TOPIC:

I work for an organisation which assists exporters in various ways...we have a moron trying to get approval to send hand sanitisers to Indonesia even though you can't buy the stuff here. Given they're included in the Prohibited Export Regs we told him to go away and get written approval from Border Force. I know what they'll say....wanker.

BC wrote: I work for an organisation which assists exporters in various ways...we have a moron trying to get approval to send hand sanitisers to Indonesia even though you can't buy the stuff here. Given they're included in the Prohibited Export Regs we told him to go away and get written approval from Border Force. I know what they'll say....wanker.

BC I’m a bit concerned for the mental health of Xi Ping. You might want to use your contacts to pass on the Beyond Blue helpline to Xi Ping. I reckon his Belt and Road dream Is kaputski. Tell him Julia is standing by to take the call.

If the bloke can’t supply the world with a simple product like hand sanitizer he’s failed the first test. What happens when the shit hits the fan? Can you deliver?

A - Obviously farken NOT!!

BC wrote: Sneakers is getting serious now by completely closing down WA's borders from Sunday night at midnight. Not even West Aussies returning home will be allowed through. Only essential services, freight, coppers and emergency services can pass through. Good on ya Sneakers...you're doing a bloody good job as shown by only 8 new cases overnight.

About 3 weeks late

BC wrote:

jackspratt wrote:

Devonleigh wrote: Think you will find there are powers under the health acts that override these provisions.

I doubt that any Act can override (ie conflict with) the Constitution.

Agreed Jack but it's the interpretation of the Constitution by the courts that count.

Both the Public Health Act and the Emergency Management Act grant the State powers to control people coming into and out of the state.

The Public Health Act allows for the control of anu Vehicle Air Land or Sea wthin the State borders , also allows the State to take any person by force into Quarantine once inside WA.

If you look at what McGowan has it has enforced far tougher Quarantine Powers on entries into the State. It isn't actually totally closing the borders to trade, Trade is still allowed to flow and section 92 only refers to the imposition of duties - I cant see any breach,

Its worth noting that The Agricultural Protection Act has worked in the same way for 100 years or more without any Constitutional issues.

Bazza wrote:

BC wrote:

jackspratt wrote:

Devonleigh wrote: Think you will find there are powers under the health acts that override these provisions.

I doubt that any Act can override (ie conflict with) the Constitution.

Agreed Jack but it's the interpretation of the Constitution by the courts that count.

Both the Public Health Act and the Emergency Management Act grant the State powers to control people coming into and out of the state.

The Public Health Act allows for the control of anu Vehicle Air Land or Sea wthin the State borders , also allows the State to take any person by force into Quarantine once inside WA.

If you look at what McGowan has it has enforced far tougher Quarantine Powers on entries into the State. It isn't actually totally closing the borders to trade, Trade is still allowed to flow and section 92 only refers to the imposition of duties - I cant see any breach,

Its worth noting that The Agricultural Protection Act has worked in the same way for 100 years or more without any Constitutional issues.

It also covers movement of people between the states as well Baz. Extract from Wikipedia.

"Trade and commerce" and "intercourse" are two separate concepts, as noted in Cole v Whitfield:

13. ...The notions of absolutely free trade and commerce and absolutely free intercourse are quite distinct and neither the history of the clause nor the ordinary meaning of its words require that the content of the guarantee of freedom of trade and commerce be seen as governing or governed by the content of the guarantee of freedom of intercourse.[4]

In that regard:
"trade and commerce" includes "the mutual communings, the negotiations, verbal and by correspondence, the bargain, the transport and the delivery",[12]
"intercourse" is the ability "to pass to and fro among the States without burden, hindrance or restriction",

BC wrote:

Bazza wrote:

BC wrote:

jackspratt wrote:

Devonleigh wrote: Think you will find there are powers under the health acts that override these provisions.

I doubt that any Act can override (ie conflict with) the Constitution.

Agreed Jack but it's the interpretation of the Constitution by the courts that count.

Both the Public Health Act and the Emergency Management Act grant the State powers to control people coming into and out of the state.

The Public Health Act allows for the control of anu Vehicle Air Land or Sea wthin the State borders , also allows the State to take any person by force into Quarantine once inside WA.

If you look at what McGowan has it has enforced far tougher Quarantine Powers on entries into the State. It isn't actually totally closing the borders to trade, Trade is still allowed to flow and section 92 only refers to the imposition of duties - I cant see any breach,

Its worth noting that The Agricultural Protection Act has worked in the same way for 100 years or more without any Constitutional issues.

It also covers movement of people between the states as well Baz. Extract from Wikipedia.

"Trade and commerce" and "intercourse" are two separate concepts, as noted in Cole v Whitfield:

13. ...The notions of absolutely free trade and commerce and absolutely free intercourse are quite distinct and neither the history of the clause nor the ordinary meaning of its words require that the content of the guarantee of freedom of trade and commerce be seen as governing or governed by the content of the guarantee of freedom of intercourse.[4]

In that regard:
"trade and commerce" includes "the mutual communings, the negotiations, verbal and by correspondence, the bargain, the transport and the delivery",[12]
"intercourse" is the ability "to pass to and fro among the States without burden, hindrance or restriction",

BC , there’s been numerous cases that make it clear that if the purpose of the law is for public good for example public health of the State then it’s not unconstitutional ,
The look at the purpose of the law and run a test, Nationwide v Wills is a good case with the test laid out.

China's bullshit Covid19 reporting and WA's alarmingly low level of testing. Compare SA 17.1k per million to WA just 6.3k per million.

I’m not normally one to believe conspiracy theories but scientists are finding cellular evidence that this virus was most likely man made in a laboratory environment. Scary shit reading this. You have to ask yourself, why would anyone genetically modify a virus, possibly a perfect virus that is hard to detect, is deadly, affects humans much more than animals and spreads rampantly?

Hmmmmm

www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health/health-...fa2f30d5e7306dbf4780

DD wrote: I’m not normally one to believe conspiracy theories but scientists are finding cellular evidence that this virus was most likely man made in a laboratory environment. Scary shit reading this. You have to ask yourself, why would anyone genetically modify a virus, possibly a perfect virus that is hard to detect, is deadly, affects humans much more than animals and spreads rampantly?

Hmmmmm

www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health/health-...fa2f30d5e7306dbf4780

We live in an information age but the tendency is to go looking for stuff that supports our existing views - not challenge it. Your source is a little dubious. Israeli geneticist, Dr Ronen Shemesh is of the opinion the virus was more likely created in a laboratory than evolved in nature whereas Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard and University of British Columbia biologist, Alina Chan, said there was little evidence to definitively say where COVID-19 originated. Then you have La Trobe University Chemistry and Physics Professor David Winkler saying there were several possibilities for the source of COVID-19. Finally Flinders University Professor Nikolai Petrovsky says “We really don’t know where this virus came from – that’s the truth.