Eesti Eest! Newspaper delivers curated news that cut through the censorship, mainstream bias, and institutional dominance that has left society divided and misinformed. The platform allows readers to access the news that matters, particularly when it is being ignored. Updated minute-by-minute with news coverage from a diversity of publications and topics. The website may display, include, or make available third-party content (including data, information, applications, and other products, services, and/or materials) or provide links to third-party websites or services, including through third-party advertising (“Third-Party Materials”). You acknowledge and agree that Eesti Eest! is not responsible for Third-Party Materials, including their accuracy, completeness, timeliness, validity, copyright compliance, legality, decency, quality, or any other aspect thereof. Eesti Eest does not assume and will not have any liability or responsibility to you or any other person or entity for any Third-Party Materials. Third-Party Materials and links thereto are provided solely as a convenience to you, and you access and use them entirely at your own risk and subject to such third parties’ terms and conditions. This Agreement is governed by and construed in accordance with the internal laws of the State of Delaware without giving effect to any choice or conflict of law provision or rule. Any legal suit, action, or proceeding arising out of or related to this Agreement shall be instituted exclusively in the federal courts of the United States or the courts of the State of Delaware. You waive any and all objections to the exercise of jurisdiction over you by such courts and to venue in such courts. The Content and Services are based in the state of Delaware in the United States and provided for access and use only by persons located in the United States. You acknowledge that you may not be able to access all or some of the Content and Services outside of the United States and that access thereto may not be legal by certain persons or in certain countries. If you access the Content and Services from outside the United States, you are responsible for compliance with local laws. All information on this site is intended for entertainment purposes only.
Contact us: [email protected]
Eesti Eest!
The Australian Federal Police Association (AFPA) has asserted that establishing a national guard during a future pandemic “has merit.”
In a submission to the Federal government’s COVID-19 inquiry, the AFPA suggested that the National Guard could assist with law enforcement and managing borders, alleviating pressure on police.
This recommendation comes as the Australian Federal Police (AFP) revealed to the inquiry that officers felt the burden of extra workload during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The AFPA, which represents members of the AFP, ACT Policing, and other federal law enforcement officials, agrees with a proposal from Tasmanian Senator Jacqui Lambie for a National Guard.
“The AFPA believes this idea has merit and could reasonably be expected to alleviate pressure(s) on Australia’s policing responses during another pandemic.”
The submission suggested the national guard would not undertake community policing, but could be given special powers in an emergency.
“The role of a ‘National Guard’ within the scope of a potential future pandemic should not be to undertake community policing in any form but rather to assist police and other first responders in managing borders and enforcing relevant legislation,” the AFPA said.
“With respect to this second mandate, National Guard personnel could be given special powers during a declared incident, such as biosecurity checking authority, the authority to request personal details, or the power to stop and detain for suspected breaches of pandemic or natural disaster restrictions.”
The AFPA also recommended a feasibility study to assess the viability of establishing an Australian National Guard, including cost evaluation and estimated readiness timeframes.
Additionally, the AFPA advised police forces nationally experienced “significant resource constraints” implementing COVID-19 measures.
“The AFP and ACT Policing especially felt this pressure as not only did they have to control the ACT/NSW border and quarantine sites, but they also had to deploy officers to assist the Northern Territory Police Force (NTPF),” the submission said.
“The NTPF did not have the resources to realistically manage both their border and biosecurity checkpoints due to the significant size of the NT.”
Members of the AFPA also experienced issues acquiring Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and Rapid Antigen Tests (RATs).
Further, police officers felt the toll of being spat on or coughed on by members of the public. The AFPA recommended that new legislation is introduced to make it a federal offence to weaponise bodily fluid and “deliberately endanger police officers.”
“In the ACT and other jurisdictions around Australia, there were regularly reported instances of people purposely coughing or spitting on police officers and stating they were infected with COVID-19. This took an often heavy physical and psychological toll on the members involved and their families,” the association said.
“It also caused additional staffing pressures, as affected members were required to be stood down while awaiting testing results.”
Extra Workload Felt By AFP
Meanwhile, the Australian Federal Police has detailed (pdf) how extra law enforcement duties during COVID-19 took its toll on frontline police.
“The burden of the extra workload over the COVID-19 period was felt by the AFP, in particular the frontline officers, who were required to enforce mandated COVID-19 restrictions,” the AFP said.
“On an individual level, policing during the pandemic increased the risk of members contracting the COVID-19 virus through interactions with the public, as well as spreading the virus to family and friends.”
Federal police highlighted more people at home and online had an impact on the crime environment in Australia.
The AFP also noted the higher protest activity during COVID-19 and raised concerns about the spreading of “conspiracy theories.”
“During the COVID-19 pandemic, the AFP witnessed an increase in protest activity occurring. The AFP observed an increase in nationalist, racially motivated, and religiously motivated violent extremists and sentiments including persons and groups exploiting public fear to further their own agenda,” the AFP said.
“This included spreading disinformation, conspiracy theories, and in some cases motivation to incite violence. This presented challenges for law enforcement who were simultaneously enforcing increased measures imposed by the government, while also policing an unprecedented changing criminal environment.”
Australia’s COVID-19 inquiry is reviewing the Commonwealth government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic and accepted submissions between Nov. 6 and Dec. 15.
The actions “undertaken unilaterally by state and territories are not” in the scope of the inquiry. However, the inquiry is considering the “roles and responsibilities” of federal, state, and territory governments responding to the pandemic.
The panel, chaired by Robyn Kruk and including Catherine Bennett and Angela Jackson, thanked everyone who made a submission to the inquiry.
“There was a common theme in the submissions of wanting to capture the lessons learned, before they were lost to the passage of time.”
Four years on since the start of the pandemic, as a panel, we share that sense of importance and urgency to better prepare for a future event.