****ting on AP for closing the border and yet here is SA going into a tougher lockdown that VIC. Man I would hate to be as wrong as often as you are

Oh, so the Feds have taken over the State's responsibilities? Missed that on the news. Might want to let Comrade Dan know so he can claim back the Millions he paid to that security firm.

Australian Constitution:s51 The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power12 to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to:
(ix) Quarantine
(xix) Naturalization and aliens;
(xxvii) immigration and emigration

In addition to Border control and Biosecurity. It's the Federal Government which operates facilities like Christmas Island and military bases.

The Feds have delegated this task to the states, and show no inclination to take charge with their resources when it's obvious the current situation (major CBD hotel quarantine) is causing national problems. From now on this situation should be dealt with with a coordinated national approach with the Federal Government stepping up to be real leaders with a Federally managed remote quarantine program.

There is a big difference between indefinite border closures and a wise lockdown Rat.

And I’ll take an extreme lockdown lasting 6 days over a 4 month emotional extravaganza any day.

I would take a 4 month border closure and being able to goto a cafe and have an effectively unchanged life over the a 14 day (not 6) day lockdown

Well if the border closure doesn’t effect you (which I find interesting since you likely are a professional pilot on this forum) keep voting for McClown or Queen P and enjoy that latte

You're oversimplifying S51. That's also one of two references to 'quarantine' in the Constitution. If it were that simple, the States could've saved a fortune.

Whilst the Biosecurity Act has superseded Quarantine Act, there's much too much to cross reference to find a definitive answer. The Australian Emergency Management Arrangements, whilst also a simple document, manages to be devoid of 'Legal Speak'. It contains the following references;
And...

On a side note, I stumbled across this in the Constitution;
Just found that one interesting...

I wonder how all the constitutional law experts on here (maybe even myself) felt when Palmer’s High Court border challenge was thrown out of court? Maybe we aren’t the legal experts we think we are?

Either way I’m sure the government could facilitate remote quarantine like they did to the Wuhan evacuees in January on Christmas Island.

It’s beyond the point of political arguing, as long as quarantine is maintained in cities, we risk these breakouts every few months which threaten the nation’s generally Covid free status, the national economy and our industry.

Wrong how? Closing borders is not the answer to every new case SA new cluster is still below the Fed Gov definition of outbreak and still does not meet hot spot as defined by Fed Gov. SA said today they can trace all the origin of new cases I believe they are making a more a political move knowing they will be locked out well into next yr if they don’t have zero cases because eradication is what is expected now. The original goal was suppression that has now changed.

And who/what institutions changed the goal from suppression to elimination without consulting anyone else??

Anyone who thinks this can be eradicated is a moron, with interdependent economic ties courtesy of the much touted "globalisation" of the world there'd be nothing left to rebuild the scorched earth.

BTW in case unclear I agree with Ragnor's comment, a fair question/observation that deserves consideration because the actions of some state/territory leaders makes you wonder what their strategy is.
And all the while whilst still pocketing whatever they can from ScoMo - just proving that underrneath, whatever they say or pontificate, they really are just politicians and until the cash flow diminishes they are happy to be double faced.

Anyone who thinks we should just let if go nuts and do nothing is a bigger moron. Apart for tourism globalisation hasn't been effected, arguably trade has actually increased, monthly household spending has increased.

OK for ****s and giggles what would be your plan to handle it. I need a laugh

I don’t think it should “let go nuts” at all I have the opinion we have to live with it and deal with cases as they arise because at the moment the solution is worse than the problem. NSW perfect example of living with it there has been plenty of small clusters over the last 6 month notably cross roads hotel, pockets in SW SY all very well handled and I have no doubt it will happen again. These border closure are a knee jerk reaction which have exposed the failure of those states to prepare them selfs over the last 6 months.

I'll just agree with Ragnor's statement, pretty clear and sensible.

Problem I have is that the states who chose "isolation" believe they have been a success and may not have the protocols established to deal with any outbreaks, when they DO open their fallback position (if South Australia's any indication) is simply to close down - yet again.

Like many one of my parents died (at 93) due a chest infection/cold/flu that became entrenched and led to the body organs saying "yeah all too much".
We haven't eradicated the common cold - yet there appear to be people/organisations who delusionally think CV19 can be eradicated.
My apology in these PC times but my comment stands - morons.

If nothing else simply demonstrates this is still early days of seeing how different approaches do/do not work socially and economically both in Australia and the globalised, interconnected world.

Anyone who believes the first half of 2021 will be any better - good luck on that, I honestly hope you're right.

We’re not that far off.

NSW and Victoria have gone 11 and 17 days without local transmission. They’re well on their way to 28 days by December.

SA? This incredibly strict lockdown may do the trick and allow a Covid free Christmas.

Yes, there are organisations who are staffed by some very qualified and experienced people, who think we should aim for zero cases until vaccine uptake is widespread. This will cause the least long term harm to the national economy and allow the most free movement and interstate trade.

Go for zero: How Australia can get to zero COVID-19 cases

People scoffed at this a few months ago. Now we’re on the cusp on achieving it. Until a vaccine or rapid testing is here best to keep international travel with Covid affected nations limited. Therefore the one weak leak in this strategy, international hotel quarantine, must be addressed.

Hate to sound like a broken record but it is the most important factor. If we remove the quarantine cases from major cities, and isolate them remotely, then we remove the only potential source of widespread outbreak into a Covid safe nation.

As much as conspiracy theorists would like to think that State premiers are doing this for delusional psychopathic reasons they are being advised to do this by the experts for good health and economic reasons.

Allowing for contact tracing and suppression is good in theory, and you might get lucky. But if factors are wrong you might not. Let it spread and see how it’ll rip through the US this winter. Even previously “common sense approach” Sweden is now instituting strict restrictions as their previous “common sense” approach failed. Miserably.

If we have a chance to get to zero, and it’s close, then take it.

Not a pilot; and usually politically quite left of centre. I am involved in COVID data work and advisory including analysis towards air travel reopening. I can say that 'zero' is a bloody-minded, aesthetic and egotistical choice by several state leaders and their close sets of advisors. Most certainly eradication is possible to reach. (Ironically, in the early days of COVID-19 the statistical and biosecurity guys about the place were often given a rough time by the health experts and epidemiologists for arguing that the actual data was showing we were nearly there back in May). But it is extremely difficult to sustain, and moreover tremendously costly to achieve and then re-achieve. The "premium" in long-term costs, in going from low to zero, is utterly disproportionate to the benefits (despite the calculations of Prof. Blakely -- synopsis of his article supporting eradication on health cost grounds is: let's poorly represent low-rate non-eradication approaches, and form a narrowly-focused cost function, and then seek to convince all and sundry that eradication is obviously the lowest-cost option)

Vic Govt's obsession with zero, rather than following the clearly sufficient and far more moderate NSW position, has cost Victoria dearly. For example, senior figures in mental health talk in private about widespread damage that will never be repaired. This has become the status quo without consultation with their populations, with patchy-at-best dialogue with the rank-and-file of the science community, without regard for the Commonwealth Govt position, and under State of Emergency powers that stifle constructive debate about what is best for a state or the country, because the executive don't have to listen, they can act with impunity.

It is ironic that despite Dan Andrews' constant claims about being driven by data and science, most certainly Vic Govt's approach was *not* data driven. Data-driven showed that every Australian state got COVID-19 rates from first wave peaks down to very low figures March-May 2020. That is eight experiments all showing the same result, done with relatively moderate restrictions through most of the period. NSW has then successfully put multiple outbreaks to bed with the same settings, Tassie put Burnie away pretty easily, and even VIC managed one or two wins. Then VIC had a spectacular series of well-documented failures starting mid-late May. (Sure, if you point an A380 at the ground, you will kill 550 people. What does that prove?) What seemingly has been quickly forgotten is that due to various factors (including what I believe is a reticence to be open with the public about some of the 'social indicators', and embarrassing systematic shortcomings that were not acknowledged and were quickly cascading) Victoria spent more than two weeks racking up scores of cases, before decisive action was taken. The initial action was late but correct. The last 6 weeks? Jesus wept.

Now with COVID nationally, without actually informing and asking the population about the options, we are at an analogous position to saying "sorry, we just can't trust our firefighters to put fires out, so we declare every day from November to March to be a Total Fire Ban, and closing all the National Parks: and you will support us, because you don't want anyone to get hurt do you?". It's fundamentalist logic that we expect to hear from Middle Eastern leaders or the dumbest parts of the USA. Thing is, winners are grinners unless your world has fallen apart in the process. There have been too many happily married 40-somethings making decisions for everybody else (says one of those people...). An almost voiceless 5%-10% of the population have been utterly smashed by this, and god help you if you are an Aussie wanting to get home or an overseas guest who didn't f*** off home when Scomo told you to (the multi-$B education export will *never* recover from our disregard and callousness). But yeah, winners are grinners.

I don't have much of a view on SA, although on first blush it might be overkill, and certainly the snap border closures were heartless and stupid acts which left many people isolated from their homes and lands.

I don't think the premiers are doing this for "delusional psychopathic reasons" but neither are they being rational, well-informed and holistic. Except in NSW/ACT it seems. The drive to reach zero, and be heroes/heroines like Jacinda, is no better than religious fundamentalism. You can have zero adultery too, if you work hard enough at it. The ends do not justify the means. Just because Dan and Mark and Anastasia etc "won" does not mean they have chosen the best path. We do not have a binary choice between NZ on one hand, and Sweden, the UK or the USA on the other. The data shows that we all had a great and successful approach March-May but now the wheels are well and truly off. Yes it is better that the wheels rolled south to zero, rather than rolled north to infinity -- but they are still off. The majority of relevant scientists, sociologists, economists and data-wranglers are NOT being harnessed or listened to; and state and national strategy is a total shambles.

So, SA 6 day lockdown WTF! where does 6 days come from another rogue premier and CMO making $hit up as they go like QLD and WA. Sco Mo needs to grab the reins and pull these premiers into line make a national standard FFS.

It doesn't really matter, we want zero community transmission and we'll accept nothing less. You guys best accept and adapt the airlines will never be what they were. It will be climate change next and that will be a whole lot more destructive than any virus.

I say good on SA for making the big call early. It wasn’t just a small number of cases, it was 20 or so in 48 hours from nothing. If it turns out to be nothing they can call stumps in 3 days.

You and I both know if Adelaide turns in to another Melbourne it will be a disaster for the domestic aviation market which was just about to turn a corner.

Déjà Vu- feels a lot like July- the great unknown. Which way will it go?

I hate to break it to you, but there are other avenues for COVID to enter AU besides the traveller quarantine system. And I am not talking aircrew.

The greatest danger to this country is the perception that with zero, we can go back to normal, or just about. Then when something pops up, it goes nuts. Look at the panic buying yesterday in Adelaide, not a mask in sight on the vision I saw. IF it is about, it's probably now well seeded.

Stumps to be called on day 3 (Saturday night). Big win for SA and the rest of the country