Vic How would you rate Daniel Andrews' performance as Victorian Premier? - Part 6

[Sttew]

yes very misleading

How? It’s not that the information may not be protected; it’s that the government fought to suppress details for 5 years. I mean, why would you bother if it’s a lie?

 

[Gralin]

How? It’s not that the information may not be protected; it’s that the government fought to suppress details for 5 years. I mean, why would you bother if it’s a lie?

Maybe so the HUN couldn't right an article designed to get people to stop checking in?
If there is no discussion of how the pandemic bill that passed recently protects data and the article is talking about what things were like 2 months ago its misleading

 

[Sttew]

Maybe so the HUN couldn't right an article designed to get people to stop checking in?
If there is no discussion of how the pandemic bill that passed recently protects data and the article is talking about what things were like 2 months ago its misleading

Firstly the new pandemic laws do not completely protect the information. The government has conceded this today.

Jacinta Allan claims the government’s repeated and deliberate attempts to hide the information was to avoid a “baseless scare campaign” and protect the community from media reports that attempted to drive “fear and misinformation”. It took the government 12 hours to come up with this line

How about letting us decide for ourselves instead of treating us like mushrooms? It also makes you wonder what else this government is hiding from us??

 

[Gralin]

Firstly the new pandemic laws do not completely protect the information. The government has conceded this today.

Jacinta Allan claims the government’s repeated and deliberate attempts to hide the information was to avoid a “baseless scare campaign” and protect the community from media reports that attempted to drive “fear and misinformation”.

How about letting us decide for ourselves instead of treating us like mushrooms? It also makes you wonder what else this government is hiding from us??

well seems you've gone straight to the fear and misinformation from a scare campaign by a paper that has done everything possible to undermine the response in Victoria over the last 18 months so dunno seems like they had the right idea

 

[Sttew]

well seems you've gone straight to the fear and misinformation from a scare campaign by a paper that has done everything possible to undermine the response in Victoria over the last 18 months so dunno seems like they had the right idea

It might be okay with you to be told by your government that your personal information is protected when in fact it may not be. This mode of government, highlighted by secrecy, lies and spin, is accepted by the Dan fans on BF.

Here’s the thing. It’s not the first or last time Dan will treat us like mushrooms.

As Patrick Carlyon put it, “ignorance is healthy for a public routinely blocked from the details it needs to know.”

 

[Gralin]

It might be okay with you to be told by your government that your personal information is protected when in fact it may not be. This mode of government, highlighted by secrecy, lies and spin, is accepted by the Dan fans on BF.

Here’s the thing. It’s not the first or last time Dan will treat us like mushrooms

Anyone who doesn't agree with you on a topic is a Dan fan yeah?

HUN is poison, they aren't reporting in public interest, crickets from then when its not a Labor Government with the secrecy or spin.

They wouldn't know balanced factual reporting if it hit them in the face

My view on that has nothing to do with my view on the Andrews Government btw, they both suck

 

[Ice-Wolf]

It took the government 12 hours to come up with this line

Is a public holiday on the Christmas/New Year break how quick do you want them to be?

 

[Sttew]

Anyone who doesn't agree with you on a topic is a Dan fan yeah?

HUN is poison, they aren't reporting in public interest, crickets from then when its not a Labor Government with the secrecy or spin.

They wouldn't know balanced factual reporting if it hit them in the face

My view on that has nothing to do with my view on the Andrews Government btw, they both suck

But Gralin, regardless of who published this piece, the facts speak for themselves. There is along list of things this government has done where it has fought through the courts to suppress details, or where it has simply buried the facts. Put the Hun aside. Do you like how secretive and deceitful this government has acted?

 

[Sttew]

Is a public holiday on the Christmas/New Year break how quick do you want them to be?

The Hun got access to the government and court papers over a week ago. That’s plenty of time....if they already had the answer

 

[Ice-Wolf]

But @Gralin, regardless of who published this piece, the facts speak for themselves. There is along list of things this government has done where it has fought through the courts to suppress details, or where it has simply buried the facts. Put the Hun aside. Do you like how secretive and deceitful this government has acted?

It won the case and kept the data from Worksafe and the new pandemic laws close off potential sharing of the data.

 

[radiojake]

So... Has QR data been shared to third parties? That's the crux - if not you zealots can pipe down

 

[Ice-Wolf]

So... Has QR data been shared to third parties? That's the crux - if not you zealots can pipe down

No, the Government/Health Department won the case.

 

[Sttew]

No, the Government/Health Department won the case.

Is that actually correct? Why would they fight to suppress if they won?

“A secret Supreme Court ruling confirmed personal information shared with contact tracers or through QR codes does not have “absolute protection”

...the ruling means companies, crime-fighting agencies and authorities such as WorkCover could apply to the court to access the data”

 

[pazza]

I dunno why everyone is complaining vis-a-vis the QR codes.

Let's be honest. If you have nothing to hide, why would you be worried? Sounds like some in here would rather commit crimes and not be found out through scanning QR codes....

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

It won the case and kept the data from Worksafe and the new pandemic laws close off potential sharing of the data.

It didn’t win the case.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

I dunno why everyone is complaining vis-a-vis the QR codes.

Let's be honest. If you have nothing to hide, why would you be worried? Sounds like some in here would rather commit crimes and not be found out through scanning QR codes....

They are also walking around with gps equipped mobile phones in their pocket.

BuT DaN MaN bAd.

 

[kalex6251]

They are also walking around with gps equipped mobile phones in their pocket.

BuT DaN MaN bAd.

dont forget the 5g chip in the covid vaccine

 

[Ice-Wolf]

It didn’t win the case.

Did WorkSafe get the data?

 

[Evolved1]

I dunno why everyone is complaining vis-a-vis the QR codes.

Let's be honest. If you have nothing to hide, why would you be worried? Sounds like some in here would rather commit crimes and not be found out through scanning QR codes....

Just because you don't care about your right to privacy, doesn't mean others agree with your stance.

Do you Dan fans hold him to account for anything? I'm pretty sure you guys would take a different stance if it was Scomo.

 

[Proper Gander]

Is that actually correct? Why would they fight to suppress if they won?

“A secret Supreme Court ruling confirmed personal information shared with contact tracers or through QR codes does not have “absolute protection”

...the ruling means companies, crime-fighting agencies and authorities such as WorkCover could apply to the court to access the data”

That’s the way it works sttew - with any government policy.

The Government determines that their policy is that QR data will be protected. They seek legal advice as to how to make it happen. They get legal advice, make legislative changes and implement the policy on the basis of their advice that all should be sweet.

Advice is just advice, in any field. Not certainty. It is a lawyer assessing the hypothetical outcome should a matter, or matters, come to court. The only way to determine whether the legislation is fully effective is for it to be tested in a court. So no legal advice is foolproof. And different advisors will have different advice etc.

All government does this. All of the time. You don’t ever know entirely if your legislation is bullet-proof until such time as someone starts firing bullets. As far as I can make out, so far, the application to access the private data failed. So far so good I guess?

 

[Ice-Wolf]

All government does this. All of the time. You don’t ever know entirely if your legislation is bullet-proof until such time as someone starts firing bullets. As far as I can make out, so far, the application to access the private data failed. So far so good I guess?

And the new pandemic legislation has closed it off as well (albeit yet to be tested in the courts)

 

[Proper Gander]

And the new pandemic legislation has closed it off as well (albeit yet to be tested in the courts)

Yeah. With these things you just hope that the advisors and drafters have done a solid job of closing off all avenues. But you can never quite know, especially with legislation that works in opposition to other legislation. Right to privacy versus rights for investigating agencies to seek access to information relevant to their investigation is a perfect example.

I work in Government in regulation and this is the kind of work we do all the time, constant tweaking of legislation to ensure it actually is sufficiently robust to meet its objectives, so I’m probably more accustomed to these types of ongoing issues then others.

 

[adogsfan5]

Ripper thread.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Did WorkSafe get the data?

That isn’t the question. The issue wasn’t tried.

 

[Sttew]

That’s the way it works sttew - with any government policy.

The Government determines that their policy is that QR data will be protected. They seek legal advice as to how to make it happen. They get legal advice, make legislative changes and implement the policy on the basis of their advice that all should be sweet.

Advice is just advice, in any field. Not certainty. It is a lawyer assessing the hypothetical outcome should a matter, or matters, come to court. The only way to determine whether the legislation is fully effective is for it to be tested in a court. So no legal advice is foolproof. And different advisors will have different advice etc.

All government does this. All of the time. You don’t ever know entirely if your legislation is bullet-proof until such time as someone starts firing bullets. As far as I can make out, so far, the application to access the private data failed. So far so good I guess?

Just heard Justin Quill, a leading media lawyer, and he said no government can lawfully claim personal information is totally protected. He was surprised when the government made the claim in August 2021