This afternoon the NSW Government gazetted a public health order, banning people who have lived, worked or stayed overnight in nine western Sydney suburbs on or after December 24 last year to attend the third cricket test between Australia and India at the SCG starting tomorrow. The nine suburbs are: Auburn, Belmore, Berala, Birrong, Lidcombe, Potts Hill, Regents Park, Rookwood and Wentworthville.
The order also stipulates spectators must wear a mask inside the SCG unless they are eating or drinking.
Yes sorry. But it also should be remember it was only closed after consultations with Daniel Andrews and Scott Morrison
They agreed it would be a âsmart ideaâ because they didnât want Victorians running to the borders and spreading it when there was so many unknown cases and at the time there was at least 7 known different outbreaks and at the time of the border closure there was over 600 active cases in Victoria alone. It is just not the same as NSW. And I know and I can understand Victoria has placed itself in such an amazing position after having such a hard time. They donât want to ruin it. I get it. I just donât think it is fair to compare the NSW border closure with the Victorian one.
Thanks for the link, itâs getting harder to find references from only a few months back already with the way this has been reported.
If I recall there were calls to close the borders to Victoria much sooner than they actually did. Fortunes flipped, other states close their borders and social media and mainstream media have had a meltdown.
No sane person wants to see what happened in Victoria repeat there or anywhere else.
Yeah I believe there was calls a lot sooner. But NSW didnât want to close their border. From all reports it was actually a joint decision between both NSW and Victoria. Clearly Victoria didnât want people running for the regions and NSW, that would have been worse for the country.
The Victorian hard border doesnât seem to have been done in the same way. NSW also have people a little longer than Victoria did. I am not trying to be critical of Victoria here because another big outbreak would be disastrous. But it just goes against what has been agreed upon in National cabinet and again I just donât agree with the border closures.
The government really needs to revisit who has the powers to close the borders after covid is finished.
Just donât understand why he had to single NSW out as being âbetterâ. Every state is doing well, and having success in their own way. No one is doing it badly. Yes thereâs been hiccups, but even after the Ruby Princess (remember that?) and the second wave in Victoria, those states have got back on top of it all. Something the rest of the world hasnât been able to achieve.
The timframes were the same pretty much 24 -36 hours according to your link, main difference being, I donât think it applies to travellers returning to NSW at least not initially unlike Victorians returning home.
Nothing meaningful will change unless it goes to Court - the Federal Government has limited powers in this regard (and on other states-rights issues generally). We might get some agreement around some consistency, but it will more than likely be not in any enforceable form.
While the constitution mentions free movement between states, restricting that movement for the purpose of protecting a state from injury to its persons has been previously considered to be acceptable. Someone could take it to the High Court (Clive Palmer did that with WA) but Iâd imagine youâd be against every state
While the Feds would prefer not to have border restrictions, theyâve taken a pragmatic approach to the response and seceded that itâs at the prerogative of the states to make the decision
NSW have taken a less of a âbring in law enforcementâ approach to the pandemic - favouring trusting the public health system and that people will follow the rules (which is interesting given its usually the opposite).
NSW doing the first border closure was in many respects a practical measure - it allowed Victoria to direct resources to where they were better needed
I was thinking more of a Royal Commission into the Covid response. Surely that will be something the Government does to get some legal clarifications in the case it happens again. Or am I looking down the wrong path here?
Who knows - some things will be easy to change or clarify, others wont be or met with considerable resistance.
Weâve done enough natural disaster enquiries and royal commissions to know that we have continuing issues with collective efforts (be it by law, or because no-one wants to play nicely with one another), especially where it would add resiliance and capability - like the recent recommendation to establish a national airborne firefighting fleet
Why is the NSW gov allowing a crowd to go ahead at the cricket? Theyâve always said they follow health advice and now that the AMA is advising against any crowd, shouldnât they listen?
At least they now have masks mandated, thatâs something I guess.
I imagine if a reporter asked Gladys that question - sheâd say something along the lines of âwe listen to the health advice from OUR experts, not other doctors, unions, organisations etc.â
I guess itâs there just in case a caretaker still occasionally stays overnight.