From 12th July, 2021, Australians in NSW will be required to use a code on their mobile phones to check in everywhere we go! If a person does not have a mobile phone, the retailer must provide an alternative such as a sheet of paper, or simply record name and some details. example - police state
Most other states of Australia have similar requirements, all enforced by wicked fines and an encouragement to citizens to inform on anyone not complying - reminiscent of other police states such as East Germany in the post war period, Stalin's Russia and present day Communist China.
The requirement to check in at pubs, restaurants and hairdressers - places where you spend some time - that was accepted by most of us. A nuisance, of course, and there was some non compliance, but nearly all of us went along with it. The difference now is that we are supposed to check in at every single shop we might visit, even if it is only to pick up a newspaper.
This is a terrible attack on our privacy and our liberty. I doubt there is a SINGLE OTHER COUNTRY in the world that has these onerous requirements.
I did not expect this to happen, simply because it is impractical, and will reduce the numbers of people shopping for pleasure - so reduced profit for retailers. and considerable damage to the economy, even more than what has already been done.
Like most things these days, the excuse is the Coronavirus pandemic. This disease has caused far less direct harm than it has caused indirect harm. It came from China, probably from a laboratory that was engaged in the reckless 'gain of function' research.
And then we followed the example of China with the lockdowns that have caused tremendous harm, even when the same effect can be achieved with less damage. It is like nuking a house to get rid of a mouse problem. It destroys quality of life. Restrictions on travel, both overseas and interstate, and at times, even restrictions on leaving your home. Wearing face-masks, and while that can be of some small use in crowded areas, it also means rebreathing your own expirations, which is not good for your health.
And cruel, cruel things, like a new mother being separated from her newborn baby. Like family being stopped from visiting sick or dying relatives. Like old people in Nursing Homes dying of despair when family no longer visit and they do not understand why.
There was once a government campaign aimed at improving health - 'Life, be in it."
Now the message is 'Life, better not to bother. Stay home."
"Australians all let us rejoice,
For we are young and free..."
But - we are no longer free.
Dear Marjorie,
ReplyDeleteAlmost everyone must by now be aware of the restrictions imposed by the virus on our daily lives and liberty. There was a time, not so long ago, when those with 'notifiable diseases' were subjected to much indignity to control disease and help manage public health threats, often because there wasn't much of a public health system available to pick up and sort out the problem. Improvements in public health in the last seventy years have allowed us a great deal more freedom.
Many of us have an app on our phones - which we are supposed to carry with us everywhere, and which I sometimes forget to - that allows our movements to be tracked, so that if we risk being exposed to the virus, it stands a chance of being contained.
Australia is relatively fortunate, having had less than a thousand covid 19 deaths so far. So do countries opt for mass vaccinations, or do they attempt to stifle the growth of that virus - and its unpredictable variants - by restricting people's movements?
Where the threat of disease is not immediate, it does seem as though the restrictions far outweigh the damage caused. So how does a government control a threat which seems to be minor, and stop it escalating, without being criticised? Either the govt is doing 'too much' and is seen to be 'heavy handed' or worse, it stands accused of 'shameful neglect' when the stats of ill and dying citizenry spiral out of control. It's a classic and unenviable 'no win' situation, which I, for one, would not relish having to manage.
I do think that the requirement to have an app registration in order to visit shops is a bit heavy handed, and perhaps that will be modified in time. My guess is that within about six months of its introduction, a less severe and more workable compromise will emerge.
Or perhaps we should all throw away our mobile phones in protest, (or not take them when you go shopping so that the shop-keeper has to get out pen and paper to take a record of our visit). Tempting, but on balance, I think I will keep mine and hope that the virus is eventually brought under control and the restrictions can be lifted.
I've always advocated that the best way to protest is with quiet, determined action. So going back to pen and ink might be the way.
Thanks for this wonderful piece. All best,
Fran
Thanks for the comment. As for the mobile phone, I don't have one. And that means that each time I enter a shop, I am required to find (or ask for) a different way of signing in. So only essential shopping for me until reason returns, and that is taking a very long time.
ReplyDeleteWell I do understand. My husband can't use a mobile either, which proves difficult for him. But since he is usually with me or my daughter, he manages. ;) All the best!
ReplyDelete