After the University of Western Sydney has provided cash grants to help students with expenses for quarantine, the University of Melbourne and Adelaide University also offer cash grants to help Chinese students: the University of Melbourne is offering cash grants of AUD$7,500. It goes without saying that most international students from China are wealthy, would they be attracted by the subsidies? Perhaps what those Chinese students really want is only escaping from their “ghost home cities”.
Those subsidies are evidence that tuition revenue of Australian universities mainly come from Chinese students. According to the Government of Australia, about 190,000 Chinese students are studying in Australia. No wonder universities are aggressively lobbying the Australian Government to relax its China travel ban. The Federal Government bans travelers coming from, or transiting through, mainland China from entering Australia - unless they have spent 14 days in another country. In another words, Chinese students who might be “virus carriers” have to stay first in some other vulnerable countries such as Thailand, thus this measure may increase the risk of transmitting COVID-19. If this really happens, will those poor countries be able to handle the medical challenges of this epidemic?
Furthermore, large-scale class suspension may be prompted like that in Japan if coronavirus cases spike in Australia, and Australian universities may well be asked to refund the tuition fees or even to arrange accommodation for their students. Losing money and public image all in one go, is it really worth doing so?
#Australia #TravelBan
#coronavirus #ChineseStudent
Further reading:
https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2020-02-26/melbourne-uni-offers-coronavirus-grants-chinese-students/12004262
https://www.sbs.com.au/language/cantonese/zh-hant/coronavirus-travel-ban-prompts-melbourne-university-to-offer-chinese-students-7-500-grant
Those subsidies are evidence that tuition revenue of Australian universities mainly come from Chinese students. According to the Government of Australia, about 190,000 Chinese students are studying in Australia. No wonder universities are aggressively lobbying the Australian Government to relax its China travel ban. The Federal Government bans travelers coming from, or transiting through, mainland China from entering Australia - unless they have spent 14 days in another country. In another words, Chinese students who might be “virus carriers” have to stay first in some other vulnerable countries such as Thailand, thus this measure may increase the risk of transmitting COVID-19. If this really happens, will those poor countries be able to handle the medical challenges of this epidemic?
Furthermore, large-scale class suspension may be prompted like that in Japan if coronavirus cases spike in Australia, and Australian universities may well be asked to refund the tuition fees or even to arrange accommodation for their students. Losing money and public image all in one go, is it really worth doing so?
#Australia #TravelBan
#coronavirus #ChineseStudent
Further reading:
https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2020-02-26/melbourne-uni-offers-coronavirus-grants-chinese-students/12004262
https://www.sbs.com.au/language/cantonese/zh-hant/coronavirus-travel-ban-prompts-melbourne-university-to-offer-chinese-students-7-500-grant
www.abc.net.au
Melbourne University offers students $7,500 to help circumvent coronavirus travel ban
One of Australia's most prestigious universities offers cash grants of $7,500 to help Chinese students get around the coronavirus travel ban and resume their studies.
Biased belief in CCP hurts the world: WHO is the accomplice 5/7
Thirdly, the most effective global approach to prevent the contagion being spread to other countries is to set travel restriction to and from China (the epic-centre). However, the approach taken by WHO seems to take care of CCP’s reputation and ego more than to consider the possibility of harms brought to the international community. Examples include:
1. Since the day CCP notified WHO the epidemics in China on 3 January, WHO announced numerous press releases and notices emphasising it is “not necessary” to have in place any concrete hygiene policies and measures on the travellers. WHO recommended not imposing any travel and trades restrictions on China.
2. Even though it has been well reported that the virus has spread outside China, WHO still applauded PRC for what they were doing about the situation. WHO is unwilling to declare a PHEIC situation. Even though the PHEIC mechanism has no coercive power on sovereign countries, it is an effective alarm signal to the world regarding the severity of disaster.
3. WHO was only forced to kick off the PHEIC mechanism until USA announced evacuation of American citizens trapped at Wuhan. Even till that moment, WHO only emphasised that their decision was based on consideration of the vulnerability of the public health systems of the developing countries affected by the epidemic rather than any scepticism about the works of PRC. WHO still called the world not to impose ‘discriminative’ trade and travel restrictions on China.
These suggest that WHO has lost its professionalism, neutrality and objectivity.
Source: HKCNews
#CCP #WHO #PHEIC #TravelBan #Wuhan
⬇️⬇️⬇️⬇️⬇️ Continue
https://t.me/guardiansofhongkong/19544
Thirdly, the most effective global approach to prevent the contagion being spread to other countries is to set travel restriction to and from China (the epic-centre). However, the approach taken by WHO seems to take care of CCP’s reputation and ego more than to consider the possibility of harms brought to the international community. Examples include:
1. Since the day CCP notified WHO the epidemics in China on 3 January, WHO announced numerous press releases and notices emphasising it is “not necessary” to have in place any concrete hygiene policies and measures on the travellers. WHO recommended not imposing any travel and trades restrictions on China.
2. Even though it has been well reported that the virus has spread outside China, WHO still applauded PRC for what they were doing about the situation. WHO is unwilling to declare a PHEIC situation. Even though the PHEIC mechanism has no coercive power on sovereign countries, it is an effective alarm signal to the world regarding the severity of disaster.
3. WHO was only forced to kick off the PHEIC mechanism until USA announced evacuation of American citizens trapped at Wuhan. Even till that moment, WHO only emphasised that their decision was based on consideration of the vulnerability of the public health systems of the developing countries affected by the epidemic rather than any scepticism about the works of PRC. WHO still called the world not to impose ‘discriminative’ trade and travel restrictions on China.
These suggest that WHO has lost its professionalism, neutrality and objectivity.
Source: HKCNews
#CCP #WHO #PHEIC #TravelBan #Wuhan
⬇️⬇️⬇️⬇️⬇️ Continue
https://t.me/guardiansofhongkong/19544
Telegram
📡Guardians of Hong Kong
#Newspaper
Hong Kong, Singapore and Taiwan — once heralded for early successes in battling the pandemic — are now confronting a new wave of coronavirus cases, largely fueled by infections coming from elsewhere.
The first confirmed cases in all three places were connected to people who had travelled to Wuhan, where the pandemic began, followed by small clusters of cases among residents with no travel history.
This article compares and analysis in details the epidemic in these three places, with well illustrated graphs.
Full Article: NYTimes, (09-Apr)
https://nyti.ms/2V4FCRX
#HongKong #Taiwan #Singapore #Pandemic #TravelBan #Quarantine
Hong Kong, Singapore and Taiwan — once heralded for early successes in battling the pandemic — are now confronting a new wave of coronavirus cases, largely fueled by infections coming from elsewhere.
The first confirmed cases in all three places were connected to people who had travelled to Wuhan, where the pandemic began, followed by small clusters of cases among residents with no travel history.
This article compares and analysis in details the epidemic in these three places, with well illustrated graphs.
Full Article: NYTimes, (09-Apr)
https://nyti.ms/2V4FCRX
#HongKong #Taiwan #Singapore #Pandemic #TravelBan #Quarantine
Nytimes
Why Coronavirus Cases Have Spiked in Hong Kong, Singapore and Taiwan (Published 2020)
Once heralded for keeping their case counts low, Hong Kong, Singapore and Taiwan have recently seen a surge in numbers, largely fueled by infections coming from elsewhere.
#LettersToEditor #TheGuardian
Letter to Ms Boseley, The Guardian
Editor’s note: This is a letter from a subscriber of our channel.
Dear Ms Boseley,
I would like to provide some feedback on your article "Test and trace: lessons from Hong Kong on avoiding a coronavirus lockdown" published on 17 April 2020.
There is nothing you can learn from Hong Kong unless you want your country to degenerate into a failed state. The reasons why we could cope with the coronavirus better than other places are simply that (1) Hongkongers have lost all trust and confidence in our government; (2) we know by instinct that Chinese figures are fake. We know in our hearts that the Hong Kong government is ignorant, incompetent and totally untrustworthy, that it has been blind and deaf for many months, that it would never put the interests of Hongkongers in any priority. To survive, we must rely on ourselves solely.
The terrible experience of SARS in 2003 definitely helps raise the awareness of personal and public hygiene. You are quite right to point it out. When we heard about the outbreak in China in late January, we knew instantly what we needed and which items of personal protective equipment (PPE) were the most essential. Everyone rushed to buy face masks and alcohol hand gel between late January and the entire February. And I must remind you that WHO said wearing masks had little to no effect in preventing the coronavirus infection. Ordinary Hongkongers have done all we can to find PPE from Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam, India, North America, South America and the whole Europe.
I need to emphasise it is "ordinary Hongkongers" because our government has never assisted the people of Hong Kong to acquire any PPE. Frontline health workers repeatedly said they did not have sufficient masks (doctors and nurses had to reuse their masks all day long). It was "ordinary Hongkongers", many of whom donated a few boxes each time to the medics. When we learnt that elderly people and low-income families could not afford to buy masks as prices went up more than 10 times, residents and shop owners in the neighbourhoods volunteered to provide free resources, such as masks, gloves, alcohol, liquid bleach, etc. In the time of coronavirus we have created an economy and a culture of mutual self-help. The solidarity of Hongkongers, the spirit and willingness to fight for the benefits of our fellows (by acquiring PPE from around the world and sharing it with others), the determination and sense of urgency to protect this place that is our home, these have nothing to do with WHO guidelines.
Continue reading:
https://telegra.ph/Letter-to-Ms-Boseley-The-Guardian-04-22
#SelfHelp #HongKong #Epidemic #Coronavirus #MedicalStaffStrike #TravelBan #WHO #Taiwan #ChinaThreat #ChinesePropaganda
Letter to Ms Boseley, The Guardian
Editor’s note: This is a letter from a subscriber of our channel.
Dear Ms Boseley,
I would like to provide some feedback on your article "Test and trace: lessons from Hong Kong on avoiding a coronavirus lockdown" published on 17 April 2020.
There is nothing you can learn from Hong Kong unless you want your country to degenerate into a failed state. The reasons why we could cope with the coronavirus better than other places are simply that (1) Hongkongers have lost all trust and confidence in our government; (2) we know by instinct that Chinese figures are fake. We know in our hearts that the Hong Kong government is ignorant, incompetent and totally untrustworthy, that it has been blind and deaf for many months, that it would never put the interests of Hongkongers in any priority. To survive, we must rely on ourselves solely.
The terrible experience of SARS in 2003 definitely helps raise the awareness of personal and public hygiene. You are quite right to point it out. When we heard about the outbreak in China in late January, we knew instantly what we needed and which items of personal protective equipment (PPE) were the most essential. Everyone rushed to buy face masks and alcohol hand gel between late January and the entire February. And I must remind you that WHO said wearing masks had little to no effect in preventing the coronavirus infection. Ordinary Hongkongers have done all we can to find PPE from Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam, India, North America, South America and the whole Europe.
I need to emphasise it is "ordinary Hongkongers" because our government has never assisted the people of Hong Kong to acquire any PPE. Frontline health workers repeatedly said they did not have sufficient masks (doctors and nurses had to reuse their masks all day long). It was "ordinary Hongkongers", many of whom donated a few boxes each time to the medics. When we learnt that elderly people and low-income families could not afford to buy masks as prices went up more than 10 times, residents and shop owners in the neighbourhoods volunteered to provide free resources, such as masks, gloves, alcohol, liquid bleach, etc. In the time of coronavirus we have created an economy and a culture of mutual self-help. The solidarity of Hongkongers, the spirit and willingness to fight for the benefits of our fellows (by acquiring PPE from around the world and sharing it with others), the determination and sense of urgency to protect this place that is our home, these have nothing to do with WHO guidelines.
Continue reading:
https://telegra.ph/Letter-to-Ms-Boseley-The-Guardian-04-22
#SelfHelp #HongKong #Epidemic #Coronavirus #MedicalStaffStrike #TravelBan #WHO #Taiwan #ChinaThreat #ChinesePropaganda
the Guardian
Test and trace: lessons from Hong Kong on avoiding a coronavirus lockdown
Semi-autonomous city followed WHO advice and moved swiftly to stem contagion without rigid curbs on movement
#CoronavirusPandemic
Despite #COVID19 Threats, #HongKongAirport to Allow Travellers from China to Make Transit to World Destinations, But Not the Other Way Round
In a statement released after midnight on August 13, the Hong Kong International Airport (#HKIA) announced that travellers from China could transit in Hong Kong and head to different destinations around the world. Despite the menace of the COVID19 pandemic, the aarrangement will be effective from 15 August to October 15, 2020.
Meanwhile, the statement also said "transfer/transit services to destinations in Mainland China will remain unavailable at HKIA". As travellers can leave but not enter China via Hong Kong, the travel restrictions on one side of the borders seem to suggest that China has imposed strict measures to prevent Covid-19 cases from entering the country.
Source: RTHK; InMedia #Aug13
#TravelBan
Despite #COVID19 Threats, #HongKongAirport to Allow Travellers from China to Make Transit to World Destinations, But Not the Other Way Round
In a statement released after midnight on August 13, the Hong Kong International Airport (#HKIA) announced that travellers from China could transit in Hong Kong and head to different destinations around the world. Despite the menace of the COVID19 pandemic, the aarrangement will be effective from 15 August to October 15, 2020.
Meanwhile, the statement also said "transfer/transit services to destinations in Mainland China will remain unavailable at HKIA". As travellers can leave but not enter China via Hong Kong, the travel restrictions on one side of the borders seem to suggest that China has imposed strict measures to prevent Covid-19 cases from entering the country.
Source: RTHK; InMedia #Aug13
#TravelBan
China bans Australian academics from entering country
Academics Clive Hamilton, a professor of public ethics at Charles Sturt University in Canberra, and Alex Joske, an analyst with the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (#ASPI) have been critical of China. They worked together on a book about China's political interference in Australia.
While both of them have no plan in visiting China nor applied any visa, China has banned their entry in an apparent tit-for-tat following Australia's decision to cancel the visas of two Chinese academics.
Chinese Government usually doesn't publicise who is on the blacklist. This explicit action aimed to cause a chilling effect on the academicians who need to travel to China for work or research.
#China #Australia #TravelBan #Academic
Source: ABC news #Sep24
https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp.abc.net.au/article/12698410
Academics Clive Hamilton, a professor of public ethics at Charles Sturt University in Canberra, and Alex Joske, an analyst with the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (#ASPI) have been critical of China. They worked together on a book about China's political interference in Australia.
While both of them have no plan in visiting China nor applied any visa, China has banned their entry in an apparent tit-for-tat following Australia's decision to cancel the visas of two Chinese academics.
Chinese Government usually doesn't publicise who is on the blacklist. This explicit action aimed to cause a chilling effect on the academicians who need to travel to China for work or research.
#China #Australia #TravelBan #Academic
Source: ABC news #Sep24
https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp.abc.net.au/article/12698410