The Hobart stadium is a condition of the licence for the Devils' inclusion in the competition in 2028. The online poll of 842 voters, conducted by YouGov on behalf of progressive think tank The Australia Institute from June 12 to 16, indicates most Tasmanians believe the stadium deal is unfair. More than two out of three (69 per cent) support Tasmanian parliament renegotiating with the AFL to avoid constructing a new stadium. Support to renegotiate was even stronger among Labor supporters (71 per cent). Liberal voters were the most likely to disagree (38 per cent) but a majority (56 per cent) still backed the proposition. More than two-thirds of those surveyed also believed the AFL was treating Tasmania unfairly in its requirements for granting the state a licence. The AFL has been staunch in its refusal to renegotiate the deal, declaring the stadium a non-negotiable condition. The Australia Institute's Leanne Minshull said the deal was a "dud" and one of the most one-sided in Australian sport. "This state deserves to have a team in the AFL, but Tassie taxpayers don't want to be on the hook for a billion-dollar indoor stadium they don't want," she said. Some analysts have described the July 19 state election as a referendum on the stadium, but Liberal Premier Jeremy Rockliff and Labor leader Dean Winter have been unwilling to budge on their support. Mr Rockliff was sticking to his guns on Monday, dismissing the poll as "bodgey" and "anti-jobs". "This week we would've been putting forward legislation to in fact get on with the job and build the stadium ... (but) unfortunately Dean Winter and Labor forced the election," he told reporters. Mr Winter also reaffirmed his support for the stadium while criticising the way the AFL deal came together without cabinet approval or treasury advice. "This has been a problem that Jeremy Rockliff has created and it's a problem that now needs to be dealt with seriously and methodically," he said. Mr Rockliff separately revealed one of two Spirit of Tasmania replacement ships was expected to arrive in August. The vessel has been docked in Scotland for six months after his government unsuccessfully tried to lease it. The other has been undergoing sea trials in Finland, with Tasmania to officially take ownership during the week. The ferries won't be in service until late 2026, years behind schedule, because a berth has not been built in Devonport. The Spirit of Tasmania debacle was one of the reasons cited by Labor in its successful no-confidence vote against Mr Rockliff. An AFL stadium deal worth close to $1 billion is on the nose with most voters in one state but neither the premier or his would-be replacement are sniffing the electoral breeze. With a snap election weeks away, Tasmanian voters were surveyed on their attitude to a contentious deal struck with the AFL to build a $945 million roofed stadium at Macquarie Point. The Hobart stadium is a condition of the licence for the Devils' inclusion in the competition in 2028. The online poll of 842 voters, conducted by YouGov on behalf of progressive think tank The Australia Institute from June 12 to 16, indicates most Tasmanians believe the stadium deal is unfair. More than two out of three (69 per cent) support Tasmanian parliament renegotiating with the AFL to avoid constructing a new stadium. Support to renegotiate was even stronger among Labor supporters (71 per cent). Liberal voters were the most likely to disagree (38 per cent) but a majority (56 per cent) still backed the proposition. More than two-thirds of those surveyed also believed the AFL was treating Tasmania unfairly in its requirements for granting the state a licence. The AFL has been staunch in its refusal to renegotiate the deal, declaring the stadium a non-negotiable condition. The Australia Institute's Leanne Minshull said the deal was a "dud" and one of the most one-sided in Australian sport. "This state deserves to have a team in the AFL, but Tassie taxpayers don't want to be on the hook for a billion-dollar indoor stadium they don't want," she said. Some analysts have described the July 19 state election as a referendum on the stadium, but Liberal Premier Jeremy Rockliff and Labor leader Dean Winter have been unwilling to budge on their support. Mr Rockliff was sticking to his guns on Monday, dismissing the poll as "bodgey" and "anti-jobs". "This week we would've been putting forward legislation to in fact get on with the job and build the stadium ... (but) unfortunately Dean Winter and Labor forced the election," he told reporters. Mr Winter also reaffirmed his support for the stadium while criticising the way the AFL deal came together without cabinet approval or treasury advice. "This has been a problem that Jeremy Rockliff has created and it's a problem that now needs to be dealt with seriously and methodically," he said. Mr Rockliff separately revealed one of two Spirit of Tasmania replacement ships was expected to arrive in August. The vessel has been docked in Scotland for six months after his government unsuccessfully tried to lease it. The other has been undergoing sea trials in Finland, with Tasmania to officially take ownership during the week. The ferries won't be in service until late 2026, years behind schedule, because a berth has not been built in Devonport. The Spirit of Tasmania debacle was one of the reasons cited by Labor in its successful no-confidence vote against Mr Rockliff.
The Advertiser
33 minutes ago
- The Advertiser
Airlines weigh Mideast cancellations after US strikes
Commercial airlines around the world are weighing how long to suspend Middle East flights as a conflict which has already cut off major flight routes enters a new phase after the US attacked key Iranian nuclear sites and Tehran vowed to defend itself. The usually busy airspace stretching from Iran and Iraq to the Mediterranean has been largely empty of commercial air traffic for 10 days since Israel began strikes on Iran on June 13, as airlines divert, cancel and delay flights through the region due to airspace closures and safety concerns. New cancellations of some flights by international carriers in recent days to usually resilient aviation hubs like Dubai, the world's busiest international airport, and Qatar's Doha, show how aviation industry concerns about the region have escalated. However, some international airlines were resuming services on Monday. Leading Asian carrier Singapore Airlines, which described the situation as "fluid", was set to resume flying to Dubai on Monday after cancelling its Sunday flight from Singapore. Similarly, Flightradar24 departure boards show British Airways, owned by IAG, was set to resume Dubai and Doha flights on Monday after cancelling routes to and from those airports on Sunday. Air France KLM cancelled flights to and from Dubai and Riyadh on Sunday and Monday. With Russian and Ukrainian airspace also closed to most airlines due to years of war, the Middle East had become a more important route for flights from Europe to Asia and Australia. Amid missile and air strikes during the past 10 days, airlines have routed north via the Caspian Sea or south via Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Added to increased fuel and crew costs from these long detours and cancellations, carriers also face a potential hike in jet fuel costs as oil prices rise following the US attacks. Safe Airspace, a website run by OPSGROUP, a membership-based organisation that shares flight risk information, noted on Sunday that US attacks on Iran's nuclear sites could heighten the threat to American operators in the region. In the days before the US strikes, American Airlines suspended flights to Qatar, and United Airlines and Air Canada did the same with flights to Dubai. They have yet to resume. Israel is ramping up flights to help people return home, and leave. The country's Airports Authority says that so-called rescue flights to the country would expand on Monday with 24 a day, although each flight would be limited to 50 passengers. Commercial airlines around the world are weighing how long to suspend Middle East flights as a conflict which has already cut off major flight routes enters a new phase after the US attacked key Iranian nuclear sites and Tehran vowed to defend itself. The usually busy airspace stretching from Iran and Iraq to the Mediterranean has been largely empty of commercial air traffic for 10 days since Israel began strikes on Iran on June 13, as airlines divert, cancel and delay flights through the region due to airspace closures and safety concerns. New cancellations of some flights by international carriers in recent days to usually resilient aviation hubs like Dubai, the world's busiest international airport, and Qatar's Doha, show how aviation industry concerns about the region have escalated. However, some international airlines were resuming services on Monday. Leading Asian carrier Singapore Airlines, which described the situation as "fluid", was set to resume flying to Dubai on Monday after cancelling its Sunday flight from Singapore. Similarly, Flightradar24 departure boards show British Airways, owned by IAG, was set to resume Dubai and Doha flights on Monday after cancelling routes to and from those airports on Sunday. Air France KLM cancelled flights to and from Dubai and Riyadh on Sunday and Monday. With Russian and Ukrainian airspace also closed to most airlines due to years of war, the Middle East had become a more important route for flights from Europe to Asia and Australia. Amid missile and air strikes during the past 10 days, airlines have routed north via the Caspian Sea or south via Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Added to increased fuel and crew costs from these long detours and cancellations, carriers also face a potential hike in jet fuel costs as oil prices rise following the US attacks. Safe Airspace, a website run by OPSGROUP, a membership-based organisation that shares flight risk information, noted on Sunday that US attacks on Iran's nuclear sites could heighten the threat to American operators in the region. In the days before the US strikes, American Airlines suspended flights to Qatar, and United Airlines and Air Canada did the same with flights to Dubai. They have yet to resume. Israel is ramping up flights to help people return home, and leave. The country's Airports Authority says that so-called rescue flights to the country would expand on Monday with 24 a day, although each flight would be limited to 50 passengers. Commercial airlines around the world are weighing how long to suspend Middle East flights as a conflict which has already cut off major flight routes enters a new phase after the US attacked key Iranian nuclear sites and Tehran vowed to defend itself. The usually busy airspace stretching from Iran and Iraq to the Mediterranean has been largely empty of commercial air traffic for 10 days since Israel began strikes on Iran on June 13, as airlines divert, cancel and delay flights through the region due to airspace closures and safety concerns. New cancellations of some flights by international carriers in recent days to usually resilient aviation hubs like Dubai, the world's busiest international airport, and Qatar's Doha, show how aviation industry concerns about the region have escalated. However, some international airlines were resuming services on Monday. Leading Asian carrier Singapore Airlines, which described the situation as "fluid", was set to resume flying to Dubai on Monday after cancelling its Sunday flight from Singapore. Similarly, Flightradar24 departure boards show British Airways, owned by IAG, was set to resume Dubai and Doha flights on Monday after cancelling routes to and from those airports on Sunday. Air France KLM cancelled flights to and from Dubai and Riyadh on Sunday and Monday. With Russian and Ukrainian airspace also closed to most airlines due to years of war, the Middle East had become a more important route for flights from Europe to Asia and Australia. Amid missile and air strikes during the past 10 days, airlines have routed north via the Caspian Sea or south via Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Added to increased fuel and crew costs from these long detours and cancellations, carriers also face a potential hike in jet fuel costs as oil prices rise following the US attacks. Safe Airspace, a website run by OPSGROUP, a membership-based organisation that shares flight risk information, noted on Sunday that US attacks on Iran's nuclear sites could heighten the threat to American operators in the region. In the days before the US strikes, American Airlines suspended flights to Qatar, and United Airlines and Air Canada did the same with flights to Dubai. They have yet to resume. Israel is ramping up flights to help people return home, and leave. The country's Airports Authority says that so-called rescue flights to the country would expand on Monday with 24 a day, although each flight would be limited to 50 passengers. Commercial airlines around the world are weighing how long to suspend Middle East flights as a conflict which has already cut off major flight routes enters a new phase after the US attacked key Iranian nuclear sites and Tehran vowed to defend itself. The usually busy airspace stretching from Iran and Iraq to the Mediterranean has been largely empty of commercial air traffic for 10 days since Israel began strikes on Iran on June 13, as airlines divert, cancel and delay flights through the region due to airspace closures and safety concerns. New cancellations of some flights by international carriers in recent days to usually resilient aviation hubs like Dubai, the world's busiest international airport, and Qatar's Doha, show how aviation industry concerns about the region have escalated. However, some international airlines were resuming services on Monday. Leading Asian carrier Singapore Airlines, which described the situation as "fluid", was set to resume flying to Dubai on Monday after cancelling its Sunday flight from Singapore. Similarly, Flightradar24 departure boards show British Airways, owned by IAG, was set to resume Dubai and Doha flights on Monday after cancelling routes to and from those airports on Sunday. Air France KLM cancelled flights to and from Dubai and Riyadh on Sunday and Monday. With Russian and Ukrainian airspace also closed to most airlines due to years of war, the Middle East had become a more important route for flights from Europe to Asia and Australia. Amid missile and air strikes during the past 10 days, airlines have routed north via the Caspian Sea or south via Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Added to increased fuel and crew costs from these long detours and cancellations, carriers also face a potential hike in jet fuel costs as oil prices rise following the US attacks. Safe Airspace, a website run by OPSGROUP, a membership-based organisation that shares flight risk information, noted on Sunday that US attacks on Iran's nuclear sites could heighten the threat to American operators in the region. In the days before the US strikes, American Airlines suspended flights to Qatar, and United Airlines and Air Canada did the same with flights to Dubai. They have yet to resume. Israel is ramping up flights to help people return home, and leave. The country's Airports Authority says that so-called rescue flights to the country would expand on Monday with 24 a day, although each flight would be limited to 50 passengers.
