2022 Election

"Have you worked out why Scumo never criticises Palmer and the fuckwits in the streets of Melbourne carrying around gallows and nooses?"

because he thinks they have a point?

him, and a heap of people that would never ever vote lnp...

and, a heap of other people that wouldn't been seen dead with those guys in the street... but...

That's complete BS sypkan.
Scumo wants Palmer's base (via preferences) but the Libs got sooooooo burnt in WA when Scumo and his idiot crew jumped into bed with Palmer for the High Court Challenge to open the WA border during the pandemic.
Palmer and his lunatic anti-vax fan club have no point at all. It doesn't take a genius to work out what would have happened in Australia if these nutters got their way during the pandemic. The bodies would have piled up high and wide.
Palmer and his idiot mob of gallows-carrying fucksticks deserve to be condemned and mocked, but you won't catch Scumo doing it. The PM will happily import Trump style idiocy for electoral gain at the expense of decent society. The PM is a POS just like Palmer.

I havent heard Scomo asked the question but have heard it asked to other LNP members on ABC radio, off course they denounce that kind of behaviour & props.

But they also acknowledge as does anyone with half a brain that it's silly to tar the whole crowd and protest with one bush and ignore their concerens because of the actions of a tiny minority.

Obviously the protest are made up of all kinds of people including anti vaxers, anti lockdown but many fully vaxed and pro vax, these protest are more about the concerns of the new bill and concerns over Dan having even more power than he has, people are concerned because we saw how power hungry Dan is.

Oh FFS indo dreaming, Scumo has had ample opportunity to denounce these extremists but he hasn't because they are useful idiots for him politically.
He hasn't condemned his Liberal Party colleagues who have attended and spoken at these insane rallies.
Did you see the news overnight? A far right wing extremist was arrested for encouraging people to bring guns to the next rally to shoot the premier.
How fucking bad does it have to get before Scumo should actually step up and say enough? The warning signs are there, and if (probably when) a politician or media worker is physically attacked, it's too late for Scumo and Guy to say it's terrible. They fucking encouraged this shit.
And as for the bill, a couple of weeks ago this mob were bitching and moaning about the CHO having too much power. This bill shifts responsibility back to elected representatives, just what the mob wanted. The mob shifted the goal posts and now sook about a power grab. The new bill would replace the old state of emergency legislation (due to expire) that this mob hate anyway. FFS it's pathetic. Come mid Dec, thanks to the shitheads in the Liberal PArty, Victoria may have no legal framework to deal with a pandemic. ID. You are clapping and cheering a pack of dangerous arseholes.

Vic Local wrote:

The Libs tactics re pandemic laws are going down really badly in Vic. The mob in the streets are despised by the vast majority of Victorians and the Libs cosying up to these nutters is not going down well with the voting public. Having said that, I think Scumo refusing to condemn the nutters is aimed at Queensland voters. they are a weird breed up there, and Victoria is a lost cause for the LNP.
I just hope it costs Frydenberg, Sukkar, Lui, and Wilson their seats. When the PM won't condemn shit heads with gallows in the streets with politicians names on it, he is a truly awful man. A PM has zero morals and he's is putting his political ambitions ahead of basic decency. What a POS.

Did you see the entire crowd on Saturday? You have mentioned this one person with Gallows a few times now. Was it fucked? of course, but to judge a crowd of 50,000+ on one persons actions is idiotic.

View this post on Instagram

Underestimate this crowd at your own peril. The people of Victoria have had enough. But keep talking about the person with the gallows Vic.

It was a crowd with highly different motives though, reignite. Don’t get too caught up in the numbers, which as protests go was just average. It was made up of those who had a genuine concern about the laws which was justified, but I doubt that was the majority as those arguments are quite nuanced. It had grifters, Trumpists, MAGA hatted people unaware that the US is a different country to the one they inhabit, gallows wielding fools and a hell of a lot of people who were taking selfies at the gallows, so it’s not like you can just write it off as one person with nooses. Death threats against the Premier and public officials were made.

As for crowds, in 2001 the largest protest crowds in Australia’s history gathered in all points to protest against Australia getting involved in a war in Iraq. Surveys recorded 95% disapproval against the idea. Sydney Harbour Bridge, it’s on-ramps and off-ramps all the way down to Macquarie St were full of protestors, easily 10 to 20 times that crowd. Melbourne the same, all other capital cities and regional towns.

Howard was re-elected about 12 months later.

Of that crowd, those protesting vaccinations, lockdowns, public health orders etc were already unlikely to vote for either Labor or the LNP. Their votes will be farmed by the more extreme ends and fed back to the LNP, but that involves some slippage.

There is a saying about the wisdom of crowds, but also about the insanity of them. All you can confidently say about that crowd is that they turned up.

Wasn’t a patch on any of the climate activist crowds we were getting in Sydney pre-pandemic. Not even close to indigenous reconciliation marches.

Just saying. There is less there than meets the eye.

" It was made up of those who had a genuine concern about the laws which was justified, but I doubt that was the majority as those arguments are quite nuanced."

Reckon you nailed it there batfink. Fair enough to protest and have a say, just keep it tidy.

BTW, are your wings really like a shield of steel?

Sorry burleigh but this is just a mob looking for a cause. The string pullers have their agenda and it's either make some cash (grifters), get rid of Dan Andrews (conservative politicians), or recruit people to even more radical groups (nazis)
It's a rabble. One minute they are anti-vax, then anti lockdown. When the lockdowns ended they shifted to being anti-vax passports, and now they are opposing the pandemic bill. It will shift again to the next scary thing in a few weeks time. One thing that won't shift is the target of the mob's anger.
Here's how stupid the Kill the Bill mob are. They hate the current state of emergency laws that give Sutton "too much power". The pandemic bill changes that but they hate the "power grab" when politicians have more responsibility. Who exactly does this mob want to make the decisions during a pandemic? Nothing can satisfy the mob. Actual results don't matter, keeping the mob angry and together is the key thing for the string pullers.

Vic Local wrote:

One minute they are anti-vax, then anti lockdown. When the lockdowns ended they shifted to being anti-vax passports, and now they are opposing the pandemic bill.

I would say all of these listed above have a mutual connection. wouldn't you?

campaign harder vicvocal...

the bill is up for some serious amendmant

because it's shit, and people across a wide spectrum have said as such

(and yes, people are pissed with andrews generally... only a mindless partisan would think his performance is above reproach)

you trying to deflect to a few rogue protestors doesn't change any of that

personally, I cannot believe the crowds are so big considering we are coming off of restrictions

...australian apathy should rule the day... but they are getting serious numbers... still!

"because it's shit," Sypkan, The Victorian bill has more oversight than the NSW covid legislation. The big difference is, the NSW opposition hasn't politicised the pandemic and News Limited hasn't weaponised idiocy against the NSW premiers.
"I would say all of these listed above have a mutual connection. wouldn't you?"
Yes burleigh and they all have limited shelf lives. The vax isn't lethal, passports have worked, lockdowns have ended, and the current pandemic bill wouldn't cause the sky to fall in. Make no mistake, this mob will need a new issue to rally around in the New Year.
Like I said, a mob looking for a cause, stirred up by scumbags.

sypkan, tell us all exactly what you dislike about the bill? And do you want it "killed" like the majority of the mob?
And if you do want it killed, what exactly do you want to replace the current state of emergency laws with that expire in mid December? The situation in Europe proves this pandemic isn't over and governments still need to introduce laws to protect the health of their citizens.
Here's where the rubber hits the road. The mob in the streets have no solutions. All they have is anger, gallows, the willingness to harm politicians, and a sense of connection with the other nutters marching beside them.
I'd be happy to give them some credit if they genuinely wanted to contribute to the debate and offer solutions other than Dan "dancing on the end of a rope". Until they do this, that mob can take their Trump rubbish and fuck off somewhere dark and dingy. And to the politicians encouraging and condoning this bullshit, they deserve to be wiped out at the ballot box.

Scumo told everyone to stop stockpiling toilet paper but on this issue his silence is just plain weird.

More people protested against the Tote closing, so you know, perspective.

My prediction, for what it's worth (usually less than nothing!): The Bill will get a few more tweaks, taking on board some of the extra comments from the Ombudsman etc, and then pass in the final sitting week of the year and everyone will go home for Christmas claiming they won. But who knows? Considering the times we live in it's just as likely Holt will wash up somewhere near Sorrento with a cure for Covid given to him on that Chinese sub that kidnapped him.

Vic Local wrote:

governments still need to introduce laws to protect the health of their citizens.
.

That isn't their primary concern. They don't give two hoots about their citizens, which is consistently proven and you have been very vocal about. Their primary concern is the collapse of a health system and health services that is completely second rate due to their incompetence and ineptitude.

"The Bill will get a few more tweaks, taking on board some of the extra comments from the Ombudsman etc, and then pass in the final sitting week of the year and everyone will go home for Christmas claiming they won. "

You'd like to thing that, but I can't actually see it happen.
First of all, the grifters and their mob don't do victories, they do resentment. If their audience could influence public policy by traditional lobbying, there's no need for wife bashing shitheads like Avi Yemeni. There's no need for street rallies. Claiming victory isn't good for the wife basher's bank balance. Being a "fighter" for "victims" is how he makes his cash.
Secondly, I can't see the LNP supporting any Pandemic Bill. They've spent the entire pandemic undermining the CHO's message and promoting ideas dangerous to public health. The only chance they have of supporting a Pandemic Bill is if the focus groups come back with some pretty significant results suggesting the LNP is losing the debate badly. Geez, there would have to be some serious back-pedalling if the LNP voted for the legislation. What would Bernie "the sky is falling" Finn say?

You don't think for even a minute Vic, despite the portrayal by the media, that there might be a few normal people that may actually have concerns about the introduction of this new legislation?

Or are every single one of them grifting, right-wing, neo-nazi, racist, white supremacist nut jobs?

From the outside imo, I think it's quite unsettling what's going on back home right now.

ok you're right vicvocal

because you told us so...

so many tines!

now can we go back to minor parties and policy?

for vj

actually zen's here, with some refreshing sense...

give us another rant...

can you mention avi the wife basher and the 3 neo nazis again?

cos that shit never gets old... especially the way you tell it...

Clot Morrison this morning https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-11-18/covid-news-blog-november-18/10062...

Then Dan Andrews on unvaxxed being locked out:
"There will be less cases of this virus because those who have not got vaccinated … are not mingling, other than in essential circumstances, with people who have gone and protected themselves and protected all of us.

"The vaccinated economy is important.

"It won't be here forever, but it will be here for as long as the health advice says that it serves a useful purpose."

"You don't think for even a minute Vic, despite the portrayal by the media, that there might be a few normal people that may actually have concerns about the introduction of this new legislation?"

That of course depends on your definition of "normal".

We've had months of protests / riots in Melbourne. The red flags are there for all to see. Gallows, nooses, people smashing things up, taking over the Westgate bridge, beating up cops, calling for political executions, Trump flags, journalists being targeted. etc etc etc.

We've just seen a neo-nazi arrested because he called on other's to bring guns to the next rally to shoot Dan Andrews.

If "normal" people are joining these rallies, at the very least, they are staggeringly ignorant about the mob they are marching with, or happy to tolerate shitfuckery of the highest order.

That's not my definition of normal.

Again, a complicit media ramming home the extremes without even entertaining the thought that maybe, just maybe there are people out there that have genuine concerns about a hurriedly drafted piece of legislation that can have severe ramifications down the track.

How long did the Bill take to draft?

indo-dreaming wrote:

Few examples

Aboriginal deaths in custody, often discussed but very rarely pointed out that when comparing the same number of people (non indigenous vs indigenous) in custody indigenous death rate is actually slightly lower, and they and pretty much all media also like to allow people to believe any deaths are of a suspicious nature, when the reality is most are of natural causes and any suspicious deaths are rare and thougly investigated.
.

You sure about those numbers champ?
https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/...

Thanks Sypkan, must have cursed the thread when I said the policy discussion bit.

If the thread can go mining for preferences data and show where every party will preference before the election, that will be a major win. Imagine that - I will be able to see that my vote for the Fiscal Responsibility Party actually goes back to the major Brawndo Economics Party: it's got Electrolytes.

Solitude: I think Indo Dreaming has a George Castanza attitude to truth telling.

zenagain wrote:

Again, a complicit media ramming home the extremes without even entertaining the thought that maybe, just maybe there are people out there that have genuine concerns about a hurriedly drafted piece of legislation that can have severe ramifications down the track.

And when you think about it logically it's no surprise everyday people might have genuine concerns or are skeptical about giving anymore power to any government be it state or federal.

If before Covid anyone had suggested people would one day be prevented from traveling intentionally, interstate, or a few kilometres from their home people, or even be told to stay home unless exercising or essential activity's and you couldnt visit friends of family or go fishing or play golf and in some cases not even be allowed to go to work and if you did you could face fines or even worst.

We would all just laugh and say, your crazy that could never happen we dont live in North Korea.

But it happened, to call anyone extremist because they are opposed to changes that make this easier to happen or shifts power is crazy.

Queensland Deputy leader Steven Miles has a touch of Paul Keating about him. And he didn't miss...
"He is so desperate to claw together a coalition of anti-vaxxers for his own political benefit.

"[The new venue vaccination rules] do not deserve to be undermined by a PM more interested in currying favour with coffee baron donors and lunatic backbenchers than the health and the jobs of Queenslanders."

>

Solitude wrote:

indo-dreaming wrote:

Few examples

Aboriginal deaths in custody, often discussed but very rarely pointed out that when comparing the same number of people (non indigenous vs indigenous) in custody indigenous death rate is actually slightly lower, and they and pretty much all media also like to allow people to believe any deaths are of a suspicious nature, when the reality is most are of natural causes and any suspicious deaths are rare and thougly investigated.
.

You sure about those numbers champ?
https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/...

Yes I am Champ

Because im basing it off facts and figures and articles based on official finding and figures.

NOT some crapy bias Guardian article that tries it's best to twist things to give their left leaning audience what they want to hear.

FACTS ARE

The royal commission in 1987 when comparing the same amount of people in custody indigenous and non indigenous found not only were deaths rates not higher in Indigenous people in custody, but surprising slightly lower.

This pattern has continued.

There is plenty of articles on the topic

https://www.news.com.au/national/courts-law/its-time-australia-told-the-...

Any excuse to bash a labour gov. Just like our dickhead of a pm, currently supporting vic protests while having a go at the vic gov. He's also having a go at the Qld gov for their re-opening plans.

blindboy wrote:

So Indo, how about letting go of the cherry picking and obfuscation and publish the causes of death of the non-indigenous prisoners and then publish the incarceration rates for indigenous vs non-indigenous. Then compare the sentences for indigenous vs non-indigenous for the same offences.

That would be virtually impossible to do, even if you compared the raw data such as crime = sentence.

That's just one small aspect, two people can be charged with something and receive different sentences based on details of the crime and also the persons criminal history, id expect other factors too.

indo-dreaming][quote=Solitude wrote:

indo-dreaming wrote:

-in-custody

Yes I am Champ

Because im basing it off facts and figures and articles based on official finding and figures.

NOT some crapy bias Guardian article that tries it's best to twist things to give their left leaning audience what they want to hear.

FACTS ARE

The royal commission in 1987 when comparing the same amount of people in custody indigenous and non indigenous found not only were deaths rates not higher in Indigenous people in custody, but surprising slightly lower.

This pattern has continued.

There is plenty of articles on the topic

https://www.news.com.au/national/courts-law/its-time-australia-told-the-...

Look mate, I do apologise for the condescension, that’s not usually my style and I do stand corrected if I’m wrong.

I just couldn’t really believe that what you were saying could be right. Hence, quick google and came across that article. I’d have to look into it more.

This is the thing about research and statistics I suppose we can pick and choose what story we want to tell.

I guess at the end of the day depends of what your point was? Are you trying to say that indigenous and non indigenous prisoners / offenders are on equal footing?

No, It was in response to Vic pointing out the coverage of nooses, lynch mobs, a call to arms etc. but failing to address in any great detail the impact the legislation may have on people in the future, especially in regards to huge fines and even jail. And again, painting people as nutjobs, extremists or grifters simply because they are reluctant to relinquish their increasingly diluted rights without question is a bit of a stretch imo.

Two things, why wouldn't I question the MSM? That's the source of the majority of my news. Second, just because I don't live in Australia does that preclude me from having an opinion does it? I have many many friends and relatives back home and many who live in Victoria, I am quite concerned as an 'outsider' looking in just how Australia is approaching the pandemic.

Yesterday, less than 150 cases nationwide in a country of 125 million. No lockdowns. Help me understand the necessity of these new laws?

Solitude][quote=indo-dreaming wrote:

Solitude wrote:

indo-dreaming wrote:

-in-custody

Yes I am Champ

Because im basing it off facts and figures and articles based on official finding and figures.

NOT some crapy bias Guardian article that tries it's best to twist things to give their left leaning audience what they want to hear.

FACTS ARE

The royal commission in 1987 when comparing the same amount of people in custody indigenous and non indigenous found not only were deaths rates not higher in Indigenous people in custody, but surprising slightly lower.

This pattern has continued.

There is plenty of articles on the topic

https://www.news.com.au/national/courts-law/its-time-australia-told-the-...

Look mate, I do apologise for the condescension, that’s not usually my style and I do stand corrected if I’m wrong.

I just couldn’t really believe that what you were saying could be right. Hence, quick google and came across that article. I’d have to look into it more.

This is the thing about research and statistics I suppose we can pick and choose what story we want to tell.

I guess at the end of the day depends of what your point was? Are you trying to say that indigenous and non indigenous prisoners / offenders are on equal footing?

My original post was about ABC sometimes misleading us, its something we expect from private media as they are always going you have their bias and things they play up for clicks or engage or enrage their audience demographic.

But as a tax payer funded organisation i think they should be as free as possible from this or atleast give us both arguments.

In regard to being on equal footing id expect how most prison guards would treat a prisoner would depend mostly on the behaviour of the prisoner if they were trouble makers and smart arses to guards id expect they would get treated worse than those prisoners who corporate and don't cause issues, in regard to getting treated differently based on ethnicity or skin colour id expect this wouldn't be in the minds of most prison guards, id expect the crimes people are in for and known cases would be more of a factor...for instance rapist, wife bashers, pedophiles etc would be on a lower footing.

"Help me understand the necessity of these new laws?"
Zen, the current state of emergency laws end mid December and the Pandemic Bill was designed to replace those laws, so that in the event of a Covid resurgence or another pandemic, there's a legal framework to implement necessary measures to protect Victorians.
The crybabies in the street didn't like the old laws and wanted politicians to make key decisions rather than the CHO. You'd think they'd be happy about the new bill, but nooooo, these people have been fed a load of BS, and they think the sky will fall if it passes.
Yes you can argue about checks and balances, but that's not what most protesters want. They want to "kill the bill". This would make it extremely difficult, most likely impossible, for the Victorian government to introduce sensible health measures during a pandemic.
Nothing is not an option, and that's precisely what the mob want. Imagine a situation where the government can't order a covid positive person to isolate. Imagine a situation where covid cases increase rapidly in specific areas and the govt can't issue stay at home orders. That's what we are looking at here.
Ignorance has been weaponised by the LNP and the tabloid media in this situation..
The funny thing is, there must be a nagging sense in the minds of the LNP politicians. If the state of emergency laws don't get replaced and the LNP win the next state election, they will inherit the shitshow they created. They may even negotiate something before the end of the year to get a legal framework in place, but I doubt it, they thrive on chaos.

Solitude][quote=indo-dreaming wrote:

Solitude wrote:

indo-dreaming wrote:

-in-custody

Yes I am Champ

Because im basing it off facts and figures and articles based on official finding and figures.

NOT some crapy bias Guardian article that tries it's best to twist things to give their left leaning audience what they want to hear.

FACTS ARE

The royal commission in 1987 when comparing the same amount of people in custody indigenous and non indigenous found not only were deaths rates not higher in Indigenous people in custody, but surprising slightly lower.

This pattern has continued.

There is plenty of articles on the topic

https://www.news.com.au/national/courts-law/its-time-australia-told-the-...

Look mate, I do apologise for the condescension, that’s not usually my style and I do stand corrected if I’m wrong.

I just couldn’t really believe that what you were saying could be right. Hence, quick google and came across that article. I’d have to look into it more.

This is the thing about research and statistics I suppose we can pick and choose what story we want to tell.

I guess at the end of the day depends of what your point was? Are you trying to say that indigenous and non indigenous prisoners / offenders are on equal footing?

very big of you...

that response (and I mean it)

prepare yourself, the bullshit has been running thick and fast on this one, you won't be the first person surprised in what you find...

Human Right Law Centre today:

“The pandemic isn’t over and governments around the country are still relying on public health and emergency powers to help manage it. The new bill isn’t perfect but it’s a big improvement on the existing law. There are some new human rights and transparency safeguards in there that aren’t in the laws in other states, like an express requirement that all decisions and actions comply with Victoria’s Human Rights Charter.

These are the sorts of safeguards that ultimately help governments make better decisions and strike the right balance between public health and the right to life and other rights and freedoms. We do however think there should be an outer limit on how long a pandemic declaration can be extended for and stronger appeal rights for detention. But overall the new bill offers much greater transparency, oversight and human rights protections than the current law and the law in other parts of the country.”

sypkan wrote:

very big of you...

that response (and I mean it)

prepare yourself, the bullshit has been running thick and fast on this one, you won't be the first person surprised in what you find...

Thanks mate. It’s a pretty tough and insular world to live in if we can’t go into a debate without being open to having our mind changed or be wrong.

Lesson for me, read deeper. I kind of got click baited myself (by the post).

Carry on gents i’ll stick to the lighter hearted threads.

Vic Local wrote:

sypkan, tell us all exactly what you dislike about the bill? And do you want it "killed" like the majority of the mob?
And if you do want it killed, what exactly do you want to replace the current state of emergency laws with that expire in mid December? The situation in Europe proves this pandemic isn't over and governments still need to introduce laws to protect the health of their citizens.
Here's where the rubber hits the road. The mob in the streets have no solutions. All they have is anger, gallows, the willingness to harm politicians, and a sense of connection with the other nutters marching beside them.
I'd be happy to give them some credit if they genuinely wanted to contribute to the debate and offer solutions other than Dan "dancing on the end of a rope". Until they do this, that mob can take their Trump rubbish and fuck off somewhere dark and dingy. And to the politicians encouraging and condoning this bullshit, they deserve to be wiped out at the ballot box.

mate I dislike you, and the bullshit you peddle...

if a significant number of lawyers from the bar in victoria think there is a problem with the bill - as is the case - then... there's a problem with the bill... simple as that...

no amount of your toxic attempts to delegitimise people's legitimate concerns will change that, so grow up, turn down the constant toxicity, and accept it...

yes there's a heap of crew in the street for a heap of different reasons, complete with a minority of nutters, but again, that doesn't 'cancel' out fair concerns from reasonable people... dsspite your best and most desperate of floundering efforts to do so...

maybe if dickhead dan didn't fuck up so much (not to mention be embroiled in a corruption scandal, ...one you vehemently outright denied just months ago... in more toxic lies and bullshit...) then there wouldn't be so many people pissed off !!

I saw two lovely old chooks get interviewed yesterday, and they had fair concerns, very fair...

they may or may not have had concealed swastika tattoos... but I don't really care...

the vicco government is a bloody shambles, and an absolute disgrace, on so many fronts... literally the only thing saving them is a no clue opposition...

that does not make labor good! ...it just deepens the shit pile...

"But overall the new bill offers much greater transparency, oversight and human rights protections than the current law and the law in other parts of the country." Human Rights Law Centre
Huge moment in history coming up.
The LNP are at a crossroads. They can either support this bill for the good of Victoria, or they take the Trump option and pander to the ignorant mob. In the short term, rejecting the bill could have serious health consequences for Victorians. In the long term, there's no turning back once you embrace the mob.
Which way will they go? The LNP have given themselves the biggest political wedgie ever. Half their team are "Kill the Bill" nutters while the others realise that that shit has serious consequences.

So what concerns did the 60 barristers have with the bill ?

I only understand generally, so as far as that goes: basically they raised some oversight issues, which the amendments have addressed, and some appeal issues, which I believe the Ombudsman still has some concerns about.
There were also a lot of QCs and the likes of the Law Council who are now much more satisfied with the Bill following the amendments.
Someone with legal training would explain it better. Plus it's hard to see through all the hysteria at the moment, like a strong offshore blowing spray into your eyes as you try and paddle into a good one.

I don't know what the bill means by 'detention', but if the beaks can't even work it out that's a bit of a worry. And appealing detention via VCAT - that's farcical.

"The Victorian Bar recommends that the Bill be amended to:

- More clearly and narrowly define the criteria upon which a person may be detained; and
- Provide for a detained person to be brought before a court as soon as
practicable for the court to review that person’s detention on the merits."

"Guardian Australia has learned they (the crossbenchers)... will be granted, a number of amendments to the bill, including... granting Victorians the right to appeal detention orders at the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal."

What I don't understand is why they have to introduce a whole new piece of legislation and a raft of new laws. If the idea was because the current State of Emergency legislation expires on December 15th, why don't they amend the legislation that's already in place?