Djokovic

[st13phil]

but this was never about reputation in the first place

Correct. It was about politics.

 

[Tonye]

Wrong, it was about rules, then turned into politics

 

[Deleted member 126251]

It's was absurd for you to write that "A lot of this happened during the industrial revolution which put people out of jobs and who were starving as a result and stealing to stay alive."

The industrial revolution put people into jobs, put food into people's hands, and took them out of an agricultural living which did routinely starve them because of their dependency on the seasons and crops.

Why were people deported? Because they had the tech and destination to do so.

What happened to thieves previously? They were killed by the people around them, or sentenced to death, or died while imprisoned in far more appalling conditions of poverty, squalor and violence than any 21st century mind can countenance.

Nothing absurd buddy. Simple facts as to why women and children were being imprisoned and deported by the government of the time.

What was absurd was the disingenuus argument, and out of context quotation you tried using. If you’d said what you said above (ignoring the first paragraph) fair enough. However at the time most people worked in (or lived off) the countryside where they lost their jobs because of industrialisation. They then flocked to the cities and could not find work etc etc ......

However, that was how things were at the time and we don’t see people pulling down statues because of it.

 

[st13phil]

Wrong, it was about rules, then turned into politics

Really?

So why did the Victoria State Government provide assurances to Djokovic that he would be allowed entry to the country?

It is (and always was) about State vs Federal authority.

 

[Tonye]

State vs Federal

One set of rules. How there applied is another story

 

[grober]

Has anyone come out of this utter shambles well?

This may well have something to do with it. A hard politically based upcoming voting calculation will have been made? win some lose some

Timing for the 2022 federal election

With 2021 rapidly drawing to a close, it seems probable that the next federal election will happen in the first half of 2022. The timing for federal elections is determined by a combination of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (the Act) and the Australian Constitution. The exac

www.aph.gov.au

 

[st13phil]

This may well have something to do with it. A hard politically based upcoming voting calculation will have been made?

Hole in one (imo).

 

[Flyinspanner]

Simple, read the requirements, if you comply, go - and fill in the forms yourself honestly!

if you don’t - then either get compliant or stay away.

it’s not that difficult really.

 

[mattc]

There has been disingenuousness by all players in this farce; Federal, State, tennis authority and team Djokovic. The"winners", if there is such a thing in this whole debacle, has been the average Aussie who made it very clear they thought the "elite" of various ilks were talking the proverbial out of them. In the end all the elites learned they only have their titular power with the consent of the masses who in this case were clear very anti Djokovic and the Federal government bent to their will.... Perhaps we need some of that over here so all the Mickey taking rule makers understand they only have power whilst we allow it (no, I won't hold my breath).

 

[A.J.]

 

[st13phil]

There has been disingenuousness by all players in this farce; Federal, State, tennis authority and team Djokovic.

Whether Australia should or shouldn't have let Djokovic in, it seems to me that they should have chosen one or the other before he travelled. After all, he was happy to quarantine for 14 days - in an official facility - on arrival in Australia prior to the 2021 Open so, presumably, he would have been happy to do so again if that had been a pre-condition of entry? Likewise, if he had been told categorically that unless he could provide an acceptable immunisation record he would be denied a visa then he would have had the choice not to travel.

I don't subscribe to the view that the "great and good" should be exempt from entry restrictions (good examples in the UK that rankle with me include the G7 Summit, FIFA, and COP26), but if I had been awarded an entry visa and been given an assurance that I would be permitted entry, I'd be pretty irritated if that was then rescinded once I arrived.

 

[E55BOF]

There has been disingenuousness by all players in this farce; Federal, State, tennis authority and team Djokovic. The"winners", if there is such a thing in this whole debacle, has been the average Aussie who made it very clear they thought the "elite" of various ilks were talking the proverbial out of them. In the end all the elites learned they only have their titular power with the consent of the masses who in this case were clear very anti Djokovic and the Federal government bent to their will.... Perhaps we need some of that over here so all the Mickey taking rule makers understand they only have power whilst we allow it (no, I won't hold my breath).

The final decision was in accordance with Australian immigration laws, not 'titular power', and public opinion had nothing to do with it; no 'elites' learned anything (unless you regard Djokovic, or the Australian tennis authorities, as 'elites'), and irrespective of what 'the masses' thought, the judges would reach their decision on the law.

That law is clear; you are either vaccinated, or you isolate for fourteen days. The tennis authorities and the State government tried to get round Federal law, and failed. The Immigration Minister simply upheld Federal law.

The Australian tennis authorities have no power to change the law, and Federal authority, and legislation, is superior to State authority and legislation. Djokovic never had a chance of success with his application for Judicial Review (not an appeal), because the Minister had exercised his legally-held powers in accordance with the law.

 

[Dryce]

There has been disingenuousness by all players in this farce;

I rather got the impression that this has been a two way battle. Those (including Mr Djokovic and the tennis authrities) who would just like to conveniently nod him through. And those at the border under the federal government who are trying to deal with the rules.

The publicity from Mr Djokovic's camp (whether he directed it personally or not) has not been helpful.

The apparent publicised discrepancies in the way he apparently handled his positive Covid test are utterly damning.

There could only be one outcome.

 

[grober]

What has Novak Djokovic actually said about vaccines?

The tennis ace had his visa cancelled in a row over jab exemption. But what's he said about vaccines?

www.bbc.co.uk

now you know

 

[mattc]

Whether Australia should or shouldn't have let Djokovic in, it seems to me that they should have chosen one or the other before he travelled. After all, he was happy to quarantine for 14 days - in an official facility - on arrival in Australia prior to the 2021 Open so, presumably, he would have been happy to do so again if that had been a pre-condition of entry? Likewise, if he had been told categorically that unless he could provide an acceptable immunisation record he would be denied a visa then he would have had the choice not to travel.

I don't subscribe to the view that the "great and good" should be exempt from entry restrictions (good examples in the UK that rankle with me include the G7 Summit, FIFA, and COP26), but if I had been awarded an entry visa and been given an assurance that I would be permitted entry, I'd be pretty irritated if that was then rescinded once I arrived.

Don't disagree. As I mention in an earlier post. Federal Australian government should have made it crystal clear beforehand. Fully jabbed or no entry.

 

[mattc]

The final decision was in accordance with Australian immigration laws, not 'titular power', and public opinion had nothing to do with it; no 'elites' learned anything (unless you regard Djokovic, or the Australian tennis authorities, as 'elites'), and irrespective of what 'the masses' thought, the judges would reach their decision on the law.

That law is clear; you are either vaccinated, or you isolate for fourteen days. The tennis authorities and the State government tried to get round Federal law, and failed. The Immigration Minister simply upheld Federal law.

The Australian tennis authorities have no power to change the law, and Federal authority, and legislation, is superior to State authority and legislation. Djokovic never had a chance of success with his application for Judicial Review (not an appeal), because the Minister had exercised his legally-held powers in accordance with the law.

I disagree. Public opinion and getting re-elected had everything to do with the Federal stance. The immigration minister exercised powers that he did not need to exercise. He could have hidden behind the first court ruling but, having seen how it was playing with the voting public, decided to act. I agree that Djokovic was unlikely to win the 2nd court appearance as the situation was obviously inflaming passions on both sides of the divide and the answer was clearly to starve the fire of fuel (Djokovic).. . Which is what has happened

 

[Swotty]

I disagree. Public opinion and getting re-elected had everything to do with the Federal stance. The immigration minister exercised powers that he did not need to exercise. He could have hidden behind the first court ruling but, having seen how it was playing with the voting public, decided to act. I agree that Djokovic was unlikely to win the 2nd court appearance as the situation was obviously inflaming passions on both sides of the divide and the answer was clearly to starve the fire of fuel (Djokovic).. . Which is what has happened

It seems that the main premise of the second prosecution was that ND may become "an icon of free choice". These are the actual words used.

No more free choice in Oz, it seems.

 

[Tonye]

He is on his way home, c u in a year or 3. Waiting to see what happens in USA FRANCE. Whether he's going next. *****.

 

[Tonye]

***** = prikk

 

[Tonye]

As of post #1
Who are ya