Conspiracy Theory Coronavirus #5: We're in this together!

[Dogs_R_Us]

Mofra.. are you taking the piss or do you just believe everything Dan Andrews says?

The bill allows the health minister to take any action, including without the need to consider if it is a discriminatory action, on the SUBJECTIVE belief that it is necessary to do so.

By establishing the SUBJECTIVE element, it effectively means the decisions of the health minister are not challengeable at law. As the health minister can just state "i believed it was necessary" end of story.

So it doesn't matter what transperancy or disclosures there are, the health minister is under no obligation to consider them or follow them.

The Victorian Bar and other impartial legal bodies are all opposed to this legislation.

Please don't spread such one-sided rubbish ever again.

Can a premier also be a health minister?

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Do you disagree that state premiers have been informed by their respective CHOs and (more often than not) have applied that advice to decision making?

Which parts do you disagree with?
Do you disagree with the efficacy of vaccines?
How does reading The Lancet and trusting the research (as opposed to shady websites and you-tube videos) equate to 'peak insanity'?

1. health advice is clearly not "expert" as:
- it solely promotes vaccines over a combination of vaccine, medical treatment and prevention (i.e stay home and isolate when positive rather than take any preventive treatment)
- all the modelling has been proven wrong time and time again (100,000 cases per day predicted in Sydney, never got anywhere to that level despite a substantially delayed lockdown response).
2. decision making is a holistic approach, need to consider holistic health outcomes (i.e missed cancer diagnoses, increased suicides, decreased preventative care) instead of just one tunnel vision issue, need to also consider economic and societal impacts not just health
3. ministers have imposed policy based approaches based on polling and perception not based purely on health (as evident in McGowan's divergence from the national cabinet plan).

So yes, i'd:
- Ministers cannot be trusted with this much power; and
- true health responses are not being pursued in the sole focus of preventing covid and doing so via vaccines, if the free market was just left to address the issue we would have a balanced and well rounded response.

 

[Mofra]

They are from the same pool of resources so in that case they do go hand in hand. Issue like any form of expenditure or investment is value for money, return on investment. I guess what we need to discuss is the value for money

A vaccine that reduces the hospitalisation rate and therefore reduces government expenditure would certainly represent value for money.
Noting of course we've had a lot of problems with our vaccine rollout.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

All decision are subjective in nature. The Immigration Minister makes subjective decisions when deciding to deport people for example.

Based on advice and information provided to the Minister, and applying the standard as presented in the Act.



Administrative law contains several basic principles: That of Natural justice and Procedural fairness, states a decision cannot be ultra vires (outside the scope of the power conferred) and must not be 'clearly unreasonable' (the test from Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corp aka 'Wednesbury unreasonableness').

I havent looked at the legislation in question (please provide me with a link so I can), but unless it contains a provision that somehow shields the Minister from these Common law principles (and I can assure you the High Court has had things to say about similar legislative provisions in the past) then how exactly is the Minister protected here?

Summary of Victorian Bar’s Submission to The Department of Health and Expert Reference Group on The Public Health and Wellbeing (Pandemic Management) Bill 2021 | Victorian Bar

The Victorian Bar has provided a submission to the Department of Health and an Expert Reference Group following a briefing on 3 November 2021 in relation to the Public Health and Wellbeing (Pandemic Management) Bill 2021. The Bar’s submission addresses both the intent of the Bill and specific...

www.vicbar.com.au

Take the Victorian Bar's submissions to Government on the Bill.

 

[Mofra]

1. health advice is clearly not "expert" as:
- it solely promotes vaccines over a combination of vaccine, medical treatment and prevention (i.e stay home and isolate when positive rather than take any preventive treatment)
- all the modelling has been proven wrong time and time again (100,000 cases per day predicted in Sydney, never got anywhere to that level despite a substantially delayed lockdown response).
2. decision making is a holistic approach, need to consider holistic health outcomes (i.e missed cancer diagnoses, increased suicides, decreased preventative care) instead of just one tunnel vision issue, need to also consider economic and societal impacts not just health
3. ministers have imposed policy based approaches based on polling and perception not based purely on health (as evident in McGowan's divergence from the national cabinet plan).

So yes, i'd:
- Ministers cannot be trusted with this much power; and
- true health responses are not being pursued in the sole focus of preventing covid and doing so via vaccines, if the free market was just left to address the issue we would have a balanced and well rounded response.

1. My read is that the health advice does not 'solely' promote vaccines - a combined approach of vaccines to reduce the transmission and the hospitalisation rate. Then isolation in the event of a positive test and/or exposure. Then medical treatment when required.

2. Yes absolutely. However implicit in that point is the 'tunnel vision' comment which I don't believe is the case, hence measures such as a 'household bubble' visitor. No it's not perfect but it does indicate the 'bubble vision' is incorrect. We can argue exactly where that line should be, but I'd much rather have that opinion be informed by the best available evidence at the time rather than hidden in some cabinet-in-confidence document. As I noted earlier, this woudl have avoided the nighttime curfews in Victoria as this wasn't part of the health advice.

3. Yes they have, hence increased transparency behind those decisions being made public is a good thing. I'd much prefer more transparency than the current (Victorian) legislation.

 

[Joey JoJo Shabad]

 

[Mofra]

Summary of Victorian Bar’s Submission to The Department of Health and Expert Reference Group on The Public Health and Wellbeing (Pandemic Management) Bill 2021 | Victorian Bar

The Victorian Bar has provided a submission to the Department of Health and an Expert Reference Group following a briefing on 3 November 2021 in relation to the Public Health and Wellbeing (Pandemic Management) Bill 2021. The Bar’s submission addresses both the intent of the Bill and specific...

www.vicbar.com.au

Take the Victorian Bar's submissions to Government on the Bill.

Many of those points made are sensible amendments to the legislation, not complete opposition to the bill.
It would be interesting to compare specific provisions to other state based legislation, as my understanding is that Victoria is the only mainland state with a legislated time limit to invoking emergency powers.

It is worth noting that President is a Liberal member so a Lib criticising a Labor Bill is nothing to be surprised about.

 

[No SPIN]

Awwwhh look at you, propped up by the Orwellian enforcers from the slow moving train wreck you were on!

Many people have been asking why is this happening? Thought you'd be happy he doesn't think it's about Bill Gates?

Read the Board and thread title. People are posting here becasue we are asking questions that challenge the propaganda that you and others are spewing. He makes some good points about this being planned, but there is no fame, social, work, or political advantage for having these views.

You think you're a big shot sucking up to the Big Pharma propaganda and personally abusing any expert that disagrees with you, but you are a fraud!

The problem with you guys and McCulloch is that you have no credible theory for what’s going on.
Just fake news BS about Gates , 5G, Great Reset, and Lizard people.

So why would any sensible person take your Conspiracy talk seriously?

You keep calling me a fraud but the last time I checked I’ve exposed your fake news so many times I’ve lost count.
And most recently your fake news about an ingredient added to jabs to reduce Cardiac risk - when it’s clearly just to improve storage.

 

[Clawed]

Well that confirms it, let the genocide begin!

Jesus tapdancing christ, mate. Get a grip

He's not going to help you, its illegal for unvaxxed to worship...

 

[GoEaglesGoSGIO]

A vaccine that reduces the hospitalisation rate and therefore reduces government expenditure would certainly represent value for money.
Noting of course we've had a lot of problems with our vaccine rollout.

Value for money? Explain that concept please rather then ignoring the questions you get asked

 

[Clawed]

It was a new virus in circulation, it can take months before the science can identify it and as something they've never seen before. First, doctors in the hospitals start seeing older people dying of a respiratory condition, then it seems to be more than usual but it's not until they begin to see emergency departments filling up with the same complaints they even start looking for it.

France went back 6 months of all deaths involving respiratory issues from January 2020.

They found cases mid November 2019.

The American strain brought here in February 2020, could not be traced back to China. Suggesting covid been circulating in America sometime around October.

Wuhan is the cover story. No point dwelling on it. Segregation is the issue at hand now. Medical apartied and paid trolls. Those trolls in here, notice many of thier status?

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Do you disagree that state premiers have been informed by their respective CHOs and (more often than not) have applied that advice to decision making?

Which parts do you disagree with?
Do you disagree with the efficacy of vaccines?
How does reading The Lancet and trusting the research (as opposed to shady websites and you-tube videos) equate to 'peak insanity'?

They have, and they’ve got a tough job, in which they’ve had mixed success. I’m not against “science” but the continual overreach by modellers and “experts” in this pandemic (even allowing for them starting from scratch, data-wise), plus all the perplexing and inconsistent rules, the very scary use of force against the people, does make people sceptical and possibly fearful when they hear that a health minister can impose all sorts of restrictions and penalties based on information that often strays into the realms of fantasy, and there is no comeback. It’s odd, and maybe a sign of where we are today as a society, that we are expected to accept this without question.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Many of those points made are sensible amendments to the legislation, not complete opposition to the bill.
It would be interesting to compare specific provisions to other state based legislation, as my understanding is that Victoria is the only mainland state with a legislated time limit to invoking emergency powers.

It is worth noting that President is a Liberal member so a Lib criticising a Labor Bill is nothing to be surprised about.

The concerning point is - those are sensible, some would even say vital, amendments to the Bill to make it balanced and and fit-for-purpose, yet those are amendments that need to be made. As proposed by Victorian Labor and as passed by the lower house, those changes are NOT in the bill.

 

[Mofra]

Value for money? Explain that concept please rather then ignoring the questions you get asked

Easy. A few bucks for a vaccine is far less expenditure than thousands of dollars in hospitalisation costs.

Why are you in favour of an increased hospitalisation rate and the associated costs involved?

 

[yebiga]

Amazingly clear review - riveting viewing
If you are still stuck in the official narrative - stay away from this if you don't want your preconceptions challenged
He even defends the vaccines
One of the 3 authors of the Great Barrington Declaration - subsequently signed by over 60,000 Doctors and Allied Health Care Workers defying the official narrative

 

[Mofra]

They have, and they’ve got a tough job, in which they’ve had mixed success. I’m not against “science” but the continual overreach by modellers and “experts” in this pandemic (even allowing for them starting from scratch, data-wise), plus all the perplexing and inconsistent rules, the very scary use of force against the people, does make people sceptical and possibly fearful when they hear that a health minister can impose all sorts of restrictions and penalties based on information that often strays into the realms of fantasy, and there is no comeback. It’s odd, and maybe a sign of where we are today as a society, that we are expected to accept this without question.

I don't think anyone would argue that state governments got it all right. I think there are certainly valid criticisms to be made.

None of that impacts on the actual status of Covid as a highly transmissible disease that has killed millions of people and adversely effected tens of millions of others, including many that are suffering from 'long covid' months after contracting it.

I think there is a difference between "I disagree with the response" and giving reason why, as opposed to promoting conspiracies based on highly-dubious you-tube 'sources' that spread misinformation.

 

[Mofra]

The concerning point is - those are sensible, some would even say vital, amendments to the Bill to make it balanced and and fit-for-purpose, yet those are amendments that need to be made. As proposed by Victorian Labor and as passed by the lower house, those changes are NOT in the bill.

Some yes, some no - but again, there are positives in there as well. I'm very much in favour of increased public disclosure and accountability and the Bill at least makes some ground up in representing that.
The upper house debates will be interesting.

 

[zill]

You're not making sense. I'm not denying that acts of terror have occurred.
I am stating I disagree with recent changes to Australia's Federal security legislation.

People actively denying science while getting the bulk of their information from you-tube videos and twitter are a world away from sensible policy discussion.

I thought from your response that you consider the "war on terror" to be a smokescreen for the enforcement of various policies including spying on everyone. Much like i think covid is a smokescreen.

And I'm not denying covid science because there is none, you can't selectively enforce public health orders based on socioeconomic status like what has been happening in VIC and NSW especially and then try and say that it is science based.

 

[GoEaglesGoSGIO]

Easy. A few bucks for a vaccine is far less expenditure than thousands of dollars in hospitalisation costs.

Why are you in favour of an increased hospitalisation rate and the associated costs involved?

311 billion is a few bucks?

 

[Mofra]

And I'm not denying covid science because there is none

None? This is something most people would disagree with.

https://www.nejm.org/coronavirus

COVID-19 | The Medical Journal of Australia

www.mja.com.au

Coronavirus (covid-19) Hub - Latest News & Research

BMJ has created this coronavirus hub to support healthcare professionals and researchers dealing with covid-19. It includes practical guidance, latest news and research. The content is free and is updated daily.

www.bmj.com

Research and opinion articles on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) from JAMA Network

Read the latest on the COVID-19 outbreak, including new expert opinion and science on the epidemiology, diagnosis, management, and prevention of infection

jamanetwork.com

There are hundreds of journal articles here just to start with.

 

[Mofra]

311 billion is a few bucks?

The vaccines don't cost 311 billion dollars. Weird comment.

 

[Bumpswithagrin]

Welcome to The war on Terror for the past 20+ years. The sweeping changes to the Federal security framework in just the last five years are far more intrusive than 99% of most people realise.

Mostly cheered on by flag-waving nationalists who are only now suddenly worried about 'freedom' because they have been asked to wear a mask indoors.

What? I don't know any flag-waving nationailsts that have cheered on the intrusiveness of laws passed due to terroroism, quite the opposite in fact. The only people I know who are cheering on that are lefties.

If you can see through the war on terror lie though, why can't you see that what is going on now with Covid is far more insidious and happening at an alarming pace.

 

[No SPIN]

Mofra how can you lament the intelligence laws post 9/11 in one breath and support the pandemic laws in another. They're literally the exact same thing, an incredible overreach of government power imposed while taking advantage of coordinated fear campaigns.

He can, because unlike the Conspiracist he can walk and chew gum at the same time.

 

[Mofra]

What? I don't know any flag-waving nationailsts that have cheered on the intrusiveness of laws passed due to terroroism, quite the opposite in fact. The only people I know who are cheering on that are lefties.

Dutton is a leftie?
Well, that's a new one...

 

[Kurve]

France went back 6 months of all deaths involving respiratory issues from January 2020.

They found cases mid November 2019.

The American strain brought here in February 2020, could not be traced back to China. Suggesting covid been circulating in America sometime around October.

I've yet to see any evidence of that outside of conspiracy theories that originated in China, of course. I remain open minded on origins.

Wuhan is the cover story. No point dwelling on it. Segregation is the issue at hand now. Medical apartied and paid trolls. Those trolls in here, notice many of thier status?

You think communist China doesn't have their people spreading propaganda all over social media? They used to be fairly easy to spot but getting better at it I think, the Saudis are the easiest, Russia not so much.