N8WUNZ 20230331 (F) The Battering Ram - HSWA s191

The speaker discusses various topics, including the use of the Health and Safety at Work Act in relation to COVID-19, exemptions for vaccination, and the authority of different agencies under the act. They also mention a case involving a bouncy castle collapse and the role of WorkSafe in enforcing safety regulations. There is some confusion about whether certain actions were within the authority of the council or WorkSafe. Overall, the speaker seems to be discussing legal issues and the application of the Health and Safety at Work Act in different contexts. Thank you. Emma, did you get the thing? Yes, about Chinok191. Yes. Good. And thank you for that great cover. I really like the meme, the battery frame. Because I was going to put a ram on it, and then I thought, no, that's not right. That's not what it should be. So I went and did it. That's right. There we go. Good evening. Good evening, Facebook. When we get to you. Yeah, no, I kind of think maybe it brings a little more attention to our Zoom. So hopefully that works. Yeah. And so what I want to talk about was section 191 again, because I've just hopefully cracked the explanation for it in terms of the fact that COVID-19 is not an occupational disease. When we start using it a bit more often, we'll also quote the American case, the Supreme Court of the United States and their reasoning around why it's not a workplace occupational disease. It'd be funny if it turned out to be what I'd sort of was rubbing my head over for a long time and then figured it out. Maybe, maybe not. I do know that that was one of the, you know, that was the factual part of the case, why it was found against the Biden mandate. When I say the Biden mandate, it was because it was an executive order, as are all of these, of course. So if we can go and have a look at, for example, as you know, the so-called government mandates had a number of groups of people. It got up to 10 groups, I think was the last count. They started off with five and then they added on as they went along. Yeah, that's right, Geoff. Oh, is this the people on the radio? Yeah. Yeah. Good. Okay. Let's have a look. Well, they probably got expected to have the sort of wages that they were getting off us as well, you know. They probably don't really know how to make a radio station go with a little bit of elbow grease. They just expect to be picking up the shekels as they, just because they're them. Okay. You got that piece of explanation there? We'll go through that and then people can ask questions about it. You seem to be on mute as well. Yeah, here we go. Oops. There we go. Thanks, Emma. No worries. Here we go. Oops. Now, let's just pretend that we were sending that sort of information to that we were sending that sort of information to one of the companies called Air New Zealand. Where's it gone? Oh, here it is. Okay. I just need to get it up on my screen. Where's it gone? Oh, come here. Here we go. Okay. I'll just close this up so we've got a bit more room. So, this is the application of Section 191 of the Health and Safety at Work Act in the context of, say, Air New Zealand. So, at the time of COVID-19 public health response vaccinations order, that's 2021, the order was in force. It was to apply to affected persons in our members' case as part of group, of part five groups in relation to aircraft. So, if you go down to schedule two, you'll see that. They were the first five groups that were put under this order. The order came into force at five minutes to midnight on the 30th of April 2021, having been signed into law two days previously by Dr. Alicia Verrill, Associate Minister of Health. Now, it was supposed to be the Minister of Health, and one of the cases that I was looking at lately made something of that, but in actual fact, in the end, it didn't cut the mustard with the court. But you can often find things in these cases where they didn't win the case, but there's a lot of good comment by the judges in that case. So, B, COVID-19 was designated an infectious disease notifiable to the medical officer of health. Schedule one, part one, section B, and a quarantinable disease by schedule one, part three of the Health Act 1956 on 11 March 2020. Okay, so this was before the vaccines come along, but the designation of it was as an infectious disease and a quarantinable disease, both on the same day. C, significantly, COVID-19 is not and never was designated an occupational disease under schedule two, section B. The reason that COVID-19 is not in schedule two is because COVID-19 is not an occupational disease. This means that COVID-19 transmission should have been regulated under the Health Act 1956, not under the HSWA. And if you know anything about the Health Act, as we've been through it on a few occasions, one of the things it says in the Health Act is that in no case is anybody required to be medicated. Right, that's section 92, I for India, subsection 5 of the Health Act 1956. D, all matters of health and safety in the workplace or in relation to an occupational disease, in contrast, are regulated by the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015. Okay, and that's the work that WorkSafe does. The E, the order granted, it's supposed to be, um, it's supposed to be, uh, it's supposed to be Air New Zealand, not Air New Zealand, it's supposed to be, but I'll have to change that, the airport, let's say. Two exemptions that could have been used to exempt the worker from vaccination. Exemptions and exceptions, and I really hadn't noticed this too much before, but one of them they call an exception and one of them they call an exemption. So the exception clauses are under clause 9, um, under the purport, and there's another, um, needs to go in there, under the purported control of the Director of Civil Aviation, of the Civil Aviation Authority of New Zealand, Keith Manch. Exemption clause 12a, under the purported control of the Minister of Health at the time, Andrew Little, that Air New Zealand could have theoretically used to avoid the vaccination of those staff who did not wish to be vaccinated. Yes, the regulator of all matters under the Health and Safety at Work Act is WorkSafe. Parliament has envisaged that in some circumstances, the regulation of health and safety in the workplace may be delegated to the CEO of certain bodies that are part of or agents of the Crown. These delegations are designations under section 191 of the Health and Safety at Work Act and are required to be gazetted in the New Zealand Gazette. Under section 191.3, the agency, uh, agencies are as follows. The agencies are the chief executive of the department or departmental agency within the meaning of section 5 of the Public Service Act. So that's all of the teaching, you know, all of the schools, um, the DHBs, etc, etc. A Crown entity, um, the Maritime New Zealand is what is known, um, as a Crown entity or agency, one or the other. But anyway, um, the Civil Aviation Authority of New Zealand is a Crown agency. All the same things. The Commissioner of Police, the Chief of the Defence Force. Gee, there are, there were no designations gazetted for Keith Manch, Dr Ashley Bloomfield, or the Minister of Health at the time, Andrew Little. The logical inference is that there was no authority granted by the order for any action to be taken under the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015. These actions, including forbidding the workplace to workers, compiling a register of the vaccination status of workers, or indeed granting exemptions of any description by the above-named persons. H. Section 1684 of the HSWA specifically prohibits the collection or inspection of any documents that identify the health status of a worker that may then be used in any way without the consent of the worker. And this is, um, this is Section 1684. Despite Section 1A, if all or any part of the information relates to a person's health status and identifies the person, an inspector must not, without that person's consent, require the production of information, or examine the information, or make a copy of or take an extract from the information, or make a copy of the from the information. I remember that we talked about this section last Friday and, um, and I was suggesting that we should take a, a case, um, before the courts and have all of that information on those registered gathered up and destroyed. That sounds like a good plan, Liz. Was taken unlawfully. Aye. It is clear, therefore, that the Health and Safety at Work Act was the act that was brought into play, but because there was no authority to act, deserted under Section 191, this made all actions taken in reliance on the order void ab initio. There was no authority placed in the hands of any of those purporting to be able to issue exemptions, and certainly no authority in anyone further down the chain of command, such as the CEO of the PCBU of Air New Zealand or his or her officers. The Health and Safety at Work Act is primary legislation. Secondary legislation, such as the order, cannot have the effect of overriding the requirements, it should be for authorisations, of authorisations required under HSWA. As Churchman Jay said in GF versus Minister of COVID-19 response, this was a 2021, early 2021, this case. Um, section, it was a judicial review. Section 11 of the act does not authorise the making of an order overriding primary legislation. Okay, so primary legislation is what you've got with the Health and Safety at Work Act. So as long as, and now we know how to knit it into the fabric of our PGs, um, that's the method that we're going to be using. So it'll be really interesting to see um, how, um, how it's going to fare. But we've got it into, um, well, three, three at the moment. We're waiting on, um, either, um, um, we're waiting on, um, what he calls, um, mediations. Some are in the, in the authority already. Um, also, um, one of them is going to be used, um, in, it's going to be used in the port case, which is in the Employment Court. So we should get some, um, we should get some reaction I think we've already got, because it's, it's been put forward in a couple of cases and, and the, um, and the other side have quickly moved to, um, settle. Hi Kiseyane, nice to see you. Um, I know you've been waiting an awful long time for your PG, but you've come, come at the right time, let's say. It's always, you know, I do worry about people who've been waiting so long and so patiently, but, um, you know, they get the best. They get the best in the end, because we've been building as we go along with the cases, we've been building and building, um, strength upon strength. So, uh, yeah, that's really all I had to say about that. Um, we'll put it on the website, aren't we, so people can have a look at and, uh, think about at their leisure. That's laid it out so clearly, that's amazing. Even judges should be able to understand it. Help, if they don't, it's, we're in trouble. Yes, that's what I was thinking. Well, I'm looking at a couple of, um, yeah, uh, yeah, and I'm looking at the judicial review cases and I can see pretty much why they didn't, they didn't, um, they didn't succeed, but, um, they do provide, they do provide a, you know, a lot of insights from judges. Um, not so much, not so much from the lawyers, but then that's why lawyers are lawyers and judges are supposed, they're supposed to be, they're supposed to be smarter than us. So why, what, why weren't they successful? What, what, is it that thing of, that analogy I use of directions to go to Papakura, but you want them to go to Pukekohe and they won't find, you know, you can't. Yeah, yeah, that's, that's right. They will never get there with the information you give them. Is that how that works? Yeah, yeah, pretty much, pretty much. Um, the, um, there was some interesting stuff in the case. It's that last one I referred to, GF versus the Minister for Workplace Relations, and it was interesting though that it wasn't picked up because the, the, the vaccination order itself was supposed to be signed off by the Minister of Health, right? And they made, the Council for GF made a, um, made a point of saying, well, it wasn't the Minister of Health who signed it off, it was Varel, who's the Deputy Minister. So what you also get is, um, you got affidavits by, um, Bloomfield and, I don't know, Varel put one in, that's right, something about Chris Hipkins wasn't there on the day, and so she, she signed it off. But it wasn't her that was supposed, it wasn't Chris Hipkins that was supposed to sign it off anyway. It was Andrew Little, because she was the Associate, um, Minister of, um, she was the Associate Minister of, um, of Health. So they came up with some, some rule about, well, you can get anybody to sign off as long as they're in the Executive, as long as they're in the Cabinet or something. Yeah, and, and that was the answer. So any pig in a poke, basically. But, um, but the other thing that was said was, and this is, this is perhaps why people have got this idea, or some people, some lawyers have got this idea, that they were signed off and as order, an order in Council. They weren't signed off as orders in Council. The orders themselves. You've looked at that too, Liz. Yeah, you know, in the Gazette. So, um, yeah, there's. Why did they not? It kind of, it kind of bothers me, because you would think that if you're going to do a, more judicial reviews, you'd read these judicial reviews. I mean, before we do our judicial review, we will go over each one of them. People seem to think that the ones they have to go over are the winning ones. Well, yeah, you do. But you've also got to go over the losing ones, because you've got to know how, you've got to know how to, you know, make the point that will win it next time. And the points that didn't make it, didn't win it. Yeah, yeah. And the judge will give you the, the reason why, and you've got to find, you've got to overstep that and say, well, I, you know, this is another case and that distinguishes higher up or, you know, it's more salient to the point or whatever. But, yeah, it's interesting, interesting. So, yeah, I think the reaction of the people that we've been, you know, the law firms has been interesting, to say the least. Yeah. Yeah. In what way? Hmm. Well, they're still blustering on and saying, oh, no, da, da, da. But, you know, when you've, like, one of the ones that we settled, I was having an argument with council, and it'd been a long, a long, long case, and been through various things up to, up and down to the employment court and trying to, you know, do all sorts of different interim stuff. And anyway, I had a real set-to with it about getting the explanation of why we can use the Health and Safety of Work Act and integrate it with the Employment Relations Act, and so why the authority does have jurisdiction and she was saying, well, no, it's, you know, you're just mucking around and it's going to take too long and it's, you know, we'll go for a strike-out and da, da, da. Well, the next thing, you know, they got the submissions and then they made a nice offer to finish it. And, you know, the week before, it was, no, you, you know, you're so wrong and we're going to, you know, we're going to grind you into the dust. And I'm saying to her, and this was, the authority member was on, on the call, it was, you know, to a planning meeting, if you like. And then, you know, I just had to say to her, well, I'm determined that it is going in and it's up to the authority to decide, not you. You don't decide. But I noticed too that one of the, one of the submissions we got from another set of lawyers was saying, well, we insist this and we insist that and we insist this of the authority and that of the authority. I'm thinking, man, I mean, I'm pretty bolshie, but I wouldn't be telling the authority I insist this and that. If they rule against me, I might. Yeah, but I'm trying to get them to rule for me. I'm not going to insist on things. Yeah, yeah, yeah. No, that's, that's so interesting. Yeah, that's probably right, Alicia. All the lawyers load the HSWA because it's like, oh, what? That's what goes on in the workplace? Oh, gosh, I have to think about that. And, you know, it was always something that the unions did or WorkSafe did and they've not had to do dirty, their hands with the rule. But there we go. Okay. So are we going to have a very quick early night or have people got something else they want to have a chat about? Yeah. Got any, got any questions tonight? Oh, not quite, haven't they? Oh, Jeff. Good on you, Jeff. There you go. Okay. I came across something today, which I found rather interesting, and I would like to just put in here tonight, if I may. It was the Thames Coromandel Council being fined $10,000 in respect of an incident that occurred where a bouncy castle collapsed. And I'm just wondering where the Health and Safety at Work Act or even WorkSafe might come into this. Well, if they got fined, it means they did cheat. It means WorkSafe fined them. There is a reference to the WorkSafe inspector quoting. That's why I'd like to try and find the article and put it up. Here we are. Here we are. In Waikato Times, $10,000 to a dad who snapped both ankles. And this was after the bouncy castle people were also fined. And it talks about $350,000 fine and reparations of $40,000 to the guy who got hurt. And this is a guy doing on a bouncy castle paid for tents. Well, I don't know. Anyway, here it says, over and above the operator's obvious failures, the council plainly failed to do its due diligence on an operator with a poor safety record. WorkSafe area investigation manager, Paul West, and Paul West, the WorkSafe founder. What I'm wondering is here. Mike said a beef with the Far North District Council, where they let loose one of their enforcers who acted beyond his authority and the council apologised unreservedly. I'm just wondering whether or not a little nod to WorkSafe might be relevant here. What do you think, Liz? Well, I don't know that people are regarded as unsafe working conditions. You see, WorkSafe are looking at objects. You know, I mean, sometimes people are dangerous in the workplace. Like, you could say if you had to sit around with that guy all day and he gave you a... he'd drive you crazy with his bullying. Yeah, that's a WorkSafe. The fact that the council was fine... Yeah, I know, but the thing is that I think it's more complaint to the police for assault, isn't it? Are you talking... what was he doing again? What was this person doing? Okay, there was a cruise ship in and my wife was sat in the bus waiting for me to come back from another job. And this guy who is a compliance officer, enforcer, really, he came along and said, have you got a tour operator licence? And she said no. And so he went banging on, you've got to have one, you can't stay here. If you do stay here, I'll call the police, blah, blah, blah. So, of course, he put the fear of God into her and she drove away, not knowing the situation. So, anyway, I thought, okay, they must know what they're talking about. So, I immediately went and got one of these tour operator licences so that we could operate. Well, turns out that they had no authority to force us to buy a tour operator licence because we were exempt. And it took quite a while to... and eventually apologised unreservedly for what they'd done to this ex-employee. And so, having read this article now about the council being fired, I'm just wondering whether or not... No, I don't think he's a... I don't think you could put him down as a workplace hazard that they weren't careful with. You know, it's kind of like... it's kind of also... there's this thing called... what do they call it? Vicarious liability. And, you know, maybe they could... you could get some money out of them or something. They've apologised. Maybe you could get some money out of them. I don't know. But it's not a health and safety matter. But, I mean, the one with the bouncy castle obviously is. The bouncy castle wasn't fit for purpose. Or, I mean, it just sounds quite bizarre that some... they say a man broke both ankles? I'll post the article in the chat. You can all see it. There's a photograph of him actually in hospital. Hang on a minute. Maybe... I don't know. Sounds... you can't even get on there with you. As, you know, I mean, they say get off. It's for the kids. Well, is it? That's discrimination, I suppose. Anyway, okay. Go for it, Jeff. Go for it, Jeff. Just don't tell them anything to do with the union. I say go for it, but just don't tell them anything to do with the union. I wasn't going to do it. I was just going to quote the article. I just thought you were interested. Oh, when you said you got... you know, that's discrimination when I said, oh, they tell the big ones to get off. No, I know you wouldn't. Let's tell it to Jeff. Right. Anyway, there it is. I just thought you... I can't see it. Perhaps worth a point because it's there in the chart. Yeah, no, that's... no, that's exactly what WorkSafe do. And the problem was they wouldn't do any of it when people said this stuff is dangerous. Yeah, they wouldn't do it. I was wondering about getting in touch with WorkSafe and explain my position with the council and see if they would take it up and go after the council for me because the council is not playing ball at all. What do you want them to do? Go after the council because of what this guy did to my wife. Yeah, I know, but I mean, it's money, is it? I mean, you're going to go... you're going to sue them. Well, I've tried claiming... going to claim on their insurance and they've refused, you see, so they're saying... But you have to put a claim in. You'll have to put a claim in and then the insurance will either say yay or nay. Yeah, but you see, that's the whole point, Liz. They will not put... the council has refused to put a claim in to their insurance. They won't. They... you're going to have to do it yourself. Yes, you can. You can. I'm not an insurer. You don't put the... I know that. You don't put the claim into the insurer. You sue the council in court and then they get... you happen to know that they've got insurance. That's the problem. You have to put the claim in to the court. I haven't got the money to sue the council. Okay. They can't get legal aid. Okay. Anyway. Yeah, I don't think... I think you'd be on a hiding to nothing with WorkSafe. I mean, they're already... they wouldn't even do anything about, you know, when people said this stuff is dangerous and reported it, et cetera, et cetera. And they spent their whole time mucking around, going around harassing businesses and telling lies to employers. So, um, yeah, they're probably on their way out soon anyway. Yep. Nematodes on the face of the planet. Nematodes. I like that one. What's a nematode? A worm. Oh. All right. Thank you. It's Friday night. Anybody read any good books? Seen any good movies? Because that's the other thing we sometimes have... we talk about on Friday night. No? Everybody's ready to head off. Okay. So we will have an early night and say good night. Oh, yeah, just a little bit more report about... what's his name? Mike Bull in the UK. Their efforts against the 15-minute cities are really starting to hot up. There's another town that's joined them in their struggle. So, yes, so we hope to hear more of them soon. I meant to get a link to their online meeting last night. It happened to start about five o'clock in the morning our time. So it was a bit difficult for me to watch it. But my friend in the UK is being in touch and hopefully I'll be able to talk to Mike Bull personally at some stage and give him best wishes from New Zealand and especially talk to him about what we're doing with the number eight. Yeah. Because I'd really like to encourage people in the UK to do the same thing. Get themselves a union that is non-political. Yeah. And operate and use their health and safety at work, which is called something slightly different, but it would be exactly the same, probably even better. And get stuck into the WEF or whoever's running the show and and make their workplaces, put their workplaces back in their control. Yeah. Interesting what you say about these 15 minutes. This is Liz, if you don't mind me just getting a quick thing from here. Some friends of my wife came to visit this afternoon. They're not quite my cup of tea, but I heard her talking about Hamilton. Supposedly something's going on in Hamilton about these 15 minute cities and you can't go out of one area into another. Something about, something about, they count how many times you've crossed the border from one place to another and if you get, you know, probably your social credit score goes down or something. There is, there's cameras out this way too and I'd actually like to look into how we say, well actually we didn't give you guys permission to record us in that way. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Privacy. Yeah. All of us, many, many battles ahead yet guys, but you know, we'll get control of the workplace and, you know, and then people will have, make networks and friends and groups that take on all of those sorts of things because if people feel safe in their workplace and feel in control of the workplace, they'll start to extend that out into the rest of their lives. They can, being in a public place, yeah, but the public places belong to the public. They don't belong to the executives. And the information that they use against us basically, don't they? Well, this is the thing, but if we can get, if we can get the registers destroyed about who was the, you know, who were the compliant, that would be a big dent in their gathering of information. And of course, there's that other thing that Erica told us about, that Air New Zealand went and put all of the 200,000 passengers and CVC details onto the frequent flyer database. Yeah. The whole frequent flyer thing should be completely dismantled. I take all of that information out of there. That's terrible. The other interesting thing about these 20 minute cities, I don't know whether you all know or not, but in the last election, the Opportunities Party had 15 minute cities as their solution to the housing crisis in New Zealand, which I thought was really quite amazing. Yeah, yeah. The Opportunities Party are big on AI, I'd say. Kisione is saying something about Takaneni and Papakura. Yeah, I drove round the back of there today and oh my goodness, wow. Yeah. What's going on? Oh, just the way, just all the types of housing and basically like, you know, two inches apart, three stories high, exactly the same, only slightly different shade of colour. Horrible. Absolutely horrible. New street lights. Yeah, not out our way, but yeah, I have seen them. Yeah. Yeah. Good time. Maybe. Yeah. So, we're going to win. Yeah, we sure are. We sure are. Now, that's awesome. Awesome, everybody. Awesome, Liz. Hey, you're welcome. Oh, the other thing I was going to say, the event that Erica made for the court case in... Oh, yes. Yeah. What can you tell us about that? Well, especially our members down in the Wellington area, you know, all down the bottom half of the South Island, the case, the free speech case, I'm calling it, for Amanda, is going to start on the 17th. The first day is going to be free speech, and then we're The first day is going to be very interesting because we have managed to introduce into it the information about the terrorist designations in this country that have been produced by the security services that are on the police website. Now, if you want to go and look at them yourself, they make quite gripping reading. I put about five, I think, five organisations in there to prove that there are terrorist organisations, which was what Amanda was objecting to, people making, you know, making basically threats on our nation state and on Facebook and just pointing it out, you know, and that was considered a no-no and racist. And so, anyway, it turned out to be an employment case, as you'll understand, because it's our member. So, it's going to be a very interesting case, and the first day will be taken up with looking at what these terrorist organisations have been up to. Now, you can, of course, look at them for yourself. Alicia, you were asking about looking at those cases. Did you have a look? Did you take that direction and try and find those cases? I haven't yet, Liz. I haven't had a time to breathe, to be honest. Right. Yeah, but I intend to. Okay. So, if you want to have a look at what they are, you go to New Zealand Gazette, you put in the search terrorism or terrorist, and you'll find a load of hits come up, and you look for designation, terrorist designations. Click on those. It'll take you to the particular group, and then also on that notification, you'll find a website that the police operate, and it's called, not notifications, it's called Resolutions Lists, or something about resolutions or lists, and you click on that, and it'll take you to the cases. So, you can actually read the cases, because they have to provide a case about what the group does and what the ideology is before they can be designated terrorists. Now, there is the, well, Brenton Tarrant's on there as well. Not much information about him, really. And then there's, but there's a lot of information about these other terrorist groups. He, I'd call them jihad-focused groups. So, the jihad is to do with bringing your religion in a warlike manner, basically driving all of the other religions out and being the top religion, and forcing people to play the game, or, you know, you're in big, big trouble. And, yeah, they even go around telling people who don't agree with their religion, and I couldn't believe it. I didn't even know about this stuff until about five, six years ago. I couldn't believe that there was such a religion these days, but yeah, always has been. And so, religion of peace is a load of cack, and New Zealanders need to wake up to this fact, really need to wake up to this fact. Sorry, Geoff? I was just going to say that shooting incident in Nashville, where it was a 28‑year‑old trans, not a teenage girl, who shot those kids, and they're having this day of violence and all this. They're there. What we also need to look out for, especially what happened to that lady in Auckland. And one thing, very quickly, I think we should give a big shout out to Erica for the way she got that Kate Hanna thing shut down. I mean, that was nothing short of amazing. Fantastic, eh? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, really good. So, we're all ready to go down there and have a great talk fest, but no, they slink off into their holes as soon as they're challenged. Crawl back into their stones, that's what they do. Yeah. So, coming back to the Amanda case. So, that's a court case that we can attend via that. So, Erica set up the event with the details on there so that we can attend. Yeah. Now, I'm not sure. I think we need to get a bit of indication of the interest so that we can, well, Erica can, talk to the registrar down in Wellington and get one link that everybody can link into. So, everybody that's keen, go on the No. 8 Union Facebook page and register or, you know, just put your interest on the event on there because, yeah, like Liz says, it will be a very interesting case in many respects. So, worth getting along and having a watch of that online or attending in person if you can, I guess. Yeah, it'd be great to attend in person. Yeah. I don't know how big the employment court room is down there. They're usually pretty pretty tiny rooms. But, and that's all the more reason that they provide AVL, you know. Yeah. It really is. Awesome. I'm sure they'll downsize. Yeah, I reckon. We need to have it in a cupboard today. That's amazing. You know, they're so jumpy now. You know, it looks like you're going to do something. It's, oh, about that event that didn't happen over at Salewan College. There was some twerk saying, oh, oh, I hope she wasn't terrorized by some of those awful right-wing people. Who were they? Who were they? Yeah. Yeah. Oh, probably somebody was probably going to stab her with some nipping needles or something, you know, cram her around the head with a yoga mat or tie her hair in pigtails. Oh, my goodness. Yeah. Who got paid $12 million, Emma? That Brenton chap. What Brenton chap? Brenton Tarrant. What about him? Got paid $12 million to come to New Zealand as an actor. Ah. I don't know who he is. Who is he? Oh, the mosque shooter. The assassin, the killer. Alleged assassin. Yeah. We had a very dangerous situation. This is why we have to expose what's going on. Because New Zealanders are so naive. Yeah. And apathetic. Yeah. Oh, yeah. But they don't realize what the situation they put themselves in. No. You know, all of that, do they really think that the caliph would put up with a whole lot of pink haired, butch, feminine men? Ah, they'd be minced meat in no time. Mad. Because they believe the stories, you know. Yeah. They believe their own rubbish, dog tucker. Yeah. I'm afraid they would be. Yeah, they would. That would be something they would do. They would just chop them up and feed them to the dogs. Yeah. Yeah. Horrible. My dogs would go, they're not eating that. Yeah. No, that was one of the things. You read the Bible. That's what happened to people in those cultures way, way back. Yeah. That would be a great insult to be chopped up and fed to the dogs. But they did that if they really wanted to insult you. Private point home. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Wake up, people. Yeah. So anyway, we did not talk too much about that. You'll all be getting nightmares. No, we don't want that. But have a look at those cases, because it will make you absolutely determined that we must win. What did you put in, Liz? I missed that. You put in what to get to where you need to go? So that's from the New Zealand Gazette website, isn't it? Yeah. So you put NZ Gazette? Yeah, put in New Zealand Gazette and you'll get the website. And then you put, oh, there we go. Let's just put it up for you. Have a look in the, in the, as always. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And you can find it. OK. Good night to all. Can I share something before we? Yes. Hi. So I went to a court hearing this morning. This is for my two friends that were, they were given a $4,000 or near $5,000 fine, a COVID fine for apparently, because they were just in, so I'm in Queensland and we're in, you know, on the Koolangeta, New South Wales border. And apparently, so they were sitting one metre over the border because there's no line, it's just grass. And when they walked back over this one metre of grass, they were, it was kind of a bit longer story than that, but essentially they were given a fine by QPS for breaching the COVID public health order by not flying in to Queensland, but by walking across the border because you're supposed to fly because it was a hot spot. So, so this was back in September 21. And today the case was dismissed. Oh, well done. And what made it dismissed? That there was no evidence because this was, today would have been the, I can't even say how many tenths time that they went to court and the prosecutor never presented their three witnesses of police. They never turned up. And the judge was sitting there saying, okay, we've got here delisted, relisted, adjourned, delisted. And because the witnesses, oh, this time they had COVID. This time they were overseas on the holiday. This time they were on long service leave. And she said, I don't think we've got this. And if I adjourn at one time, I'm not going to allow it because it's not happened so far. And these poor people have been coming here every week, not every week, but pretty much all the time presenting to court, wanting to take care of this matter. So, so then she dismissed it. And my two friends sat there kind of like quite confused because they were really battled. They were really, really battled. They had, you know, two files worth of paperwork and CBDs to play. And he stood up and said, but I wanted to show and proceed because it was a deprivation of liberty of what happened to us. So because they had crossed the border unlawfully saying they were put into quarantine for the 24 days. So it was 14 days without, 14 days and then an extra 10 days because they wouldn't take the PCR test. So 24 days in total, they were in there. And one of them had a medical condition and they wouldn't let him use his nebulizer in the hotel because apparently that would spread COVID through the entire building because they said that there was a problem in WA that made it dangerous for everyone else in the hotel. So I think they, then the judge advised them to follow up with the ethical standards complaint to take it further because what happened to them, they were put into quarantine. So the judge said to them, take it further somewhere else. Yeah. She said, I'm not, I'm not touching it. You need to take that to the ethical standards command and follow that up somewhere else. So yeah. Yeah. Well, this is why there's not just the UK needs to have the equivalent of a, of a number eight workers union. So does the, so does Australia. So you've got a big job ahead of you Ness. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. But it was so, you know, they spent so much of their life, the last year and a half of their life living this, this lie. And the only thing we could really come down to is that those three witnesses, by not turning up, oh, because it goes towards what is associated with, you know, in New South Wales, when they, with the people who got their COVID virus, they got their COVID people who got their COVID fines, what do you call it? Um, reversed or, yeah. So there was, um, someone who, who themselves had their money returned, the $4,000 plus 10% on top of that, for their trouble. And then he got an apology from the officer who said that he only did what he was told to do. So. Yeah. Well, you know, we start because what I was showing tonight was that Costa, um, the, um, commissioner of police and, um, the defence force, they're all, they've all done their, their staff wrong. I really want to see the police start using, you know, start suing their, their bosses now, so that we get them on, on our side, right? Yeah. That's why I was thinking again, why haven't these three witnesses turned up? They haven't turned up probably because they know what they've done is wrong. Well, they've probably been ordered not to. They've probably been paid. But the thing is that, that, um, really, why isn't the judge saying contempt of court? They're pretty quick to, to do it if it's not the, um, if it's not the, um, you know, if it's the general public. Hmm. But one day, one day. Yeah. Oh, great. Thanks for that feedback. Maybe your two friends are so keen. They've got all their paperwork. Maybe they, they should turn the efforts to making a union. Yeah. He really felt like he really wants us. He will go home, do a video on what you've got. Get it out of your system. Yeah. Yeah. Make a Facebook group, get going, find, get some other people that have been in similar situations and, and who knows what. And find some solutions because the thing is that, um, and we were talking about this, um, on Friday, no, it's today's Friday, Wednesday night. That, um, and Michael, um, was talking about it and saying he finds a lot of the books very, um, had to, had to be in because people are just so depressed and stuff like that. And it's like, you know, we, we, we have a laugh and we, and we, we take things seriously and we go after them. And you know, um, use, use it, use, use your anger or disappointment as fuel. And, you know, there are solutions to everything. Go out, go after them. Because otherwise, you know, you'll end up feeling disappointed. We're, we're all given this as an opportunity. And don't let money stop you because who knows where, what fundraising you can do and. Yeah. Money's never the problem. It's the will. It's the actual spirit and will to do it. Yeah. That makes all the difference. Yeah. Yeah. I agree. Yeah. Well, I'll let them, I'll let them celebrate tonight before I, and have one night off. Well, they've got four, well, I've sort of got $4,000, haven't they? That they, they, they don't have to pay. Yeah. Well, each, each. Wow. That's a lot of money. Yeah. So that means when they come after them with the COVID fine, why, why were they in there in the first place? They shouldn't have been in there according to the charge being dismissed. I mean, not the COVID fine, the quarantine amount. Oh, the quarantine. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. No, they should, they should sue for that. I mean, it's a deprivation of your freedom. Yeah. I mean, it's pure and simple. I used it as a jail. And the Australians of all people, and I'm not having a go at the fact that, you know, you know, it was a penal colony because a lot of those were political prisoners as well. But I think the, it's something like 25% of all people in New South Wales have got a criminal ancestor in their background. You know, you should always remember that and always be struggling to make sure that nobody gets locked up that unfairly, because it's, it's a terrible thing. You know, they never went back. They could never go back, most of them, to their, to their homeland and see their families ever again. So it was a lot more than seven years or, or, or 14 years. A lot of it was, yeah, and Susan, a lot of it was some, something for, you know, a handkerchief or, they had so many capital crimes. There's a, there's a book, I don't know if you've read it, Ness, called The Fatal Shore. Okay. Have you read that? No, I haven't. That's about the, the people being shipped out from the UK to Australia. Basically, the conditions were worse than what they were shipping black slaves out from Africa, worse. They didn't, they didn't, they didn't whip those slaves on the boats that's coming out from Africa. They, they didn't care about, they didn't care about the men and women coming out from England. The whippings were something dreadful, something dreadful. The Fatal Shore reminds me, reminds me of the pom who came to Australia and he came to the immigration. The immigration guy says, do you have a police record, criminal record? He said, well, do I still need one? Yeah. Thank you, Jeff. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, that, that book is, is pretty hard to read, but every Australian should probably read it. Because we, you know, this is where we're heading back. This is where we're heading back. They're more sophisticated the way they do it now. See, they don't use a bull whip now. They use the debt whip. Them, them slavery, different tool. Or the jail, the jail threat or the, or the COVID, the quarantine threat. Yeah. Yeah. I've just posted a link for a Facebook group, which just popped up. The easiest thing I could find straight away. That guy there, Edward Fitzgerald's just written a ebook about the history of the UK and leading up to Prince Charles's or King Charles III's coronation. Yeah. It's only, it's like 12 pounds or something to download it. Oh, it's cheaper. I got it. Yeah. It's like $2.22 pounds. I mean, $2.22 pounds. Yeah, I got it. It's quite easy to read. Yeah. So that's worth reading to get a bit more insight into. I don't know what his view is on 1649, because I haven't had a chance to start reading it yet, but yeah. It'd be interesting if he knows about it. Yeah. He's got way back, talks about the Magna Carta a lot. Oh, good. Good. Yeah. He's got to know all of that. Absolutely. Because of course, that's part of our constitution. Did you get an email I sent you yesterday? I was, last night I think it was, Em, about, because Ness was, oh yes, I did. What was the equivalent? I know, I think it's the equivalent of our Gazette, the ACT something. Yeah, I just had a look through that before. Okay. Well, there's also an article, because when I was reading this case, what was called King Henry VIII clauses was mentioned. And I came up with this thing, and it's really, really interesting. It's about the way the executive basically has been running Parliament, not the other way around, and using all of these clauses to basically change, using secondary law to change primary law. And it's rife in Australia and New Zealand, and especially, apparently, this was written around the time, just after the Christchurch earthquake. And, you know, real lawlessness, you know, all of this stuff about, well, if that, whatever the Minister decides, etc. And you'll see that in the Medicines Act. If you read the Medicines Act, there's all this stuff about, you know, well, if whatever the Minister deems this and the Minister deems that, that's wrong, right? That's going nowhere near the Parliament to debate. Not that these ones would have debated anything, but, you know, this is because they've gotten to such a state of corruption that they don't even know how to do it anymore. So, but yeah, that's a good article, and I'll find it and send it over for the for the website. Yeah, it's got some stuff in it from New Zealand law professors. So, we should get in touch with them and say, what do you think about the fact that they didn't, it doesn't taste the Canadian air, does it? It would be quite good to have a couple of law professors staying here, that's right. It would, eh? Yeah. Do not, do not go past Go, do not collect $200. Yeah. Do not collect 4, or 12, or anything else. No. Give us the damn jobs back. Yeah. Yeah. Very good. Okay, guys. Yeah. Thank you. Very good. Thanks, everyone. Thank you, Liz. Yeah. Great story. Yeah. And thanks, Liz and Jeff. And good night, everybody. Good night. Hope you have a good weekend. And we'll see you next, see you next Wednesday. Bye. Yep. See you later. Bye.