The Victorian ombudsman’s report on the Andrews government’s border closure earlier this year contains the stuff of cruel nightmares for the Victorians forced into a Kafkaesque process in which they were denied the ability to return home.
The report, by Deborah Glass, is nothing short of extraordinary in its depiction of an unresponsive, almost cruel bureaucracy determined to keep Victorians from going home. The term “public servant” has seldom been less apt.
An important issue Glass grappled with was whether those people stranded outside Victoria when Premier Daniel Andrews declared that exemptions would not automatically be granted to returning Victorians on July 20, or when no one was permitted to enter from New South Wales without an exemption three days later, were hard done by in that decision.
For weeks before the closure, the Andrews government had repeatedly warned Victorians that the border with NSW might be shut, and that non-essential travel to NSW should not be undertaken.
On July 10, Victoria’s COVID commander, Jeroen Weimar, said: “If you’re a Victorian in NSW you should have left already; you need to come home now. The chances are that at some point in the coming hours or days we will be forced to close, to upgrade NSW to red, to close the border.”
On July 15, Weimar warned: “If you’re a Victorian and you are still in NSW, time is ticking … You have to get home.”
Andrews repeated the warnings in the following days in the lead-up to the closure.
Do those stranded therefore have no cause for complaint? Didn’t they heed the warnings? One quoted complainant was a holidaymaker who chose to travel to the other end of NSW, and then complained they didn’t have time to get back. But those self-indulgent cases appear to be a minority. As Glass’ report shows, many were simply unable to return when the government demanded they do so.
Some booked flights to return home but were bumped from their flights on the eve of the closure. Couples split up, with one returning to Victoria and another staying to pack up belongings, only to be caught out. Others had applied for and were given an exemption to return before July 20, and had packed to go, but were stopped by the tighter closure.
Others were unable to leave where they had travelled to — they were caring for loved ones who had no alternative arrangements. Others left Victoria to attend funerals or farewell dying relatives and were prevented from returning, often with previously approved returns being disallowed. Some expected to be able to remain in place as long as needed, but found their circumstances changed, and were prevented from returning.
The Victorian Health Department’s management of the exemption application process bordered on the farcical. Despite increasing the number of staff to handle applications, the report shows “staff responsible for categorising and prioritising applications were expected to complete 50 per hour: an average of almost one every 30 seconds”.
Their demands for supporting documents reached absurd extremes — “statutory declarations, proof of residence, proof of ownership of animals, letters from medical professionals, bank or financial statements, and statements of relationship to people who were dying or funeral notices”, all from people not actually living at home.
Claims that people were “primary carers” were in the first instance disbelieved, even when backed by letters from medical professionals. A woman who had changed her name after marriage faced demands for her birth certificate, marriage certificate, divorce certificate and driving licence. Some simply never heard back the department, or were given no reason why they were rejected. Many double-vaccinated people were rejected out of hand.
Only 8% of 33,000 applications were approved.
Glass’ other objection to the argument that those outside Victoria had plenty of time to return was that the border closure was irrationally tight, barring people from NSW communities with zero COVID cases from returning.
Boarders at Yanco Agricultural College who were forced to return home to Victoria after the border closure when the school shut were initially banned, despite there being zero cases in the Leeton area — a factor that the Health Department secretary waved away as “irrelevant” when the ombudsman pointed out how irrational this was.
In some cases, the rejections look wilfully cruel, like bureaucrats were revelling in their capacity to make life miserable.
An application to visit a relative with terminal cancer was deemed not sufficiently “serious” to warrant an exemption; people who needed to return to obtain cancer treatment were told to get it in NSW instead. Applications were rejected as “expired” because the department failed to consider them before the date of proposed travel — and this happened multiple times to the same applicants, as if they were being trolled by the department.
The report shows the Andrews government in microcosm: incompetent, revelling in overinflated state powers, possessed of a punitive attitude toward its citizens, as reflected in the dramatic difference in the level of COVID fines in that state compared with others — consistent with the longer-term pre-pandemic practice of fining its citizens far more than any other state. (Saul Eslake is the sleuth who has unearthed both of those traits.)
The cost of Andrews’ hardline crackdown wasn’t borne by the conspiracy theorists and extremists cavorting on the streets of Melbourne, but by ordinary Victorians forced by life circumstances to travel out of their state, and then treated to a bureaucratic hell when they tried to return.
The ombudsman has mapped that hell in detail.
I live in Melbourne and have done so for many years. Seriously BK would you have subjected us to a ‘government’ led by Matthew Guy (aka Lobster Dinner man)? The situation everywhere in NSW, Vic etc was chaotic, and most adults here survived by ‘sucking it up’ and getting on with the many challenges. Few adults that I personally know are suggesting any of ‘it’ was easy or deliberate. Every Australian citizen had the right to expect our governments (State and Federal) had something like a workable plan ready to go because pandemics are not new. Sadly they didn’t have a plan and probably never will. ‘
There are a number of critical issues attached to the Victorian Labor governments up to the present. Their neo-liberal light which has focused on budget surpluses resulted in the hollowed out PS, the least investment in social and public housing of any jurisdiction in Australia, biggest prison population per capita with concomitant poorly funded judicial networks, and pathetic ‘catch-up’ approach to community health, and tertiary health care in the far western suburbs. The economy has been built on a ‘build big’ ponzi scheme. Getting that of my chest felt good! But one thing Andrews did very well was maintain an excellent COVID strategy (ok the lockdown of the public housing flats again showed a predilection for using VicPol first and think later). The Delta strain leak from NSW really stuffed that up, but what it showed was Victorians capacity to as Argentina says ‘suck it up’. We did good. Hopefully one day the rusted on Labor voters here in the west will go for progressive independents and Greens and shake things up.
What is it with you, Bernard, and your slagging of Victoria and Dan Andrews? He did everything he could to keep Victorians safe by following the Chief Medical Officer’s advice. It was never anything but Victorian’s safety. I am heartily sick of this Get Dan mentality by journos, Bernard in particular is forever going after Labor states. Dan Andrews was doing what he is paid to do; looking after Victorians.
I guess this is the usual nearing election time put down Labor season. There may have been one bit that some of us were not happy aboutbut again, it was to stop the spread in a highly built up area. And that has had it’s investigation.
Maybe there haven’t been enough deaths in Vic to please you and some of your Crikey colleagues, who make a pitiful attempt at so-called calling Lib/nats to account but it’s always a step back from what needs to be said yet Labor is always fair game – again and again, and you play surprised when your team wins – again
You don’t think the Victorian ombudsman’s report is worth anything?
Yes, SSR, it is worth something, but if the account of the report above is accurate, then it points the finger at the Victorian Health Department, not Dan Andrews personally.
If this was the first and only Keane Andrews hatchet job to appear in Crikey, it might be acceptable, but as Daibhin points out, Crikey’s, and especially Keane’s, anti-Andrews bias has been on clear display throughout the pandemic. Every possible criticism of Victoria’s handling of the situation has been directed at Andrews and portrayed as a personal failing on his part.
One could be forgiven for suspecting that, with both Nine and Sky News moving further and further towards the whacky Right, Crikey is trying to establish itself as the new standard bearer for the centre Right/Liberal Party moderate in Australia’s media landscape.
That’s the funniest thing I’ve read here in months. Crikey writing about the LNP with anything but malice and bias? Haha Haha! Sorry are we talking about the same Crikey? The same BK who writes at least one article a day bagging the LNP for anything he can think of?
I think the Ombudsman’s report highlights an inhumane policy but then Bernards spoils it by having a swipe at Andrews on everything.
Not really worth much SSR.
Blind Freddy could see that the border closures would have some adverse effect on some people in some cases.
The media had a great time beating up the stories of some affected people. Lots of tears on telly is always good for ratings.
Fires.floods,paying tax, going or sending kids to school,driving cars, being sent to hospital,working etc.etc. have adverse effects on people. A couple of our pollies trying to start a war with China could have an adverse effect on people, more so if they get their desire.
It was honestly thought by just about all, that closing borders during the onset of Covid that the closure would slow or prevent the spread.
People need to adapt to the prevailing situation. The various Govs, do need to try and find a better and faster way in future to minimise, if possible , any unnecessary trauma.
How do we know that the report is not infested with seditious right wing slant? Traitors abound there.
When you win (a game, a war, an election) you revel in your victory and fail to analyse the mistakes you made along the way, paving the way for being surprised by a failure next time. Not so when you lose. Losers forensically analyse their match, battle or campaign to work out what went wrong and how to avoid the failure next time. The rare winners who unflinchingly reflect on the failures along the way to the win will be better prepared next time. Consider BK’s musings within the bigger context. The success of stringent measures in quelling the outbreaks in Victoria does not mean that it could not have been done better (or worse). There are more many things which ought to have been considered and assessed earlier in the course of this emergency than have been discussed to date. While belated, I welcome a public discourse about all the options for dealing with a public health emergency, so that we do better next time.
Bernard, I love balance in my life, cricket now, footy later for instance, but reach for the sickbag when I see an opportunistic pile-on.
Not sure how they were looking after the health of Victorians by locking out Victorians who had very good reasons to need to go to NSW and to return home. In many cases they were directly impacting the health of those Victorians (and of Victorians back home they needed to help). Often those locked out had been nowhere near a COVID case, so how was it helping the health of the rest of us? Also, Bernard Keane is forever going after Labor states? The guy who has literally just published a book about Scomo’s constant lying? So that is somehow a pitiful attempt to held libs / nats to account? I suggest your thinking is overly partisan.
So what should we do, Daibhin? Just shrug and go “oh well, shame about these terrible things that happened to real actual prople for no good reason, but Matthew Guy would have been worse”?
would have been worse! Based upon Guy’s utterings his desire to open everything would have led to massive outbreaks as witnessed in parts of Europe, and many GOP States in the USA. I’ll take Dan any day.
What a bizarre interpretation! BK (rightly) gives the Libs a wallop every other day, and I’ve never heard him say anything positive about the pork-barrelling Nats. To say Crikey leans towards the Coalition is just divorced from reality. This is more a matter of you not wanting to see your side criticised at all.
I don’t remember the Chief Medical Officer suggesting applications be managed with cruelty and stupidity. Or that fines levied against Victorians should exceed fines for the whole rest of the country combined.
“Maybe there haven’t been enough deaths in Vic to please you”, but then you say Dan Andrews did everything in his power to keep us safe? 801 deaths is keeping us safe? Maybe there weren’t enough deaths for you Daibhin to change your mind?
Actually I think this shows that Bernard is actually one of the few real journalists/commentators left – one that will actually assess each government on its merits, and not solely on ideology or allegiance. I’m a big fan of lots of what the Andrews government stands for, but that doesn’t mean they are above criticism. Bernard will dish out criticism whenever and wherever it’s due, and I’m grateful for that.
I must have missed his accurate assessments of Gold Standard Gladys and her government – he was her chief booster until the ICAC “I don’t need to know that” recording.
He still cannot let go of the iron pyrite (FeS2) – the ‘sunk cost‘ fallacy which is common to gamblers, ideologues and other losers.
“… wilfully cruel, like bureaucrats were revelling in their capacity to make life miserable.”
“The term “public servant” has seldom been less apt.”
Maybe ‘public servant’ is quaint and has had its day. Some other phrase is needed. The Victorian government’s enforcement of its border restrictions is only one more example of the how state and federal governments operate the bureaucracy with wilful cruelty. Robodebt, the nightmare of Centrelink, the guardianship system that Crikey has recently exposed. It goes on and on, like some huge expansion of the notorious Milgram and Zimbardo experiments, and that’s before we get to the treatment of non-Australians such as refugees and temporary workers. But responsibility for unleashing this should not be placed on the bureaucrats. The primary responsibility lies with the government ministers who seek to further their careers this way, and the opposition politicians who do not oppose.
It is my habit of old to automatically say ‘civil servant‘ but, archaic as it is, due to the multitudinous meanings I continue to do so.
Depending on whether they are ‘civil’ – as in serving the citizen (civis), secular as in disinterested, ‘servant’ as in doing one’s bidding, within proprieties and always civil, as in POLITE.
There is obviously some merit in the report but none in this commentary. Crikey cannot slag off other journalists if this is the standard you let go by in the editorial process.
“The report shows the Andrews government in microcosm: incompetent, revelling in overinflated state powers, possessed of a punitive attitude toward its citizens…” is the most lamentable example from this piece. This is not journalism, it is Skynews punditry.
What this really shows is how badly the culture of the Victorian Public Service has deteriorated over successive governments. It is not alone in this, the same shift away from a focus on providing services to the public is even more apparent at the federal level (robodebt anyone?) and most likely in other jurisdictions. What has it shifted to? That is the key question.
Started with Howard who began the politicisation of the PS