The issue is a long-term commercial one. The major sporting groups took a massive hit in 2020 and need to recover at the same time countries will and in some cases are already competition against each other for who's open for business first. As someone else posted its quite hard to get one of these major events and if you loose it, say goodbye for a generation.

While this crap is going on in Oz regarding Tennis and Indian Cricket players having to make their own beds, in the UK there is another issue with English Footballers (soccer) posting photos of them on beaches and around hotel pools in Dubai. Dubai has a major "winter" training camps and literally dozens of major teams from all over come here to practice and chill out away from their local crowds and frozen weather. its been going on for years. The income stream from this would be in billions per year.  

Personally I have no issue with it,  the rules in Dubai are different than UK, whether it be for CV or anything else and Dubai is usually critised for its perceived, "extreme rules", however when you support base are all locked up, its seen as not a good look.

Abu Dhabi has "fight island", which has been very successful during the CV-19 with a number of hotels that are on a island in a group and away from everything else being used as both a quarantine centre for the UFC fighters but also supporting staff and media. No one else in or out including hotel staff.

So personally yes these sporting events can proceed on condition it doesn't impact on Australian's returning from OS, but you just need to have a better organizing committee that the $hit show running the quarantine hotels and whole process in the states now. Personally I would have flown them to the likes of Hamilton island to create a "bubble" directly from OS where they do their time in isolation but can still train and will not mix with the general public.  Then once all cleared, then fly them direct to Melbourne, where again the play, practice and sleep in a bubble environment.

As for Mr and Mrs average in the outer suburbs feeling these people are getting special treatment, yes they do. When you a top tier tennis or cricket player earning millions of dollars a year using your skills, then you can enjoy the same gravy train. At the end of the day these people only have their wealth they do because WE watch them.

Not wanting to be bitten twice the Grand Prix organisers made the sensible choice to defer (not cancel) the event in the short term for 2021.

They didn’t have a choice, as the travelling circus refused to come under the current quarantine regime.

Odds are it won’t go ahead on the provisional date in November either, as it will be the race left standing once the inevitable other rescheduling moves reduce the number of options to fit in all the higher priority races in Europe and the Americas.

Mr and Mrs average get it, as said previously with Victorians stuck over the border and others over seas the optics aren't great

Plus these spots people complaining and whining forget they are guests in our country

Not wanting to be bitten twice the Grand Prix organisers made the sensible choice to defer (not cancel) the event in the short term for 2021.

They didn’t have a choice, as the travelling circus refused to come under the current quarantine regime.

Odds are it won’t go ahead on the provisional date in November either, as it will be the race left standing once the inevitable other rescheduling moves reduce the number of options to fit in all the higher priority races in Europe and the Americas.

Given what is happening with the Tennis.....wise move. Some of the drivers were questioning why they were there last year.

For the time being it is deferred. Oh to go back to the days when it was held in Adelaide and was the final round. These days it is Abu Dhabi.

Victoria now identified to be the fastest growing economy out of COVID even with the amount of business closures and NSW records zero cases today. Hard to understand and predict how all of this works.

Victoria now identified to be the fastest growing economy out of COVID even with the amount of business closures and NSW records zero cases today. Hard to understand and predict how all of this works.

Largest stimulus since the end of WWII but its coming to an end now.

Amazing that so many large companies did so well out of this - Premier Investments for example, made a fortune on the back of not having to pay rent on their shops (Just Jeans, East Coast, Smiggle) while also having their staff wages paid by the government so they did very well out of not having to open shops during the pandemic thanks very much.

As for Mr and Mrs average in the outer suburbs feeling these people are getting special treatment, yes they do. When you a top tier tennis or cricket player earning millions of dollars a year using your skills, then you can enjoy the same gravy train. At the end of the day these people only have their wealth they do because WE watch them.

Almost anyone who is wealthy ( excepting those who inherited it) are so because we spend money on them. We watch them, we buy things they make, we pay them for professional services and so on. The only difference with sports stars is hero worship.

Victoria now identified to be the fastest growing economy out of COVID even with the amount of business closures and NSW records zero cases today. Hard to understand and predict how all of this works.

Not hard since their economy basically was brought to a halt, so the growth is no doubt returning to normal at the fastest rate because it has the furthest to go. Not sure if this is something to be proud about or not.

Mr and Mrs average get it, as said previously with Victorians stuck over the border and others over seas the optics aren't great

Provided the returning Ozzies are not sidelined for a cricket / tennis player or Matt Damon then its all good.

Mr and Mrs average get it, as said previously with Victorians stuck over the border and others over seas the optics aren't great

Provided the returning Ozzies are not sidelined for a cricket / tennis player or Matt Damon then its all good.

Except that welcoming the tennis people clearly requires resources for quarantine and the like, and they are resources that could be used to welcome stranded Australians back home. Mine can wait, and they are prepared to, but I imagine there are others who'd like to get here sooner rather than later and are none too happy that the resources are going to tennis players who'll be gone again after the event and will more than likely bad mouth Australia for the welcome, not fitting for a tennis star.

Bowen is right. It is black and white, a Commonwealth responsibility.


https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-01-19/who-is-responsible-for-quarantine-in-australia/13070108

Bowen is right. It is black and white, a Commonwealth responsibility.


https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-01-19/who-is-responsible-for-quarantine-in-australia/13070108

And if you read the story you have linked, you will find that the responsibility was referred to the states by mutual agreement.

If you read the Constitution you will find it is black and white, constitutional powers can be referred to the other tier of government when necessary to do so.

I'm surprised that you are unaware of this as the most famous example to date of powers being referred is in fact the area of railways, which the Constitution says are a black and white state responsibility.

That the federal ALP frontbench is packed with irrelevant nonentities like Bowen who have such little appreciation for the operation of the government shows exactly why the electorate chickened out and went for the safe option at the last election. And if they don't start finding a way to bring in some better talent, it will happen again next year.

Disturbing new video has emerged of the lack of management and secrecy Chinese authorities imposed on health workers at the beginning of the pandemic. https://9now.nine.com.au/today/china-coronavirus-matt-canavan-says-country-has-to-be-held-to-account-after-itv-documentary-claims/505fe244-4bca-4e61-9776-1caad9eacb7b?ocid=social-today

When the chinese knew the virus could spread human to human the government silenced the details of this and did not allow this important fact to be discussed at critical meetings at a critical time.  This is part of a new documentary being aired/released today out of the UK.

Bowen is right. It is black and white, a Commonwealth responsibility.


https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-01-19/who-is-responsible-for-quarantine-in-australia/13070108

And if you read the story you have linked, you will find that the responsibility was referred to the states by mutual agreement.

If you read the Constitution you will find it is black and white, constitutional powers can be referred to the other tier of government when necessary to do so.

I've read the article, and (some of) the constitution.  Whatever his other failings may be, Bowen is right: it's black and white, Quarantine is a Commonwealth power.  It's not by mutual agreement, it's in the constitution.  

The mutual "agreement" is the Feds have effectively said "if you don't like it, do it yourself."  The States are using their health powers to implement their own supplementary quarantine, in response to the inadequacy of those provided by the Feds (ie virtually none).

I don't know if it's a left/right, or competent/incompetent issue (Trump vs Reagen?), but I think a fair comparison with overseas countries and their response and it's effectiveness are NZ and the UK.  Our Feds have taken a position not unlike the UK gvts.  Our states more like NZ.  As a consequence we are somewhere in between - but closer to NZ because we *have* a (more or less) functioning quarantine service - operated by the states rather than the Feds as the drafters of our constitution envisaged.

Bowen is right. It is black and white, a Commonwealth responsibility.


https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-01-19/who-is-responsible-for-quarantine-in-australia/13070108

And if you read the story you have linked, you will find that the responsibility was referred to the states by mutual agreement.

If you read the Constitution you will find it is black and white, constitutional powers can be referred to the other tier of government when necessary to do so.

I've read the article, and (some of) the constitution.  Whatever his other failings may be, Bowen is right: it's black and white, Quarantine is a Commonwealth power.  It's not by mutual agreement, it's in the constitution.  

The mutual "agreement" is the Feds have effectively said "if you don't like it, do it yourself."  The States are using their health powers to implement their own supplementary quarantine, in response to the inadequacy of those provided by the Feds (ie virtually none).

I don't know if it's a left/right, or competent/incompetent issue (Trump vs Reagen?), but I think a fair comparison with overseas countries and their response and it's effectiveness are NZ and the UK.  Our Feds have taken a position not unlike the UK gvts.  Our states more like NZ.  As a consequence we are somewhere in between - but closer to NZ because we *have* a (more or less) functioning quarantine service - operated by the states rather than the Feds as the drafters of our constitution envisaged.

Bowen is just trying to big note himself and while he maybe technically correct regarding one aspect of the constitution, as I posted in April its not so simple.

As others have said its a long-term convention agreement between the states and feds who looks after Health and quarantine and it is 100% the states. The NSW govt has confirmed this to be fact when it admitted fault over the Ruby Princess. The Fed's also have almost no resources to do so which is an outcome of a 120 year long agreement.

So you reference to "The States are using their health powers to implement their own supplementary quarantine, in response to the inadequacy of those provided by the Feds" is actually rubbish.

If you would care to educate yourself more on the numerous "mutual agreements" that are in place, you might be surprised. For example Abbott tried to pull out of what was becoming a longterm acceptance that most suburban rail projects receive Fed funding stating that Suburban rail is the states responsibility. He was 100% correct, but not a popular statement.

If I'm correct, the states have also given the Feds the power to levy income tax by "mutual agreement", a move they did to fund I believe WW1 (open to correction), but this has never been formalised as permanent. Likewise the Fed's levy state excise tax on fuel and hand it over to the states by "mutual agreement". All because some lawyer realised that what the states were doing was illegal under the Constitution, it was all fixed literally over night due to the need to not interrupt the states income stream.

The Fed politicians' used to have a "mutual agreement" on how they all saw Section 44, until someone big noted themselves.

As with many other aspects of Australian and state govt, yes, our effectual duel govt level causes issues when compared to NZ, where the NZ PM doesn't even have a upper house to deal with. The UK is not alot different, although they have other problems in their governance as we saw in BREXIT where to many people thought that the Q to leave the EU was actually a legally enforceable referendum when it was legally nothing more than a survey due to the lack of a UK Constitution. Then they appealed to the Queen, who hasn't counteracted the PM in over 300 years.

So rather than compare "blindly" Australia to countries with only one level of govt (excluding local), you need to compare more with US and Canada.

Final note, I have stated in various forums here for years Australia need to move away from this dual level governance to simply make it easy to get things done and be very clear on accountability to voters.  Note just quarantine, but health, PT, Education, Road infrastructure etc etc etc. The formation of the ARTC was in part a move towards Fed ownership of the interstate network.

Just thinking to myself, and I pose this as a question, is it possible that sometime in the future that the virus can/will mutate that it has the ability to evade the vaccines?? I know the Coronavirus is mutating, although I believe that the mutations are fairly slow at this point, what do people think??

Just thinking to myself, and I pose this as a question, is it possible that sometime in the future that the virus can/will mutate that it has the ability to evade the vaccines?? I know the Coronavirus is mutating, although I believe that the mutations are fairly slow at this point, what do people think??

From what I've read so far, the Oxford-AstraZenica, Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines should remain effective as the spike proteins will still be potent against mutant virus particles which retain the main structure.

The Sinovac is a more traditional vaccine which only works against the 'original' variant of the virus from which it was developed (or very minor mutations, with reduced efficacy) and the early data from trials so far has it giving numbers as low as 48% efficacy even against that variant.

The Sinovac is not one of the candidate vaccines being funded by the Commonwealth Government, and will almost certainly never receive approval in Australia. Once travel conditions are updated to add vaccination as a condition of entering Australia, I expect that people who have received the Sinovac will be regarded as not vaccinated and denied entry.

Just thinking to myself, and I pose this as a question, is it possible that sometime in the future that the virus can/will mutate that it has the ability to evade the vaccines?? I know the Coronavirus is mutating, although I believe that the mutations are fairly slow at this point, what do people think??

Personally, I think people are holding out way too much hope that vaccines will allow things to "return to normal".

One of the many problems is no-one is testing the vaccines to see to what extent they will prevent/suppress the epidemic (or if they are, they are not publishing it).  Further, the cynic in me says no vaccine manufacturer has a financial interest in achieving this.  A vaccine that fully solves the COVID problem will render itself obsolete, and non-viable very quickly.  Far better to have your product one of life's essentials that everyone needs to buy each year to solve a problem that never existed prior to two years ago.

I also fear that - because COVID transmits primarily asymptomatically - vaccines might actually be counter productive: more infected people are well, don't isolate through illness or ever become aware they are infectious, rsulting in fewr people spreading it more (overall).  We simply don't know how effective - if at all - vaccines will be suppressing the disease.

Another thing people need to consider are all the elements of individual's risk profiles.  The A-Z vaccine will reduce your risk of getting serious illness by 60-70% - *IF* your are infected.  But if as a result of the vaccine borders are opened up and you are exposed to 4 times as much COVID - you're individual risk increases.

Another thing people need to think about is how long the vaccines we have take to work.  As I understand it, peak effectiveness of the vaccines isn't achieved until weeks, if not months after the second dose.  Making vaccination a requirement of entry to Australia is not enough.  They need to be vaccinated 3 months before arrival, have both doses correctly spaced, and preferably also pass a serum test to verity the vaccine has worked.

I'll have to see if I can find some references, but I've heard (on Coronacast,so there should be papers to back this up), that there is some evidence the Brazilian and South African variants are *already* showing resistance to the vaccines just through natural variation - even before widespread deployment applies Darwinian pressure to it.

I should add, *another* problem with the A-Z vaccine is people appear to develop immunity to the delivery mechanism (making the second dose less effective).  If follow up vaccines to the strains we are likely to encounter become necessary, mass vaccination with the current A-Z may render our population immune the future versions which our population may actually need.

I'd like to make another point on mass vaccination: I think we are being extremely muddle-headed (or perhaps just overly cynical) about why we are doing it.

IMHO, mass vaccination should be one of the tools in an eradication program.  Australia has (more accurately the Australian States have  largely achieved elimination through lockdowns, tracing and (most importantly) strict (almost strict enough) quarantine.

If mass vaccination is not going to achieve or help maintain elimination, what is the point?  As I see it, mass vaccination with a vaccine with 75% efficacy means our hospital system will be overwhelmed at 40,000 cases per day, rather than 10,000.  

So in my view our COVID vaccination policy should be:
- Maintain/Enhance our strict quarantine policies
- Improve our lockdown preparedness, so when our inevtiable rolling lockdowns occur they can be shorter, more effective and less costly (because everyone is prepared).
- Subsidise development of an MRNA vaccine (Pfeizer and Moderna) manufacturing and distribution capability in Australia for at least 30mil doses a year.  We may not need them, but we might.  Even if we don't we could earn lots of diplomatic brownie points mass vaccinating our more vulnerable Asia Pacific neighbours.
- Only vaccinate those who genuinely need protection in a COVID minimal environment like Australia: Quarantine hotel workers and COVID hospital staff.  I'm reluctant to vaccinate age care workers - until it's shown vaccination reduces infectiousness overall, not just in those who are (known to be) infected.

One last point:

If the goal is to save lives in the short term in an uncontrolled epidemic, rolling out vaccines as fast as they are produced makes sense.  But if the goal to to provide widespread protection and maybe solve the COVID problem once and for all, rolling it out piecemeal is the perfect way to ensure the virus evolves resistance.  

It's far more important that mass vaccination of a population occur simultaneously (as much as possible) with the correct dosage, not as soon as possible.

Just thinking to myself, and I pose this as a question, is it possible that sometime in the future that the virus can/will mutate that it has the ability to evade the vaccines?? I know the Coronavirus is mutating, although I believe that the mutations are fairly slow at this point, what do people think??

From what I've read so far, the Oxford-AstraZenica, Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines should remain effective as the spike proteins will still be potent against mutant virus particles which retain the main structure.

The Sinovac is a more traditional vaccine which only works against the 'original' variant of the virus from which it was developed (or very minor mutations, with reduced efficacy) and the early data from trials so far has it giving numbers as low as 48% efficacy even against that variant.

The Sinovac is not one of the candidate vaccines being funded by the Commonwealth Government, and will almost certainly never receive approval in Australia. Once travel conditions are updated to add vaccination as a condition of entering Australia, I expect that people who have received the Sinovac will be regarded as not vaccinated and denied entry.

Sinovac is different to Sinopharm, the later being rolled out across the greater GCC and Africa. It uses measles type vaccination 100 year old technology, i.e. dead piece of the virus. GCC testing has show efficacy of +85%, but like Sinovac and most others prevention of death and time in ICU is near 100%.

Experts on the radio this morning have indicated that Sinopharm at least is expected to at least retain similar levels of efficacy against the newer strains from UK and Sth Africa and others to follow.

While the Australian govt is not trialing or expected to use either of the Chinese vaccines, many countries are. Politics, price, trust, lots of reasons why not, medically maybe as the European / US ones tend to have efficacy rates in the 90's vs 85%. Meanwhile WHO recognizes and approves anything over 50% so WHO regnoises the two Chinese vaccines and as such DO NOT expect the Australian govt to treat those immunised with at least Sinopharm and potentially Sinovac as not immunised, especially since a large chunk of the Australia expat population will be immunized using Sinopharm with little other choice.

Once again politics will come into play as its not just Australian expats, but friendly trading partners who are being jabbed with Sinopharm and to a far lessor degree Sinovac.

Proof will be in the pudding as the UAE today crosses 2.5m doses of mostly Sinopharm, remainder Pfizer (only on offer to Dubai residents with health conditions and UAE nationals) for a country with a population of 9.5m. Yes, more than 20% of the population has received its first jab and 5% the 2nd and proceeding at the rate of 100,000 jabs per day with 50% of the population expected to be fully vaxed by end of Feb, 70% of the population by April. Meanwhile the virus is spreading at the rate of 3500 / day thanks to the poms who went home for Xmas. While the govt's are again banning some social activities, they are pretty much racing the virus with vaccinations to avoid a repeat of Q2 2020 lockdowns. So if the medical cases due to the virus start to evaporate as we move through March, then yes Sinopharm effective and no govt will be in a position to ignore it.

To assist the uptake of the vaccine, the expected employment restrictions have already started so those who opt out may find themselves either up for weekly PCR at their cost or eventually simply unemployed. Those with medical conditions preventing vaccination are protected by law and the employer must pay for the PCR test.

Personally, I think people are holding out way too much hope that vaccines will allow things to "return to normal".

One of the many problems is no-one is testing the vaccines to see to what extent they will prevent/suppress the epidemic (or if they are, they are not publishing it).  Further, the cynic in me says no vaccine manufacturer has a financial interest in achieving this.  A vaccine that fully solves the COVID problem will render itself obsolete, and non-viable very quickly.  Far better to have your product one of life's essentials that everyone needs to buy each year to solve a problem that never existed prior to two years ago.

I also fear that - because COVID transmits primarily asymptomatically - vaccines might actually be counter productive: more infected people are well, don't isolate through illness or ever become aware they are infectious, rsulting in fewr people spreading it more (overall).  We simply don't know how effective - if at all - vaccines will be suppressing the disease.

Another thing people need to consider are all the elements of individual's risk profiles.  The A-Z vaccine will reduce your risk of getting serious illness by 60-70% - *IF* your are infected.  But if as a result of the vaccine borders are opened up and you are exposed to 4 times as much COVID - you're individual risk increases.

Another thing people need to think about is how long the vaccines we have take to work.  As I understand it, peak effectiveness of the vaccines isn't achieved until weeks, if not months after the second dose.  Making vaccination a requirement of entry to Australia is not enough.  They need to be vaccinated 3 months before arrival, have both doses correctly spaced, and preferably also pass a serum test to verity the vaccine has worked.

I'll have to see if I can find some references, but I've heard (on Coronacast,so there should be papers to back this up), that there is some evidence the Brazilian and South African variants are *already* showing resistance to the vaccines just through natural variation - even before widespread deployment applies Darwinian pressure to it.

I should add, *another* problem with the A-Z vaccine is people appear to develop immunity to the delivery mechanism (making the second dose less effective).  If follow up vaccines to the strains we are likely to encounter become necessary, mass vaccination with the current A-Z may render our population immune the future versions which our population may actually need.

1) Yes, there have been dozens of global trials, the UAE had 3 vaccine trials alone starting from August last year, over 35,000 people were involved in the various trials. There is a website I found last week that had all the trials and details and types of vaccine.

2) Yes, we all know about the timing of the 2nd dose, would you like to know about how hard this was rammed down my throat and in the media when I got the first dose?

3) The timing of the 2nd dose is about maximising your immune system response, it doesn't mean if you get it wrong you  are not immune to some degree. They indicated this morning the first dose along  is around 15 - 30% effective.

4) The conspiracy theory the pharmaceutical companies want to prevent full vaccination is a long straw. Do you think globally they are that well aligned or even making a profit from this? If the western companies were up to this the Chinese ones would certainly call their BS. This is also not the first vaccine in the world.

5) Again according to the reports, the bodies response is maximised by around 3 weeks post 2nd dose.

6) You need other vaccines such as Yellow Fever to access other parts of the world, including Africa. If the 3rd world countries of Aftrica can get their $hit together decades again on Yellow Fever vaccination for incoming travelers, I think Australia should be able to manage.

7) Ironically this morning, on the radio they interviewed a number of Dr's about the different strains and they said some vaccines may loose some efficacy, this doesn't mean none or anywhere near none and its also very easy for the vaccine suppliers to alter their vaccine as needed like the seasonal flu.

Yes, talk of 6mthly booster is out there. Likely to deal with above.

8) I have not heard one Dr or report where someone has commented that people could develop an immunity from the vaccine itself and again as many of the vaccines are using measles type technology this is hard to believe its even possible. I think you are reading from the doom and gloomers anti-vaccination propaganda.

I'd like to make another point on mass vaccination: I think we are being extremely muddle-headed (or perhaps just overly cynical) about why we are doing it.

IMHO, mass vaccination should be one of the tools in an eradication program.  Australia has (more accurately the Australian States have  largely achieved elimination through lockdowns, tracing and (most importantly) strict (almost strict enough) quarantine.

If mass vaccination is not going to achieve or help maintain elimination, what is the point?  As I see it, mass vaccination with a vaccine with 75% efficacy means our hospital system will be overwhelmed at 40,000 cases per day, rather than 10,000.  

So in my view our COVID vaccination policy should be:
- Maintain/Enhance our strict quarantine policies
- Improve our lockdown preparedness, so when our inevitable rolling lockdowns occur they can be shorter, more effective and less costly (because everyone is prepared).
- Subsidise development of an MRNA vaccine (Pfeizer and Moderna) manufacturing and distribution capability in Australia for at least 30mil doses a year.  We may not need them, but we might.  Even if we don't we could earn lots of diplomatic brownie points mass vaccinating our more vulnerable Asia Pacific neighbours.
- Only vaccinate those who genuinely need protection in a COVID minimal environment like Australia: Quarantine hotel workers and COVID hospital staff.  I'm reluctant to vaccinate age care workers - until it's shown vaccination reduces infectiousness overall, not just in those who are (known to be) infected.

You are confusing what efficacy actually means. My understanding is that its the total efficiency of the vax to prevent any negative response should you get infected. However despite Sinovax being only 51%, my understanding is that the Brazilian's said its near 100% effective prevent death and serious illness. Thus it protects the hospital system.

Australia cannot continue to remain and jail for its population nor people from outside getting in. The elimination strategy worked well and allowed life to continue without the issues of EU, but economically its not sustainable.

Those EU and US manufacturers were paid by their govts to develop and build manufacturing capacity domestically, of course this money came with rules.

Asia is already vaccinating using a combination of suppliers, you need to remember Australia and NZ are two of the slowest developed countries to start vaccinating. The poorer countries are being funded by external partners and in some cases govts's of the vaccine suppliers. That boat has sailed.  

- Vaccinate everyone, starting with those at highest risk to getting it or risk of serious illness of death if they do get it. The Aust govt already has a roll out strategy that is basically this.

One last point:

If the goal is to save lives in the short term in an uncontrolled epidemic, rolling out vaccines as fast as they are produced makes sense.  But if the goal to to provide widespread protection and maybe solve the COVID problem once and for all, rolling it out piecemeal is the perfect way to ensure the virus evolves resistance.  

It's far more important that mass vaccination of a population occur simultaneously (as much as possible) with the correct dosage, not as soon as possible.

I think you will find its being rolled out as fast as it be made and distributed.