Perhaps the only thing all involved parties could agree on is that the proposed State of Emergency extension in Victoria is the talk of the week.
Ahead of a Tuesday parliament sitting, the Labor state government has been pushing to secure support for passing changes to emergency state legislation that would allow an extension of powers for a further 12 months.
But the Liberal Nationals have adamantly stated their refusal to back the move dubbing it a “power grab by Andrews“.
Conversations between the Andrews government and crossbench MPs have been well underway over the last days.
And according to the Age, a deal has already been struck for the Upper House to pass the arrangement, albeit for a shorter six-month extension period and on the proviso that the Parliament is briefed on the health situation in every four-week block that the state of emergency is renewed.
Earlier in the week, Opposition Leader Michael O’Brien stated open to the idea of month-to-month extension approval before parliament.
“Why shouldn’t the Premier have to justify the extension of these powers month-by-month and explain to us if they’re necessary, why they’re necessary?” he said.
But reacting to the report published on Saturday, Mr O’Brien spoke of a “betrayal of Victorians” stressing the LNP’s intention to vote against the “grubby deal”.
The State of Emergency which was declared in Victoria on 16 March provides the Chief Health Officer with additional powers to issue directions on the basis of a serious risk to public health.
The legally enforceable directions in the COVID-19 context include rules around mandatory quarantine and mask-wearing or the number of people allowed in a venue.
But they can also extend to authorised officers having the power to detain persons, restrict movement or search premises without a warrant should these steps are deemed “reasonably necessary to protect public health”.
The Victorian Premier has defended the push for extension till next year justifying it as necessary for a COVID-safe return to normality, saying it will not equate to extension of the current stage 4 lockdown or tougher restrictions.
A point has also been made about Victoria being one of the few states and territories having an expiration date for the State of Emergency enforcement as opposed to Western Australia for example where the enforcement is not bound by time limits.
Labor-affiliated individuals including former Victorian minister John Pantazopoulos, as well as member for Oakleigh Steve Dimopoulos have been vocal on social media about critics of the proposed extension.
“As they have done for a few months now, some people are trying to spread fear about this. It’s wrong and less than helpful – especially during a pandemic,” Mr Dimopoulos said in a recent Facebook post featuring “a quick Q&A on the State of Emergency.”
In a post titled ‘A STATE OF EMERGENCY ISN’T THE SAME THING AS A LOCKDOWN. Relax.’, Mr Pantazopoulos defends the need for extensive powers by the Chief Health Officer cautioning against misinformation.
“Before you share incorrect information online, which I’m sure is well intentioned, perhaps stop to think first if you might have fallen for an organised conspiracy theory,” his post concludes.
But the Opposition contends that the State of Emergency extension poses serious concerns over concentrated power and accountability.
“The State of Emergency vests enormous power with the Premier and a small number of unelected officials with very little oversight and accountability – proven in recent months with the effective shutdown of the Legislative Assembly,” a media release issued on Monday from the Victorian Division of the Liberal Party reads.
“The reason why a declaration of a State of Emergency is strictly time-limited is clear – because such massive government powers over the lives of Victorians must not be open-ended. No government should write itself a blank cheque for such extraordinary powers over Victorians’ lives and livelihoods. Oversight and accountability are paramount.”
ALSO READ: Parliament an instrument that ensures the ultimate safety of citizens
According to a Monash University law expert, who has authored a book on emergency powers, the debate around the extension is valid and needed but he pointed to the public health reasoning behind it as a determining factor.
Speaking to ABC Radio Melbourne, Patrick Emerton said :
“I think the debate is important in terms of maintaining scrutiny, but I think there’s one ‘storm a teacup’ aspect which is that most debates around state of emergency and dictatorships and so on are really focused more on political emergencies and political crises. The state of emergency we’re talking about here is quite different — it’s on a public health ground, and its powers are public health-based.”
“If someone takes a view that the Government is going off on a frolic beyond its public health foundations, they can go to the Supreme Court and seek judicial review,” Dr Emerton said.