Victoria now introduces detention without trial

The Victorian government have introduced a COVID omnibus bill into the Parliament. Here is Victorian Attorney-General Jill Hennessy explaining the bill to the parliament. This is the bit of her explanation that I want to highlight (emphasis added):

The ability for cases of COVID-19 to be proactively managed is critical to the safe operation of Victoria’s response to COVID-19. To ensure that the Government has the flexibility to respond to the health risks posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, greater scope is required to issue detention notices to hold people in accommodation.

The Bill will provide further emergency powers to authorised officers to issue detention notices and detain particular high-risk personsif the authorised officer reasonably believes that a person is likely to refuse or fail to comply with a direction made by the Chief Health Officer. High-risk persons are defined to include those diagnosed with COVID-19 and still infectious, and close contacts of those people.

This amendment will enable the authorised officer to detain individuals for the purpose of ensuring compliance with the relevant direction during the COVID-19 state of emergency. This amendment will ensure that in instances where a person is COVID-19 positive or a close contact and is likely to refuse or fail to comply the person can be detained into quarantine to ensure the safety of their family, close contacts and the wider community.

The Bill ensures that any detention on this basis is accompanied by robust safeguards to protect the health and wellbeing of detained individuals. These include detention being for the minimum duration required (noting that any period of isolation may be informed by current health advice). The Bill also ensures a person detained is provided with medical and other support that they require.

This is a reasonable, necessary and proportionate amendment that is time-limited and for the express purpose of ensuring that we, as a community, can respond to this significant health crisis. This amendment will help ensure the safety and security of Victoria.

If this bill passes the Parliament, Victorians will be liable to detention without trial for an indefinite period of time if the ‘authorised officer’ reasonably believes the person will not comply with a directive from an unelected  bureaucrat.

In another part of the same proposed legislation the definition of who can be appointed as an authorised officer is expanded.

This Bill will authorise the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services to appoint a broader class of persons to perform the roles and functions of an authorised officer under the Public Health and Wellbeing Act. Currently, only persons employed under Part 3 of the Public Administration Act 2004 can be appointed as authorised officers.

The broader class of persons who may be appointed as authorised officers may include public sector employees from Victoria and other Australian jurisdictions. For example, health services staff, WorkSafe officers such as Inspectors, Victoria Police members and Protective Services Officers.

Now for the sick joke:

Ms HENNESSY (Altona—Attorney-General, Minister for Workplace Safety, Minister for the Coordination of Justice and Community Safety: COVID-19) (10:20): In accordance with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 I table a statement of compatibility in relation to the COVID-19 Omnibus (Emergency Measures) and Other Acts Amendment Bill 2020.

Opening paragraphs

In accordance with section 28 of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006, (the Charter) I, on behalf of the Premier, make this Statement of Compatibility with respect to the COVID-19 Omnibus (Emergency Measures) and Other Acts Amendment Bill 2020 (the Bill).

In my opinion, the Bill, as introduced to the Legislative Assembly, is compatible with human rights as set out in the Charter. I base my opinion on the reasons outlined in this statement.

This amendment engages, but does not limit, the right not to be subject to arbitrary detention in section 21(2) of the Charter.

Section 21(2) of the Charter requires that a person must not be unlawfully or arbitrarily detained. Detention under section 200(1)(a) is clearly a deprivation of liberty for a finite and regularly reviewed period of time. The amendments will satisfy the requirements of lawfulness as they will constitute the relevant law. It is likely that any detention would be considered arbitrary if it was disproportionate or unjust, or if it was not based on any identifiable criterion and was therefore able to be exercised capriciously (although there remains conflict in the Victorian jurisprudence about the meaning of the word ‘arbitrary’).

The amendments will allow a person to be detained under the existing emergency detention power in the PHW Act on the basis of what a designated authorised officer reasonably believes a person is ‘likely’ to do, or to refuse or fail to do. Although these terms do involve an authorised officer making an assessment or prediction of future behaviour, I consider that the criteria for that assessment are sufficiently clear so as to avoid the power being exercised arbitrarily. I also note that the courts have accepted the use of protective detention powers in other circumstances where an assessment is required of future risk (such as under the preventative detention regimes for serious sex offenders). Although the prediction of future risk is not an exact science, where it has a rational basis, it will not be arbitrary.

I therefore conclude that although a person may be deprived of their liberty in an expanded range of circumstances, any such deprivation will be lawful, will not be arbitrary and so, will be compatible with the right in section 21(2) of the Charter.

Translation – you are not being arbitrarily detained because we have passed a law that says you can be detained if an ‘authorised officer’ has a reasonable belief about your possible future behaviour.

 

This entry was posted in COVID-19, Oppressive government. Bookmark the permalink.

96 Responses to Victoria now introduces detention without trial

  1. Delta

    Holy shit! How many people will be disappeared? Presumably the Zoes for starters — then how many enemies does Dictator Dan have to disappear? Will it be in broad daylight so it can be seen by one and all or will it be in the middle of the night when the target gets collected by the thugs in police uniforms?

  2. Professor Fred Lenin

    Will this thought supression law be challenged in the High Court? Last I heardwewere still part of the Commonwealth of Australia ,I mean most Visctorians are living on Australian Taxpayers money doled out by Canberra or is that Foreign Aid .?

  3. Michael Lewis

    What is the comparable NSW legislation like?

  4. V

    Just like the NZ high court ruling that the lockdown was legal because the parliament legislated it.

  5. HT

    I’ve never thought the Victorian Governor would exercise her Reservd Powers, and our biggest hope was always, dispiritingly, from within Labor Party itself spilling the leadership.

    But when, I wonder, will the Victorian Government attract the attention of the federal authorities to wake up the High Court of Australia? Surely this doesn’t pass any fair dinkum Constitutional analysis? And if it does, it’s time to shred the Constitution and start over. FFS, imprisonment without trial or legal recourse because they merely believe (with no standard of proof) that your maybe a threat to public health in a world where you need to be tested to know you have the disease? Srsly?

  6. Gerry

    This would appear to be a direct response to the ‘family’ outbreak, Casey, Hallam etc. My understanding is that members of this family do not fully comprehend the English language, but that can’t be stated cos its RAaacist, even though Double Down Dan said much the same prior to Eid. I believe he directly quoted Pauline Hanson on the same day as she was sacked by 9.
    This subterfuge gives him what he was seeking anyway. I suspect the ‘running dogs of Dan’ should be getting a little nervous on their way back to eating their own vomit.

  7. Robbo

    Fascism in all its glory has now arrived in Victoria courtesy of Daniel Andrews and his complete and utter failure to manage the Chinese virus in the competent way that all other States and Territories in Australia. If Victorians in significant numbers do not resist this removal of their basic rights then the upshot will be that these controls will be cemented into place permanently. I never thought that I would be a person who urged mass civil disobedience against an elected government but then I never thought that Victoria, or any other Australian State or Territory, would elect a government of useless weak incompetent fools lead by a madman.

  8. Mater

    The Nazis called it Schutzhaft.

    What is Dan calling it?

  9. Tezza

    Andrews is quite deranged. He must be deposed. (There. Is that enough to get me arrested?)

  10. Fat Tony

    Struth may have been correct……

  11. Pauly

    I grew up in Qld in the 70s and 80s. This far exceeds anything Bjelje-Petersen ever did.

  12. MPH

    How did your state turn communist? Two ways – gradually then suddenly…

  13. calli

    That state-sponsored “second wave” has proved very convenient.

    Too bad about all the old people.

  14. stevem

    Let me fix that:
    Too bad about all the old people.

  15. calli

    Not dead yet. Where there’s life there’s hope.

  16. Dan Hartley

    The Pre-crime Squad has come into being in Victoria with this difference: they consist not of identifiable officers, which would be grotesque enough, but of ‘designated authorised officer(s)’ assessing or predicting future behaviour. Your crime will not yet have been committed, your period of detention will not be named and your detainers will not be identifiable and that, of course, in Victoria is not arbitrary.

  17. Makka

    Dan will get it through . Oh yes, it’s only directed at those difficult ones, so just be reasonable. This is Australia.

    Until it isn’t. Once the directive is issued to take the vax, anyone dissenting from the CHO directive will disappear. Put your thoughts on the vax on Fb- disappear. Like that post on Fb or Twitter – disappear. Decide to rally a protest – disappear. Get caught at the protest – disappear.

    Impossible right?

    Scummo will huff and puff but in the end, zip. He’s a card carrying coward.

  18. Delta

    And where are these recalcitrant people going to be housed? All together so they can presumably infect each other in confinement, that is if the true reason to lock them up is that they are WhuFlu +ve? Or are they going to be thrown into some specially constructed re-education gulag/camp. Are some going to be declared mentally ill, incarcerated and provided with a lethal injection – Victoria voluntary euthanasia style?

    Oh the possibilities are endless in Dan’s psychotic world. Dan’s opponents should be very afraid because this mess is not going to end well.

  19. DanH

    The Pre-crime Squad has come into being in Victoria with this difference: they consist not of identifiable officers, which would be grotesque enough, but of ‘designated authorised officer(s)’ assessing or predicting future behaviour. Your crime will not yet have been committed, your period of detention will not be named and your detainers will not be identifiable and that, of course, in Victoria is not arbitrary.

  20. incoherent rambler

    if the authorised officer reasonably believes…

    Well he read it on the ABC website so it MUST be true.

  21. Boxcar

    But of course the Independents will reject this

  22. Slim Cognito

    WTF is wrong with these people? This is not going to end well. I feel we are already past a tipping point. Just waiting for the sheeple to wake up.

  23. DanH

    Please forgive my repetition. Here in Victoria people have become strangely reluctant to reveal their full names.

  24. H B Bear

    Wow. Time to get the hell out of Dannigrad.

  25. Delta A

    the Bill, as introduced to the Legislative Assembly, is compatible with human rights as set out in the Charter

    Extraordinary sleight of hand.

  26. Hay Stockard

    Work makes you free, Viktorian kamarads.

  27. Mater

    on the basis of what a designated authorised officer reasonably believes a person is ‘likely’ to do, or to refuse or fail to do.

    Nearly all of the comments on this blog (critical of the handling of Covid) would like put a person in that category. Think about that. What else are they going to base this ‘reasonable assessment‘ on?

    We will move from arresting those who are ‘Inciting’ to arresting/detaining those who are criticising.

  28. H B Bear

    This is getting very close to thoughtcrime. Orwell would approve.

  29. The BigBlueCat

    Jill Hennessy is my local member. I’ve written to her objecting to this. Detention shouldn’t be based on some authorised officer’s belief, no matter how reasonable it seems – it should be based on evidence, and where possible a judicial review and appropriate warrants issued (in my view). It seems to me they want to detain people for thinking about breaking the law, rather than actually breaking the law. It’s open for abuse.

    Given her sponsorship of the bill, I doubt she will do anything – we can only hope that this is fodder for opponents of the ALP at the next election.

  30. calli

    on the basis of what a designated authorised officer reasonably believes a person is ‘likely’ to do, or to refuse or fail to do.

    Sounds familiar. Any PreCogs involved?

  31. ev425128

    Finally they have a law written to lock up dissidents.

  32. Boambee John

    Delta

    Or are they going to be thrown into some specially constructed re-education gulag/camp.

    A few weeks ago, a health “authority, in Victoria iirc, suggested special facilities to quarantine suspected cases.

    As for the next sentence, I have not (yet) heard any suggestions of a “final solution”!

  33. Roger

    I’ve a suggestion for the Victorian government.

    Andrews’s press conferences don’t need a signer (or whatever they’re called).

    They just need to be overdubbed in Pashto.

    I think that will solve your problem.

  34. MatrixTransform

    This legislation effectively gives Karen a big-stick and license to use it.

  35. Mater

    Will they have to pay for their own detention in the ‘accommodation’?

  36. duncanm

    You know you’ve gone to far when even Julian Burnside criticises the ALP. Maybe Julian has begun to see the light, and realise the threat to liberty is currently from the left?

    LIBERTY VICTORIA VERY CONCERNED ABOUT PROPOSED NEW POWERS INTRODUCED IN THE COVID-19 (EMERGENCY MEASURES) BILL
    Submitted by Liberty Victoria on Thu, 09/17/2020 – 13:21
    Liberty Victoria is very concerned about the new powers sought to be introduced by the COVID‑19 (Emergency Measures) Bill.

    In particular, we are concerned about how the new powers of what seems to be preventative detention will affect vulnerable people. We have previously publicly discussed these concerns in the media.

    There are already powers to detain in the Public Health and Well-being Act (PHW Act) and the Government has not explained why these additional powers are needed. We are deeply concerned about how the existing detention powers have already been exercised, in particular at the housing commission towers, as noted in our submission to the COVID-19 inquiry.

    Liberty Victoria is opposed to police officers automatically becoming authorised officers under the PHW Act. The approach to COVID‑19 should be a health approach and not a policing approach. We are of the view that only health workers or those with an expertise in health should be appointed authorised officers.

    We are particularly concerned by cl 16 of the Bill, which seeks to expand police powers and introduce a preventative detention regime under the Public Health and Wellbeing Act. Little (if any) evidence has been put forward which justifies these power.

    Proposed sections 250 and 253 have the effect of permitting police to exercise public health powers and emergency powers without the direction of an authorised officer. Police are not public health officials and do not have the expertise to determine whether action is necessary to eliminate or reduce a serious risk to public health. Further, we have seen that a lot of fines for breaching the directions have been issued erroneously and at times, it seems, capriciously. With the increased arsenal of powers, Liberty Victoria is concerned that we may see an increase in the severity of consequences (beyond substantial fines) flowing from similarly erroneous or capricious decisions – including arrests and restricting a person’s movement.

    Even more worryingly, proposed s 252 introduces a preventative detention regime which appears to have little protections or oversight, and provides far too much discretion to people who may lack the necessary expertise to determine risk, including police officers. The Bill does not specify what conduct may give rise to a “reasonable belief” that a person “is likely to refuse or fail to comply with” a direction. Again, police officers are not trained public health officials and will not have the expertise to determine the likelihood of a person’s conduct presenting a public health risk.

    Further, the period of detention is not specified in the Bill and there is no oversight regulation built into this power. It is to be determined based on what the designated authorised person, including a police officer, considers and if they reasonably believe the person remains a ‘high risk person’.

    The indefinite nature of these powers is exceptional and unlike other preventative detention regimes which contain fixed detention timeframes and strict oversight requirements. While these people have not committed any offence, they do not appear to have the right to challenge a decision to detain them – unlike people accused of criminal offences. Although they could seek judicial review of a decision, that is a costs jurisdiction which would make it difficult for people to challenge their detention.

    The number of new COVID-19 infections have been coming down, with only 28 today. Those numbers have decreased without the recourse to any of those powers, so it is unclear why the increased powers are now considered necessary.

    Julian Burnside

    President
    Liberty Victoria

  37. incoherent rambler

    We will move from arresting those who are ‘Inciting’ to arresting/detaining those who are criticising.

    or thinking about criticizing.

  38. stevem

    The truly scary thing is that even with the introduction of indefinite arbitrary detention, thousands will “Stand by Dan”.
    I can only assume a case of Stockholm syndrome. Surely even rabid lefties must see that this is unacceptable. They’d see the Fascism in a Liberal government, but somehow accept it from Dan.

  39. The BigBlueCat

    duncanm
    #3589466, posted on September 18, 2020 at 4:18 pm
    You know you’ve gone to far when even Julian Burnside criticises the ALP. Maybe Julian has begun to see the light, and realise the threat to liberty is currently from the left?

    Yeah, I’m no supporter of Julian Burnside or his post-nominals, and especially not a supporter of The Greens (Watermelons). But I am pleased that Liberty Victoria is being vocal about this, and I hope the Victorian cross-bench take note. I have now emailed all Victorian MP’s with my objection to the bill. Hopefully more voices will be heard before the bill is voted on in the Legislative Council.

  40. Gab

    This is being set up to force people to be vaccinated against a virus that has a 97% recovery rate globally, contracted by 0.4% of global population.

  41. HT

    stevem
    #3589470, posted on September 18, 2020 at 4:22 pm
    The truly scary thing is that even with the introduction of indefinite arbitrary detention, thousands will “Stand by Dan”.
    I can only assume a case of Stockholm syndrome. Surely even rabid lefties must see that this is unacceptable. They’d see the Fascism in a Liberal government, but somehow accept it from Dan.

    No. It unadulterated idiocy.

  42. The BigBlueCat

    And Channel 10 hammering the bill too …

  43. Speedbox

    Good Lord. What’s next? ‘Arbeit macht frei’ over the doors to the isolation centres.

  44. Makka

    Having lived in what people consider police states such as Russia, KSA, Libya, Sudan I have never been restricted , threatened or intimidated with police/state force the likes of which I see here in Victoria.

  45. Pyrmonter

    Quarantine officials have traditionally had powers to do something similar, and powers of similar generality can be applied to those with mental health issues. Can there really be a problem with requiring someone with an infectious and potentially serious disease to abide by quarantine?

    The concern has to be with the breadth of the power of detention, and in particular non-compliance by the uninfected, not the potentially infected. In that case, it allows the ‘authorized officer’ to act punitively, something which must be resisted.

  46. KaaBee

    Who would ever have thought we would see this in Australia. The thin edge of the wedge that warns us that before speaking in public one must look over one’s shoulder to check as to who may be listening. But then the problem might not be what one has said but what some trumped up official thought one was about to say next.
    And to think my uncles fought and died for this? God help us.

  47. a reader

    What the actual fuck. This is worse than a dystopian nightmare. Unbelievable…

  48. Does anyone know if this Omnibus Legislation, or any other existing or planned Legislation, contains the “detain, restrain, forcibly vaccinate” as is included in recent WA Legislation ???

  49. Shoulod it not be incumbent upon politicians who believe in liberty to adopt leadership roles and take to the streets leading demonstrations, risking fines or imprisonment and inviting others to protest with them. We have moved into a system where the ‘rule of law’ is replaced, soviet style, by the ‘rule by law’. Do we have any politicians in Victoria who believe in liberty and are prepared to take active steps to defend it?

  50. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    Good Lord. What’s next? ‘Arbeit macht frei’ over the doors to the isolation centres.

    Don’t ever give the cardboard Nazis any ideas!

  51. MatrixTransform

    As far as I can tell, the various Health acts already gave them those powers.
    confirmed too when Sutton faced the inquiry this week

    why legislate for broader powers when the didn’t use the ones they already had?

  52. …the courts have accepted the use of protective detention powers in other circumstances where an assessment is required of future risk (such as under the preventative detention regimes for serious sex offenders).

    She wants to treat lockdown protesters like serious sex offenders?

  53. Ceres

    My god. This proposal is terrifying. Indefinite jail, no appeal if an appointed Joe Blow THINKS you won’t comply. Stalin, Mao Tse Tung, Idi Amin and Pol Pot have nothing on this deranged bloke.

  54. nb

    Glad to hear the ever-outraged Julian Burnside, all those magisterial magistrates, and all the other lawfare social justice warriors protesting arbitrary detention. No, wait … that was the sound of crickets.

  55. JC

    Rones

    Where do you come out on Apartheid?

  56. JC

    Alan M.

    That’s a very good point.

  57. JC

    Small edit suggestion, Martin.

    Except for BLM demonstrations, the courts have accepted the use of protective detention powers in other circumstances where an assessment is required of future risk (such as under the preventative detention regimes for serious sex offenders).

  58. nb

    I take it back. Reading above I see Jules has finally come down from the mountain top to waggle his finger.

  59. mh

    Do we have any politicians in Victoria who believe in liberty and are prepared to take active steps to defend it?

    ….
    ….
    🦗🦗🦗

  60. incoherent rambler

    Do we have any politicians in Victoria who believe in liberty and are prepared to take active steps to defend it?

    Counting …

    Umm err umm

    NO

  61. Mater

    I take it back. Reading above I see Jules has finally come down from the mountain top to waggle his finger.

    Yeah, but it’s conditional.

    In particular, we are concerned about how the new powers of what seems to be preventative detention will affect vulnerable people.

    An unkind person might suggest that he’s not TOTALLY against it.

  62. nb

    Seems the main critique of Liberty Victoria is ‘We (ALP and Greens in government) already have these powers and we (ALP and Greens in Liberty Victoria) haven’t had much to say about it, and now you have to go and make it all transparently obvious. We thought we could get away with silence, but there’s that stupid word ‘liberty’ in our name, so now some people are looking to us for some kind of comment. Damn you Dan, keep it under a bushel, please.’

  63. A Lurker

    1984 thought crimes have come to Victoria.
    Dictator Dan has learned his lessons well from his CCP masters.

    Get out of Victoria as soon as you can.

  64. mh

    Get out of Victoria as soon as you can.

    Victorians should stay and fight.

  65. Econocrat

    Found this on SmartTraveller:


    Victoria

    Overall: Do not travel

    Latest update

    Still current at: 18 September 2020

    Updated: 18 September 2020

    Latest update: Victoria will not allow most foreigners to enter Victoria due to COVID-19. Direct flights between Victoria and Australia have significantly reduced. If despite our advice you travel to Victoria, you must provide a negative COVID-19 test prior to flying and you’ll be subject to 14 days mandatory quarantine on arrival. These requirements may change at short notice. Contact your nearest Victorian embassy/consulate or your airline to confirm. If you’re already in Victoria, and wish to return to Australia, we recommend you do so as soon as possible by commercial means. Authorities have detained foreigners because they’re ‘endangering national security’. Australians may also be at risk of arbitrary detention.

    We advise:
    Do not travel to Victoria.

  66. nb

    A people’s tribunal can expose the truth of China’s crimes
    https://capx.co/a-peoples-tribunal-can-expose-the-truth-of-chinas-crimes/

    Sir Geoffrey Nice QC knows an atrocity when he sees one. He prosecuted Slobodan Milosevic for genocide and has been an expert on international human rights and humanitarian law ever since. He’s been involved in investigations into the Rohingya genocide in Burma, crimes against humanity in North Korea and allegations of forced organ harvesting of prisoners of conscience in China. Now the 74 year-old British barrister is taking on one of the 21st century’s most egregious human rights tragedies: the persecution of the predominantly Muslim Uighurs in China.

    ——-
    Now, it is silly to draw a comparison at this point between Milosevic, North Korea, or China’s Uighers, and Victoria, but what we can see is the difference in style between real objection and the rippling of the equanimity of Mr Burnside represented by his polite huff directed somewhere in the general direction of his friends in the China-ALP Victorian government.

  67. Squirrel

    Helen Clark should lead the UN Human Rights probe into Victoriastan.

    Burnside can be counsel assisting.

  68. 2dogs

    the criteria for that assessment are sufficiently clear so as to avoid the power being exercised arbitrarily

    Are those criteria are simply:

    (i) is a high risk person; and
    15 (ii) is likely to refuse or fail to
    comply with the direction;

    Or am I missing something?

  69. Gerry

    In response to suggestion from community leaders they’ve become scapegoats for the cluster, Mr Andrews said the virus does not discriminate.
    “Whether you’re of a particular faith or no faith, whether you’re born here all your parents were not born here or whatever part of the world you came from, what language you speak, much money you are in, what postcode you are in, your age, gender… none of this matters.”

    If you have your Enigma Decoder available you might infer that Mr. Andrews is referring to a particular type of people. He has now decided, on medical advice no doubt, that no fines would apply to these people. Telling them in English that ‘what language you speak… doesn’t matter’ is particularly emblematic of the intelligence of the man.
    Case numbers have been dropping because people are terrified to get tested if they think they are infected! All the terror images emanating from VicPol action informs these people that they would be fined, beaten, head kicked or even shot. So why would they submit to that.
    Andrews has given these people a free pass at Cedar Meats, Cedar Clinic, Al Taqwa and the towers just for starters. Never having the decency to tell them to stop it or action would be taken. His reverse racism is surely the most deadly weapon in Melbourne.

  70. Roger W

    Those of us living outside of Victoria should be grateful that Victorians can show us how the “New Normal” will work.

  71. This is clearly unconstitutional. </strong

  72. duncanm

    Quite ironic that it’s the multi-culti’s biting Dan Andrews on the bum with non compliance.

  73. Makka

    Quite ironic that it’s the multi-culti’s biting Dan Andrews on the bum with non compliance.

    It’s all of Metro Melbourne getting it’s arse bitten by these ethnics. Andrews arse is covered 50 different ways to Sunday.

  74. Rob MW

    The Bill will provide further emergency powers to authorised officers to issue detention notices and detain particular high-risk personsif the authorised officer reasonably believes that a person is likely to refuse or fail to comply with a direction made by the Chief Health Officer. High-risk persons are defined to include those diagnosed with COVID-19 and still infectious, and close contacts of those people.

    Some very reasonable people reasonably believe in ghosts but having an ‘Authorised Officer’ reasonably believe anything other than their authorised power and excuse to use it, is something else altogether and use it they will, because human nature is what it is when power is gifted over the powerless. The bastards can’t help themselves.

    So here Victorians are, not on the edge of the cliff but instead they have been herded over into the socialist/communist abyss. Commie Dan has, at long last, pulled down his fly and let his dick hang out for all to bow down to.

    Kissing Dan’s dick is no longer optional. Long live chairman Dan and his dick.

  75. duncanm

    Makka
    #3589780, posted on September 18, 2020 at 8:55 pm

    Quite ironic that it’s the multi-culti’s biting Dan Andrews on the bum with non compliance.

    It’s all of Metro Melbourne getting it’s arse bitten by these ethnics

    careful – or I’ll call you Karen.

  76. howardb

    Craig Kelly
    3hrs ago

    “THIS MUST BE THE FINAL STRAW

    Even I didn’t think the megalomaniac dictator Dan Andrews could go this far.

    But he’s put legislation before the Victorian parliament, that would give him the power to appoint his own private security forces, and they would have the power to arrest anyone deemed a ‘’high risk person’’ and jail them indefinitely, for a mere thoughtcrime.

    That’s right, you could arrested and jailed indefinitely, not for actually committing a crime, but because in the view of one Dan Andrew’s henchmen (from his private security force) that they (not a court or a judge) thought that you might be just thinking about protesting against Dan Andrews.

    Even in the most totalitarian regimes throughout history, I can’t think of any dictator that had such powers. This even goes further than Big Brother’s powers in the dystopian novel 1984.
    This is no longer a joke, this is a national emergency.

    The mere fact that Andrews introduced such legislation to Parliament demonstrates he’s gone mad – totally power drunk and he is the greatest threat to democracy in our nations history.

    LABOR MP’S MUST MEET TONIGHT AND REMOVE ANDREWS FROM POWER.

    https://twitter.com/10NewsFirs…/status/1306500171828613123 “

  77. duncanm

    But he’s put legislation before the Victorian parliament, that would give him the power to appoint his own private security forces, and they would have the power to arrest anyone deemed a ‘’high risk person’’ and jail them indefinitely, for a mere thoughtcrime.

    that’s the nub of it. Well put.

  78. mem

    I look at this proposed legislation in a positive light. What it finally is finally expose Andrews for what he is; a screaming bloody fascist/communist lunatic. The saying goes, just give a crazy man enough rope and he will hang himself.

  79. mem

    I look at this proposed legislation in a positive light. What it does is expose Andrews for what he is; a screaming bloody fascist/communist lunatic. The saying goes, just give a crazy man enough rope and he will hang himself.

  80. rickw

    Keep fucking Victoria Dan, leave no one with any doubts.

  81. Bushkid

    What actual formal qualifications does a professional need to have in order to be able to form any reliable opinion (and it can only ever be an opinion – professional or not) of what behaviour a person may or may not indulge in at a future time?

    I would have thought that should be a psychiatrist, or a psychologist at the very minimum, fully qualified and with many years of actual practical clinical experience (no academics need apply!)

    Anyone less qualified would not, by definition, be qualified or capable of having any reliable idea of any person’s future behaviour; certainly not to any degree that could be supported at law, fudged vicdanistan law or not.

    I seriously doubt that any of the bozos being touted as candidates for this latest goon squad would have suitable qualifications.

    And what happens if the “identified” supposed future recalcitrant person declines the invitation to incarceration? Do we begin to see people carted off bodily, run into by police cars, head-stomped, pepper sprayed, hit with water from a high pressure hose, manhandled, tazered, handcuffed, dragged out by their feet etc? Don’t tell me it won’t happen, we’ve already seen the vicpol only too keen to use all of these tactics.

    At what actual point will anyone in government, either state or federal, Lib/Nats, ALP or whatever, have the balls to stand up to this out-of-control, deranged mob of totalitarian arseholes, and if necessary forcibly remove them? Does nobody in the ALP, state or federal, have the nouse, the actual CDF, to realise how bloody wrong this is? Even if they’re only motivated by personal ambition, surely they can see how destructive it has to be to any future expectations they may have of holding office, or of keeping it?

    This cannot be allowed to go on.

  82. Fat Tony

    Bushkid
    #3589852, posted on September 18, 2020 at 10:13 pm

    The Chinese (CCP) have invested a lot of money in politicians all round the world. We are seeing their return on that investment.

    Emperor Xi is expecting internal strife in the USA after the presidential elections and will no doubt make his moves around the world (most likely including Australia thru Victoria).

  83. harrys on the boat

    Has m0nty finished wanking over this? This is Muppets like his dream.

  84. mem
    #3589836, posted on September 18, 2020 at 9:55 pm

    I look at this proposed legislation in a positive light.

    So do I.

    We may bring back outlawry as a perfectly legal punishment.

    Public enemy #1 2024:

    Dan Andrews.

    Hey big fella. We’ll keep your family out of it too.

  85. Hay Stockard

    Brave Victorians have taken to their keyboards in droves to fight this measure.

  86. vlad

    It passed the lower house today, Friday, with all three Greens members voting for it.

  87. Scott Osmond

    They aren’t even pretending anymore.

  88. DtjW

    In a glorious ‘Belt & Road Initiative’, perhaps DanOfTheDead is clearing the decks of old Melbourne, in preparation for the new, compliant, CCP occupants.

  89. DaveR

    they consist not of identifiable officers, which would be grotesque enough, but of ‘designated authorised officer(s)’

    the beginning of the Sturmabteilung in Victoria

  90. Kneel

    “Can there really be a problem with requiring someone with an infectious and potentially serious disease to abide by quarantine?”

    No.
    But there is a problem here none-the-less – “reasonably believes” the “intent” of the victim (yes, victim, not offender – they haven’t actually done anything yet).
    “I reasonably believe you are going to be racist.”
    “I reasonably believe you are going to discriminate against LGBT+”
    “I reasonably believe you will think the PM is wrong.”
    Yes, that bit – where does it stop?
    And why cannot I challenge this without resort to the courts and no way to claim back compensation, if, say, the test was a false positive, or I am asymptomatic and therefore not a risk for infecting others (check the science – this is the case) and it costs me my job and therefore my house. And even should I win, I am massively out of pocket – not for what I have done, but for what they fear I might do.
    Bad law. Very bad.

  91. nb

    Fat Tony, #3589854, referring to and adding to Bushkid, #3589852:

    The Chinese (CCP) have invested a lot of money in politicians all round the world. We are seeing their return on that investment.
    Emperor Xi is expecting internal strife in the USA after the presidential elections and will no doubt make his moves around the world (most likely including Australia thru Victoria).

    This seems the game plan.

  92. Cold-Hands

    The cherry on top if you have kids & get taken into custody under this totalitarian “law” is that your children can be taken from you for up to 30 months.

  93. Cold Hands

    Thank you.

    That is just terrifying.

Comments are closed.