XYZ | By David Hiscox – April 28, 2022
Daniel Andrews was asked today about all the Victorian teachers who suddenly found themselves out of work because they haven’t taken their third dose of poison. This is how he reacted:
“I’m just about sick and tired of this constant negativity when it comes to schools….”
Nobody normal responds like that. Only psychopaths do that. The kind of psychopath who would introduce an innocuous sounding bill to parliament which is designed to destroy any crops people try to grow in their backyard during a period of food shortages. This was seen on the internet:
Andrews government will be coming after agriculture next. The Agriculture Legislation Amendment Bill 2022 has had it’s second reading in parliament. Biosecurity being the stated reason for changes. Increased enforcement powers, searching of property and persons without warrant, Increased fines, what was $1800 now $10.000 for providing false or misleading info. Landholder consent no longer required for Authorised Officers to take samples, stock (animals), documents. Authorised Officers no longer required to present identification. Heavy penalties for obstructing entry to the property. Sounds like they are getting their ducks lined up, ready to be deployed to shut down farms.
Sounds crazy right? It’s true, it’s all true. Here are just a few examples from The Agriculture Legislation Amendment Bill 2022, Explanatory Memorandum:
Authorised Officers no longer required to present identification:
New section 53(4) of the Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals (Control of Use) Act 1992 creates an exception to the requirement under new section 53(3) for an authorised officer to produce their identity card. The exception provides that an authorised officer is not required to produce their identity card in exercising a power if the request is unreasonable in the circumstances, or the power is exercised by post or electronic communication…
Heavy penalties for obstructing entry to the property:
New section 54J of the Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals (Control of Use) Act 1992 creates an offence of failure to comply with the requirements of an authorised officer. The provision provides that a person commits an offence if without reasonable excuse, the person fails or refuses to comply with a requirement of an authorised officer under the Act. The maximum penalty for this offence is in the case of a corporation 100 penalty units and in any other case 50 penalty units…
Increased fines, what was $1800 now $10.000 for providing false or misleading info:
New section 54L of the Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals (Control of Use) Act 1992 creates an offence of false and misleading conduct or information. A person commits the offence if the person provides any information or produces any document or engages in any other conduct towards an authorised officer while they are performing a function or exercising a power, if the person knows that the information or conduct is or the document contains information that is false, or misleading in a material particular. The maximum penalty for this offence is in the case of a corporation 100 penalty units and in any other case 50 penalty units. Section 72A of the Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals (Control of Use) Act 1992 applies to the new offence, meaning that, if a body corporate commits the offence, officers of the body corporate also commit the offence.
Most concerning, they are putting in place laws which would allow them to charge you the money it cost them to destroy your own food supply:
Clause 20 makes miscellaneous amendments to section 58 of the
Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals (Control of Use) Act 1992 to clarify and modify the provision in relation to debt recovery and broaden the scope of the directions that may be included in a destruction notice. These amendments provide that a notice may, in addition to dealing with the destroying of chemical products, fertiliser, stock food, agricultural produce, plants or stock, also provide for otherwise dealing with the thing by alternatives means such as recycling. The amendments also include an express provision that action for the recovery of costs may be taken in a court of competent jurisdiction and the costs can be recovered as a debt.
You can also view the entire bill here.
