Corona Virus

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arapiles

Am I alone in finding these closed borders and what's basically state-based nationalism bizarre? Since when have people identified primarily as a Queenslander or South Australian and only secondarily as Australians?

The similarities to the States' responses now and to the 1918 pandemic are striking, but the difference is that in 1918 the Commonwealth was new and yet 102 years later we're getting the same responses.


"In November 1918, the various state authorities had entered into an agreement for dealing with the threat, but it did not long hold. In his groundbreaking social history of the Spanish influenza epidemic, Humphrey McQueen suggested that in relation to many matters, “the Commonwealth of Australia passed into recess”.

“The dislocation of interstate traffic is quite unavoidable,” commented the Tamworth Daily Observer on January 31 1919, “as naturally the clean States could not be expected to continue communications with the infected.” "

That could have come from Bob directly.

And, it's the same States - Queensland, WA, SA and Tasmania - responding in the same manner now as they did then. How is that the case?

---

Spend any time in Queensland and the attitude of some to the rest of the country is really interesting.

Watch commercial TV news and print media and anyone that does well overseas that originally hails from Queensland isn't an Australian, they are a Queenslander!!

The rest of the country doesn't really exist in news broadcasts.
You need to watch the ABC, SBS or read a national rag like The Australian to get a sense that there's a whole big country south of the Tweed or west of 138°
This seems to reflect a view of a reasonable propirtion of the population in Queensland.

Having parents in the Territory, (they get Queensland news) and living in the NSW bush for 15 years where terrestrial TV didn't exist (sat TV uses Queensland news) it was really obvious to an out of stater.

And I'm in Byron atm.
I've never seen it so dead!!

A good % of the businesses are closed.

I'm not one for crowds so like it, but god i feel for the people who rely on the tourist trade

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arapiles

You'll notice that the border controls weren't parochial - they required residents to quarantine before crossing. As such they'd've probably got past s.92 of the Constitution, but now the borders controls are based on residence.

---

I think you should read this.

Border restrictions Direction (No. 5) | Queensland Health

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arapiles

Right .... two cases.

---

That is exactly the ignorance that causes the borders to remain closed. Those two cases have the potential to infect 118,000 people.

Coronavirus: One COVID-19 patient can infect 59,000 people

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arapiles

You'll notice that the border controls weren't parochial - they required residents to quarantine before crossing. As such they'd've probably got past s.92 of the Constitution, but now the borders controls are based on residence.

---

Border controls for intercourse, as opposed to trade and commerce , are based on a public health issue, and section 92 doesn't apply.

The federal government’s second line of defence was to establish a consistent response in handling and containing any pneumonic influenza outbreaks that might occur in Australia.It held a national influenza planning conference in Melbourne on 26–27 November 1918, at which state health ministers, the directors-general of their health departments and British Medical Association representatives met with Commonwealth personnel.

The conference agreed to the federal government taking responsibility for proclaiming which states were infected along with organising maritime and land quarantine.

The states would arrange emergency hospitals, vaccination depots, ambulance services, medical staff and public awareness measures.

This uncertainty delayed the confirmation of an outbreak from Victorian health authorities, which allowed the infection to spread to New South Wales and South Australia by the end of January 1919. New South Wales was the first state to officially proclaim an outbreak of pneumonic influenza on 27 January 1919, with Victoria following suit the next day

.Tensions in the new Federation surfaced as the other states viewed Victoria’s delay in confirming the outbreak as a breach of the November agreement made with the Commonwealth.Soon each state made their own arrangements for handling and containing outbreaks, including organising their own border controls.

The Commonwealth temporarily withdrew from the November agreement on 11 February 1919.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bob10

That is exactly the ignorance that causes the borders to remain closed. Those two cases have the potential to infect 118,000 people.

Coronavirus: One COVID-19 patient can infect 59,000 people

---

But they haven't.

You were alleging widespread community transmission in Victoria, which isn't the case. Two cases that I'm aware of.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bob10

Border controls for intercourse, as opposed to trade and commerce , are based on a public health issue, and section 92 doesn't apply.

---

Nope, border controls on free movement of people between States for quarantine reasons are a possible exception to s.92 which does apply.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rick130

And I'm in Byron atm.
I've never seen it so dead!!

A good % of the businesses are closed.

I'm not one for crowds so like it, but god i feel for the people who rely on the tourist trade

---

Wouldn't it make sense then, to try and attract the home grown tourists milling around the border gates, waiting to enter Queensland? What don't these people understand about 'Community Support'?

From what some border town folk are reporting, I reckon, when the borders do open, it'll resemble a Bathurst 1000 start![biggrin]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bob10

I think you should read this.

Border restrictions Direction (No. 5) | Queensland Health

---

Thanks, I've read it before.

"A person who arrives in Queensland from another State or Territory of Australia will not be allowed to enter Queensland, unless they are an exempt resident or exempt person."

Relevantly, all Queensland residents are exempt.

If I was wishing to travel to Qld at the moment, and not for one of the listed reasons why non-residents can enter, I wouldn't be able to. Which, in my view, is a breach of the Constitution.

Just to be clear, I have no interest in visiting Qld at the moment but in my view the restrictions are illegal and that's the point I'm making.

Just to be clear - where did you study constitutional law?

My understanding is that this question was settled in 1919.