Australia, a country divided by mandate


The imposition of vaccination obligations in Australia has divided the country between pros and cons of compulsory vaccination. This department has created a wave of demonstrations against the government’s relentless demand for vaccination.

On February 5, a vaccination rally was held outside the Old Parliament House in Canberra. The rally supported a prominent protest against orders in Canada, the “Convoy to Ottawa.”

These vaccine obligations are enthusiastically endorsed by the political elites of both major political parties and medical institutions, depriving people of their freedom to make their own decisions regarding their welfare. Mandates are part of a series of fragmented emergency measures that are imposed on people and carried out in an overwhelming way.

Unvaccinated people are discriminated against and banned in most public places, including courts, making it difficult to legally challenge vaccination requirements.

This unfortunate disparity is characterized by various recent stances taken by Qantas CEO Alan Joyce and Prime Minister Scott Morrison.

Joyce told me to be controversial Western Australia (WA) was beginning to look like North Korea.. His controversial statement responded to the continued closure of state borders with disastrous consequences for the tourism and hospitality industry.

He lamented the fact that people can travel to London, but “cannot even travel to their own country,” indicating that there must be something wrong with our federation.

Joyce admitted that the border would be closed indefinitely at this stage, “unless you start living with COVID and plan to open it to the rest of the country.”

Epoch Times Photo
Qantas Group CEO Alan Joyce will be seen on March 17, 2021 during breakfast at the Australian Business Council at the Mural Hall of the Capitol in Canberra, Australia. (Sam Mooy / Getty Images)

The comparison of Joyce’s WA and North Korea is an inappropriate picture of his imagination and an example of an obvious exaggeration, but it is an undeniable sign of frustration.

Premier of Western Australia Mark Magawan has promised to open the border on February 5.

But when he reiterated his promise, he said it was irresponsible to open the border that day, as Omicron could spread to the eastern part of Australia and easily overwhelm the capacity of state medical facilities. rice field.

A similarly accepted explanation for the decision to postpone open border is that it was politically favorable. In any case, the Prime Minister’s face is badly reflected in our federal system.

Joyce’s remarks have an unpleasant relationship with Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s contradictory remarks. 6PR radio interview McGowan confidently claimed that it was right to postpone the opening of the border, and that he supported this decision.

Specifically, when interviewer Gareth Parker asked if he had done the right thing by postponing the planned open border, he said, “I think so,” and “the prime minister’s call. … he has to do that. ” “A decision based on what he thinks his health system is ready to absorb” and “At the end of the day, McGowan intends to make the call and we have been supporting him. “

The views expressed by Joyce and Morrison disclose different interests that are mutually exclusive. Joyce was clearly concerned about the impact of continued border closures on tourism and the desire of Qantas to resume flights to Western Australia.

In contrast, the Prime Minister may have expected to benefit politically by proclaiming his support for McGowan and his decision to keep the border closed.

Epoch Times Photo
Prime Minister Scott Morrison will talk about pandemic management at the National Press Club in Canberra, Australia on February 1, 2022. (Low Hunt Thomson / Getty Images)

The WA electorate annihilated the Liberal Party in the March 2021 election, and the Prime Minister probably welcomed his comments and his support for the Prime Minister’s decision was to support the upcoming Liberal Party. I wanted to be connected. Elections may be held in May 2022.

However, the Prime Minister’s approach reveals the lack of political nous and abandons political courage and pretending to be fundamental decision-making, unless it truly believes in the beneficial effects of border closure.

This is because the federal government is responsible for the cannibalistic decision made by the state Prime Minister in the fight against COVID-19.

In reality, the federal government has a constitutional authority to impose a unified national approach to all Australian states and territories to avoid the balkanization effect of inconsistent and rigorous state emergency measures. there is.

The national approach would have eliminated border closures and potentially restricted closures, while avoiding costly and painful consequences, especially for the tourism and hospitality industries.

Epoch Times Photo
On February 8, 2022, a large number of police gathered at the Parliament Building in Canberra, Australia. (Brooke Mitchell / Getty Images)

This unified national approach may have been easily supported by the diplomatic power of the Federal Constitution. In fact, Article 51 of the Constitution allows Congress to enact “foreign affairs” legislation. This is a concept that has been freely interpreted by the High Court.

This allows Parliament to enact legislation on any issue that is the subject of an international treaty or treaty that Australia has ratified or is involved in.

The Commonwealth has ratified or signed a myriad of international treaties and documents, which would have supported the constitutionality of domestic measures to combat the COVID-19 pandemic.

In addition, Article 51 gives Congress the legislative power to enact a “quarantine” law. This power was not trusted by the Commonwealth during the pandemic.

The Prime Minister’s establishment of a national cabinet also reveals that Australia’s elected government is reluctant to make harsh decisions. The Cabinet is not mentioned in the Constitution.

In exercising power over the state, the government has actually abandoned its legislative role and transferred its decision-making power to its political opponents.

As a result of the abdication of the federal government, Australia’s population has experienced repressive measures to recreate the worst excesses of the People’s Republic of China, such as border closures, blockades, and countless emergency orders, but it has always scared people. I planted it.

This horror was cultivated by the media, which constantly reported on suspected virus-related risks and death from infection. Alternative methods for treating the disease were not actually considered or tolerated by political and medical tangerines.

The Vaccine Obligation and its associated alliance of emergency measures may have transformed Australia into an irreparably divided country. The inability to travel freely in one’s country is an example of this division.

It’s time for the Western Australian border to open to the rest of the country.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

Gabriel Moens


GabriĆ«l A. MoensAM is an emeritus professor at the University of Queensland and vice president and dean of Murdoch University. In 2003, Mornes was awarded the Australian Centennial Medal by the Prime Minister for her service to education. He has taught extensively in Australia, Asia, Europe, and the United States. Moens recently published two novels, “ATwisted Choice” (Boolarong Press, 2020) and “The Coincidence” (Connor Court Publishing, 2021).

Posted on