You're either bitterly disappointed or you're frantically searching for reasons to feel you voted the right way.
We've seen some mind blowing legislation & any new replacement government will have to first begin now on a Legislative Reform List. Those passed acts that will need to be repealed, replaced or fixed.
That list is not short.
As it stands now, thanks to the WA Labor Party we have TWO passed bills, TWO Acts of Parliament that provide the police with the powers of entry & seizure without a warrant.
1) Firearms Prohibiton Orders can be applied to anyone whether they legally or illegaly possess or suspected of possessing frirearms, firearms parts or equipment to manufacture firearms parts. A person will have an oder live for 10 years unless authorities decided to remove it or the person subject to the order successfully appeal it. However the authorities will decide what information used in applying the FPO is sensitive & unable to be shared in an appeals process.
So if you unfairly have an FPO, you can appeal however you may not have the full reasons for the order nor know the identity of any informants who supplied information that resulted in the order...or the information they supplied.
Included in these new powers, that the Government assured us were to target bikies, are the ability to enter a property without a warrant, pull over a motor vehicle and search it without a warrant. Without warning, day or night. And there is huge scope that this can be applied to anyone who is not bikie related & should the Police decide the reasons are sensitive no one will know why.
2) The "Emergency Management Amendment
(Temporary COVID-19 Provisions) Act 2022" is now officially law. This means the Police Comissioner can bring in the equivilent of a State of Emergency at any point, not a minister who has full glare, scrutiny & accountibility of the Parliament. Before the Minister had to sign it every 3 weeks, now the Police Commissioner calls it & it lasts for 3 months at a time.
Now there's this interesting bit. The Police Commissioner, or the "State Emergency Coordinator" as the Act (same person) cannot bring in a COVID State of Emergency without advice from the Chief Health Officer. Only has to have the advice, doesn't have to follow that advice though. This is set out clearly in...
"Division 2 — Power to make COVID-19 declaration" & specifically you should read all these requirements & then look at 77H (5) which CLEARLY states in relation to the legal requirements needed for the State Emergency Co-ordinator (Police Commissioner) to call in a new 3 months Emergency Declaration...
(5) A failure to comply with this section
does not affect the
validity of the declaration
Get your head around that. There's a list of requirements which the State Emergency Co-Ordinator must statisfy...but in the end he or she doesn't actually have to at all.
Feeling happy, calm & relaxed?
In taking any action any person the State Emergency Co-Ordinator(Police Commissioner) appoints as a "COVID-19 Officer" must consult with certain people before taking actions except it doesn't say must. It says "may" so if they don't consult or take advice they're fine. Don't believe me? See for yourself.
It appears the information a COVID Officer can request is just about anything they deem relevent, including confidential health records. They can enter & break and enter any property without a warrant. They can control & use any place or "...vehicle or other thing". They can direct any person to give the COVID Officer "... reasonable assistance to exercise the
officer’s powers under this section"
No warrant is required but no later than 7 days written advice that their property vehicle or thing has been taken control of under the Act along with the name of the COVID Officer who did so.
Now if the Officer suspects you have been exposed to COVID-19 they have the power to cause you to...
(a) to remain in an area specified by the officer for such
period as is specified by the officer;
(b) to remain quarantined from other persons for such
period, and in such reasonable manner, as is specified
by the officer;
(c) to submit to infection prevention and control procedures
within such reasonable period, and in such reasonable
manner, as is specified by the officer.
Now consider reading the above several times. You have no choice. You can be detained at home, at a jail, at a quarantine camp anywhere for as long as the COVID-19 Officer specifies.
You have to submit to any "infection prevention and control procedures" as is specified by the officer. In other words if the officer thinks its reasonable and the officer specifies what a reasonable time is you have to submit to ANY health treatment. You may have to submit to vaccination or any other treatment that is around infection prevention or around control measures. Yes, unlikely as it is you could be locked at home or in a camp & forced to take a vaccination or any other treatment they consider with control an infection or prevent an infection. Yes, even if you don't have it or unlikely to have it. The proviso is if the Officer thinks you have been exposed to it. Exposure is not defined. Doesn't say close contact or somewhere in the same suburb as one isolated recorded infection.
Now another thing is there are so many bad Acts of Parliament passed under this Majority ALP Government that we are going to need a long list of Act reforms. I expect any prospective non Labor Government in waiting will have to put together quickly even though there's over 850 days until the next election. Just one thing, even if there is a huge WA ALP Backlash it might not matter a lot.
Prior to the 2021 State Election the WA Premier was constantly asked about whether Electoral Reform of the WA Legislative Council was a priority if he retained Government. The regular routine answer was "its not a priority"
Not long after re-elected the WA Labor Party introduced a bill to reform the Electorion of Upper House MPs. Now this was in the middle of COVID-19, was during a State of Emergency and was very quickly passed because Labor had control of both houses. This was suddenly a priority after winning control of both houses. It was quickly passed.
It was a Act made law that couldn't be used for another 4 years.
Re-read and try to get your head around that. Not a priority but once re-elected it was quickly passed through both houses, wasn't sent to committee...DONE, and yet no real urgency because there's no chance of the Upper House blocking supply & there's no by-elections nothing. Cannot be used until the 2025 State Election.
Why?
Well I don't know how it will work out but I think it was a deliberate attempt to control the Upper House into the future & in doing so the WA Labor Party intends to be better place to block any reforms to any legislation they've put in place since March 2019.
At the next election next State Election there will be only ONE electorate in the Legislative Council & that's WA. How it will work I don't know but with the recent TEAL experiment still in play its half likely that every man woman & dog in WA might be on a metres long ballot paper. Many of those independants might be people who aren't o independant & suddenly join the Labor party if they win a seat. Its possible there'll be many faux independants, ever so temporary independants. Or it maybe possible that the Labor Party is able to run 300 candidates for the 36 seats.
Who knows? But 5 with getcha 5 with the bookies that they ran the Electoral Reform bill through early as possible in the current term so it dies down, dust settles and they can get on with ramming through whatever they want.
Remember the Clive Palmer Bill. I'm not even remotely a fan of Clive Palmer, I was far from it when he was in the National Party, but pretty odd idea to actually remove an Australian Citizen's right to their day in court. In all my years of watching politics & looking at Bills in Parlaiament I've seen a few that probably should never have been submitted let alone passed. This one was a cake taker.
Apparently the Attorney Genneral John Quigley was on his feet in Parliament with this Bill without any notice and the Opposition Parties were summoned to outside the Chamber by the Premier. No warning.
Mr Quigely and the legal team had been working on the Bill for months & never told the opposition then dropped it amid a huge blitzkrieg fear campaign. Quigley, the same guy who couldn't get his evidence in the subsequent legal action right due to very conflicting comments he'd originally made in court & at another time on radio, he had to correct his mistakes.
Sadly the opposing parties swallowed it hook, line, sinker & jetty. "We will have to take the government at their word..."
No, if you're opposition you will have to take full independant legal advice & not decide before.
Amid ramped fears that Palmer would lodge legal action straight away the pressure was on to pass the bill on the spot. Funny it had a back dated timeframe included so they could have gone away & later passed legislation to indemnify the state. Why didn't they?
I imagine if Palmer had lodged court action retrospectively removing an Australian Citizen's right to a fair hearing in court would be struck down.
With Electoral Reform in the Upper House its going to be very hard for government to change or for the Upper House to change to another party.
Where WA Labor has gone (arrogantly) wrong is they've underestimated the WA Voters & over estimated their own perception of God Like rulers.
Remember after the Electoral Reform bill was passed one Labor MP messed up & said it wasn't a priority before the election because they didn't know how many seats they would win, how likely controlling both houses was. THAT is an admission of how calculating & misleading the Labor Party MPs were before and after the election
Rember also on Labor MP at a social function proudly remarked about the power & control they weilded saying it was great and only "North Korea" had better control.
If you vote Labor in at the 2025 election you are voting for extended disaster.
No comments:
Post a Comment