An update from Australia about the COVID situation here and recently circulating stories.

Me | 2nd December 2021 | Me (Naturalman1975)

[naturalman1975]

Over recent months, a huge amount of misinformation about Australia has been circulating on Freerepublic. In most cases, the person sharing it probably didn't know it was misinformation - they were sincerely and honestly passing on things they'd been told were true. But that doesn't change the fact that a lot of misleading material is being shared and a false narrative is being created that Australia has turned into some sort of neo-fascist state. I've attempted to provide accurate information, and I know I'm not the only Australian doing so, but it's a deeply frustrating uphill battle.

Please note - I am not saying everything has been or is rosy in Australia. In my state of Victoria, the socialist state government has been significantly oppressive - because of the way Australia's constitution works, state governments have control over dealing with anything that is considered to do with public health, while the Commonwealth government has very little power in this area and cannot overrule the states. Peculiarites in Victoria's specific constitutional conventions (peculiarities, incidentally, that American conservatives would likely support without understanding how they'd be implemented here) means that under cover of a public health emergency, the state Premier, Daniel Andrews, has been able to act in a rather dictatorial fashion - there are powers that can be used to reign him in, in extremis, but he has, so far, been careful, not to actually trigger those - the threshold for such intervention is very high. There are real issues in parts of Australia. Unfortunately, though, when these things get exaggerated or things are made up, it becomes harder for us to actually get the real issues dealt with. We have to waste so much time on false information.

Examples of some of these false claims - "Australia is under martial law." This, simply, is not true. It hasn't happened. "There are mobile forced vaccination squads". Completely untrue. Nothing like that exists. "Police have shot and killed a protester in Melbourne." Not true - the man who was supposedly killed doen't remember exactly what happened to him, but believes he was drunk and tried to rob a liquor store, and was injured during his robbery attempt - not by police, but by somebody else. And he's definitely still alive. I could list a lot of false information that is being spread.

I could also list more of the real problems that have happened, but frankly, don't have the energy right now to properly describe them in a way that's likely to be easily understood by people outside of Australia.

Context matters.

Why is so much false information circulating. My theory - and I admit it's a bit conspiratorial - is that Australia is currently the victim of a propaganda campaign that is being waged by the government of Communist China. It's not at all conspiratorial that China doesn't like Australia much at the moment for various reasons. Among those reasons is Australia's close alliance with the United States. China would love to split Australia and America, and doing so by making Americans think Australia is something different than it is, would make sense to them. I should say, that I think the same is happening in reverse - Australians are routinely being fed biased misinformation about America - recent examples include the narrative that Kyle Rittenhouse is a white supremacist murderer, for example. Again, I won't go into all of that - but I do think it is happening in both directions.

It also may have the advantage for China that if they can make it look like a liberal democracy is engaged in widespread human rights abuses when it isn't, it helps mask what goes on in China. And I have seen here on Freerepublic, quite a few people saying things like "Australia is worse than China."

That's utter crap. It borders on the insane.

Now, the reason I've been driven to post this message is because I'm really concerned about a lot of posts I've seen recently about a particular incident in the Northern Territory of Australia. Now, this incident is, at its core, real. The basic facts are true. But that doesn't stop it being used in a way that promotes propaganda. Leaving out context, and spinning the story towards a particular slant, makes a big difference.

There are specific reasons why what has happened in the NT has happened there. If these are understood, I think there's a very different complexion on what is going on. So I'm going to try and explain that context.

The basic facts - yes, indgenous people (Aboriginal Australians) from a number of small isolated communities in the Northern Territory who either have COVID or have been exposed to COVID have been moved to a facility just outside, Darwin, the capital city of the Northern Territory. They were not given a choice in this (well, at least, most of them weren't - there may be exceptions). Three boys absconded from this facility for a brief period before they were captured and arrested. That's all true.

But what is left out of that is the reasons these things happened. Now, it's perfectly legitimate to think that there are no reasons that could justify this - I don't agree. I think that's a pretty extreme position. But it's a valid one. If after reading what I'm about to explain, you still feel that way, fair enough - that's your right. But I do think the context makes a lot of difference.

I'll start by talking about the Northern Territory. The name matters in this case - Australia is made up of eight*, mostly self-governing jurisdictions. There are six states, which were the six original colonies that federated in 1901 to create a single nation - all these six states were already mostly independent, mostly sovereign nations before 1901 (they were still technically colonies of the United Kingdom, but the UK had devolved virtually everything except defence and foreign relations to local control - and even after federation, the UK kept control of those things). The two self-governing territories, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory have a slightly more limited form of self-government than the states - the NT has been offered statehood but didn't want it.

The reasons, NT is a territory not a state are relevant here. It's down to the fact that it's a very large area of land, with a relatively small population. We're talking about a quarter of a million people living in an area a little under twice the size of Texas. 150,000 of these people live in Darwin, and there's only about three towns besides Darwin that have more than 10,000 people. The population of the Northern Territory is about 30% Aboriginal Australian (I'm going to use the term indigenous from now on to refer to these people, as it's the currently preferred term - Aboriginal isn't offensive, but it's generally seen as a little old fashioned - technically speaking, not all indigenous Australians are Aboriginal, but nearly all of those in NT are).

Like a lot of countries, Australia's historical treatment of its indigenous people contains some negative features and that still has an impact on some things today.

But today, most policies are based on respect for these people and for their rights. And that is actually part of what is going on here, contrary to the spin.

It is now accepted that indigenous people should be able to continue to live on their ancestral lands if they choose to. In the past, there were policies of rounding people up based on race and sending them wherever governments wanted them to go, that disconnected people from their country. That has not been acceptable for a long time.

But one of the results of this is the Northern Territory, which has a much higher proportion of indigenous people than the rest of Australia is spotted with tiny indigenous communities that are really not viable in a normal sense. They are too small and isolated to be normally functional communities.

And these are the types of places that these people who've been moved to Howard Springs come from.

I'll be blunt. These places are slums. Governments built standard Australian three or four bedroom homes intended to house families of five people - but the indigenous people choose to have twenty people living in them. This is their choice. We do not stop them doing it.

Overcrowding and poor sanitation means these places are not places where any civilised society would leave sick people. It has been long understood - by the indigenous people themselves - that if they become sick, they will be moved to a place where they can be treated. While, in this specific case, because of quarantine rules, they don't always have a choice, it's routine to move people like this voluntarily. It's expected. The indigenous people would be outraged if we didn't do this under normal circumstances because it would basically mean leaving sick people in the desert to die. That's what used to happen. Indigenous health groups - made up of indigenous people - are supporting the actions of the NT government in doing this. If they objected, their objections would be taken into account - but they are not. They want this done. They would go nuts if we didn't do it, and would paint it as white Australia neglecting indigenous people - that would be a human rights violation.

So moving these people to where they can be treated is, in my view, absolutely defensible and reasonable. What's the alternative? Building a world class health facility in every little 200 person village in the desert for occasional use?

This is how rural Australia works - for whites as well as indigenous people. One of the most sacred institution is the Royal Flying Doctor Service that was specifically set up so people in isolated areas could be moved when they needed it.

Other relevant factors - partly because of history, indigenous Australians have a much higher level of a wide variety of medical problems than non-indigenous Australians. They are at particular risk of complications from infectious disease. These are medical facts. This makes it even more important that these people get help when they need it, but it also means that in a community where 30% of people are indigenous, governments do have to be particularly alert to the risk of contagious disease spreading.

The Northern Territory - the entire Territory - only has about 20 ICU beds. In normal times, this is all they need, but at the moment, it means that if they have any type of large COVID outbreak, their hospital system is likely to be rapidly overwhelmed. So far, they have avoided that - there's been less than 300 cases of COVID in the Territory over the entire pandemic. In this situation, their isolation is an advantage that most places don't have. This is one of those places that realistically does have a very good chance of keeping the spread very low. But it wouldn't take much for that to fail.

Now, they've moved infected people from isolated communities, hundreds of miles from any large city to a location on the edge of the only large city they have. Again, I think it's perfectly understandable that measures are taken to stop these people who are either infected themselves or who were living in the same house as infected people - because that's who has been moved - infected people or their primary close contacts) just being able to get out into a city of 150,000 people who they could infect. Yes, these three kids have currently tested negative. I hope they stay negative. Statistically though, that's unlikely. They may not get seriously ill, but it's very likely they've been exposed and will develop the disease while in quarantine.

They are being kept in good conditions. Howard Springs isn't a holiday resort, but it's certainly not a slum - nor is it any sort of concentration camp. Our Olympic athletes quarantined there after returning from Tokyo and Australia pretty much worships its athletes.

Now, you may have read all this and still think it's unjustified. You may feel any restriction on any thing any time is unwarranted for all I know. Fair enough if that is your position.

But personally I don't see it that way. My mother was one of Australia's more prominent Aboriginal rights activists back in the 1960s - she had to tone it down a little because it had the potential to damage my father's military career, but she was still pretty active. And I became so myself - I started being an advocate for their rights when I was about ten and have been consistently ever since. I've spent time in some of these communities. I'm involved in trying to get kids from these communities access to decent education (and just like health care, sometimes the only practical way of doing that involves taking them away to school - I went to boarding school myself... it's not that bad). I'm a strong advocate for helping indigenous people. If I thought these people's rights were being violated in a serious way, I'd say so. As it is, I would regard not doing what's being done currently as a greater violation. Maybe we could do better - maybe we could have hospitals in every tiny community, for example. Doesn't seem practical to me, but maybe it would be better than taking people hundreds of miles to protect them.

But even if that's the case - we don't have that system now and we can't magically create it. We have to do the best we can with what we have.

* it's actually a little more complicated than this - but the additional complexities are totally irrelevant here.

[naturalman1975]

Not all fines are in units of ten. That simply isn’t true.

And I’ve already shared a link with you showing that the fine is 32 Penalty Units.

[Steve Van Doorn]

said, "I’ve already shared a link with you showing that the fine is 32 Penalty Units."

you gave an opinion piece which said, "The penalty for failing to abide by the Chief Health Officer Directions issued under section 56 of the Public and Environment Health Act 2011 is $5024 for an individual (32 penalty units) and $25,120 for a business (160 penalty units)."
From:
https://coronavirus.nt.gov.au/updates/items/2021-08-29-covid-19-infringements-darwin

From then on we went through section 56 of the Public and Environment Health Act 2011. It doesn't say that or allude to it. Meaning the opinion piece is incorrect.

[naturalman1975]

It’s not an opinion piece, it’s off the Northern Territory Government’s coronavirus information website.

[naturalman1975]

Look at the URL.

coronavirus.nt.gov.au

NT means NORTHERN TERRITORY.

GOV means government.

This is the most official source possible for information about coronavirus policy in the Northern Territory. It is the direct information from the government.

It’s not an opinion piece of any sort whatsoever.

[Pollard]

What about things we see on actual Australian news? Manhunt for three teens that ‘escaped’ quarantine camp. ???

[Pollard]

The basic facts - yes, indgenous people (Aboriginal Australians) from a number of small isolated communities in the Northern Territory who either have COVID or have been exposed to COVID have been moved to a facility just outside, Darwin, the capital city of the Northern Territory. They were not given a choice in this (well, at least, most of them weren't - there may be exceptions). Three boys absconded from this facility for a brief period before they were captured and arrested. That's all true.

Well that's totally normal /s

[naturalman1975]

Maybe you will understand this. Maybe this will get through to you.

Official directions that give effect to Acts (legislation) are 'gazetted' in Australia (as they are in the UK). That means published in an official Gazette. Law starts with legislation, but official declarations are made to give effect to those laws.

This is a link - on the Northern Territory government's own website as can be seen on the URL to the Chief Health Officer's Covid 19 Directions 64-2021.

https://coronavirus.nt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/1066088/cho-directions-64-21.pdf

Note the URL - coronavirus.nt.gov.au - this is the official coronavirus information website of the government of the Northern Territory.

It is dated the 5th of November 2021. I believe it's the most recent revision.

Go to the bottom of page 2.

Read this:

Notes for COVID-19 Directions

1 Section 56 of the Act provides for an offence for failing to comply with a direction given by me under section 52 of the Act.

2 The maximum penalty for this offence is 400 penalty units.

3 A person is not guilty of this offence if the person has a reasonable excuse.

4 An infringement notice may be given for failing to comply these Directions with a fine equal to 32 penalty units for an individual and 160 penalty units for a body corporate

Yes, technically speaking the Act allows for a fine of up to 400 penalty units. It would be entirely legal for the CHO to set the fine at that level. He would not be breaking the law if he did so.

But he has not done that - instead he has set the fine for individuals to 32 penalty units.

That is the gazetted penalty that applies. It's a simple fact you can't seem to grasp.

Now, I've gone back through the gazetted information to find the actual order that set the penalty at 32 Penalty Units. it was issued on 12th November 2020 - over a year ago - and can be found at this link:

https://coronavirus.nt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/948150/cho-directions-55-directions-quarantine-facilities.pdf

It is the 'COVID-19 Directions (No. 55) 2020 – Directions for Quarantine Facilities'.

Again, the note indicating a penalty of 32 Penalty Units can be found on page 3 of this document just before the CHO's signature.

This is the gazetted penalty. The legally available penalty. It's not opinion. It's fact.

[naturalman1975]

I’ve addressed that in the post. It’s the main reason I wrote the post.

[Pollard]

I saw that after the fact

[naturalman1975]

Fair enough. :)

[fluorescence]

It appears that the Chief Health Officer is able to arbitrarily set an “infringement amount” as part of each edict he issues. There are nearly 200 ‘Directions’ on that website: https://coronavirus.nt.gov.au/chief-health-officer-directions and from what I can see the fine is listed in each as so:

“An infringement notice may be given for failing to comply with these Directions with a fine equal to 32 penalty units for an individual and 160 penalty units for a body corporate.”
Note: not “up to” as was suggested somewhere else, but just “equal to 32”.

And he's now issuing multiple orders every day. Those poor people can't even go for a walk without checking that they have this guy's permission at that very minute.

I think the infringement amount is the fee that makes the matter go away without going to court, but if somebody did take it to court then the judge could fine him 400 penalty units ($62,800) anyway. And there doesn't seem to be anything to stop the Chief Health Officer just decreeing one day that not wearing a mask is a 400 penalty unit fine as of that minute.

There are many pages on there gloating about fining people $5024 or $5056 (guess the amount went down by a dollar at some stage) for not wearing a mask etc. Just an exercise of raw power to humiliate the public.

[naturalman1975]

It appears that the Chief Health Officer is able to arbitrarily set an “infringement amount” as part of each edict he issues.

Thank you for trying to present accurate information. This is honestly getting ridiculous.

It's not actually arbitrary - there is a maximum and the standard is set by discussion within the department - the CHO signs off on it, and is ultimately responsible but there are discussions to make the determination and they are supposed to be based on something.

Note: not “up to” as was suggested somewhere else, but just “equal to 32”.

Infringement notices can be issued at a lower level. In the case of minors (which is what these three people are) they nearly always are.

I think the infringement amount is the fee that makes the matter go away without going to court, but if somebody did take it to court then the judge could fine him 400 penalty units ($62,800) anyway

Yes. In theory.

And there doesn't seem to be anything to stop the Chief Health Officer just decreeing one day that not wearing a mask is a 400 penalty unit fine as of that minute.

Correct. But it couldn't be retroactive. And I don't think it can happen from that minute - generally new orders come into effect at 12.01 am the following day. But, yes, they could do it quickly.

There are many pages on there gloating about fining people $5024 or $5056 (guess the amount went down by a dollar at some stage) for not wearing a mask etc. Just an exercise of raw power to humiliate the public.

A lot of the time, the media assumes any infringement notice issued is issued at the standard level. That isn't always the case. If an official government release says it, you can be pretty sure it was - if it's just a news report, not necessarily.

The reason for the $5,056 versus $5,024 difference is that from July 1st 2020-June 30 2021, a penalty unit was $158 rather than the $157 since July 1st 2021. Penalty units are partly indexed to inflation, and the Australian economy contracted slightly, mostly due to the long lockdown in Victoria last year. I believe it's the first time a PU has ever decreased.

[Steve Van Doorn]

I will say this again. Covid antigen is a parasite I gave one link on my first post in this thread. This means the injections can't work as they're designed to fight the coronaVIRUS.

Thank you Fluorescence for showing me where this is. Naturalman... giving a link without stating where you found it wasn't helpful.

said, "2 The maximum penalty for this offence is 400 penalty units."

Thank you.
This is far worse then I thought. The cult of injectors are the ones spreading these variances and they let them out to do there thing. but some how the state is saying the uninjected that is fully locked down that are spreading it.

If you fight this BS in court you have to be very wealthy and you will likely lose.

[naturalman1975]

I will say this again. Covid antigen is a parasite I gave one link on my first post in this thread. This means the injections can't work as they're designed to fight the coronaVIRUS.

I'm not a doctor and I don't pretend to be one. I'm certainly no expert on infectious disease.

But I also don't just accept what somebody tells me on the internet, over the advice of my actual Doctors who I do generally trust, or I would have changed who I see.

Naturalman... giving a link without stating where you found it wasn't helpful.

Frankly I don't think I need to point this out when the URL makes it extremely obvious, and when you click on the actual link, you find yourself on a page that is headed: Northern Territory Goverment - COVID 19.

[MrKatykelly]

Dittos

[outofsalt]

pfl

[Steve Van Doorn]

said, " I also don't just accept what somebody tells me on the internet, over the advice of my actual Doctors who I do generally trust"

Where do you think they get their information from? The report I posted came out last month from a number of European Universities. The other was from Dr Jean-Claude Perez University of Bordeaux 40 years of virology analyst and Luc Montagnier 2008 Nobel Prize in Physiology. Medicine. Both peer re-viewed. There are other papers on CD147 Basigin as the receptor of covid

[KSCITYBOY]

btt

[jetvol1]

Thank you for taking the time to write this and i do appreciate your first hand perspective.

That said my gut tells me that is how the German people talked about the Nazi camps..”Yeah they are forced to stay there but those people are better off in the camps the camps are so nice, they are like a resort.”

[Little Ray]

Y’know, in free societies, if you don’t want to go to the hospital, you don’t have to go.
And sane folks don’t get worked up about a disease with a 99%+ survival rate.