Read on Twitter
My one / only thought on the #Insiders topic of choice today before I hit the weeding ( #insidersinstead)... the decision to use security guards for hotel Q was not a dud decision. These people were given employment when they might otherwise have been on jobseeker/keeper. (1/...)
Utilising security guards to secure the Q hotels should have been a safe option, if they had done the job they were paid to do, & thatâs an assumption that we make everyday...the bus driver wonât drive into a ditch, the supermarket wonât put toxic food on the shelves, etc (2/...)
The security guards did not do the job. If the individuals concerned can be identified, they should be charged accordingly. The breaches which occurred donât fit the âreasonably foreseeableâ test, and if they did, the same could have been âforeseenâ in other workforces... (3/...)
Breaches of this type have cropped up across the country. Hotel Q was never going to be perfect, but thanks to the Premiers, itâs a thing. Way better than the PMâs proposal that everyone self isolating at home would be just fine... 
(4/...)
(4/...)
So the constant bang on about âWHO MADE THAT DECISION!?â seems so irrelevant... It wasnât a bad call in and of itself. And letâs hypothesize that it was someone really quite respected who made that choice (the Emergency Management Commisioner, as a plucked example)... (5/...)
Would the attack press then all be like âOh, righto then, well that didnât work out well, so donât do it again, ok?â, and move on, #RubyPrincess style? Iâm thinking, yep... which makes the targeted, and obvious head-hunting game going on right now, pretty telling... (6/...)
And that kind of âDonât want you to learn from this... and do better for all our sakes... just want you gone... cause that serves our personal agendaâ thinking, is what will lead our country down the US path. Ugh. We can do much better, Australia. Have a good Sunday. (7/7)
