eBay

i-need-a-martini · ‎18-10-2014

Personnel we deployed to to fight I.S.?

600.

Personnel we deployed to fight Ebola?

Zero.

icyfroth · ‎18-10-2014

@am*3 wrote:
wow and that was worth going on about it for posts afterwards? Not being clear, when you kept saying thats not THE topic?

I know not to hit reply to your posts now.

icy - your question doesn't make sense to me. I pass on replying to it.

Really? How disappointing.

I ask you what think we should be doing in your opinion besides sending money and such personnell as have volunteered.

You send me the following C&P as response:

@am*3 wrote:
The UK are sending a hospital ship to West Africa.

This is what Australia is doing about direct requests for help. Very little.

The World Health Org/UN have asked for more funds ( they were down to $100 000) and personnel to be sent to West Africa.. Australia's response a paltry $18m and no personnel to be sent.

WHAT WE’RE DOING
Prime Minister Tony Abbott has defended his government’s decision not to send Australian health workers to Ebola-ravaged west Africa.
He’s praised the “selfless humanitarianism” of non-government organisations who have sent volunteers to the region, but says there’s a world of difference between volunteering and being forced to tackle the deadly epidemic.

You still haven't said what YOU feel Australia should be doing besides sending money and such personnel as has volunteered to go.

i-need-a-martini · ‎18-10-2014

@icyfroth wrote:
I think what's being said is, ok we need health care professional personnel more than funds. But you can't force ppl to go help where they feel endangered.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Do we force people to go to their potential death in Iraq?

Of course not. They are paid to be there.

Same with medical staff. No one is forcing anyone. But, as in with military, the govts role is to pay for salaries, costs, equipment, support staff etc.

There is a plethora of people willing to go. BUt they need to pay their mortgages and feed their families. At the moment the only Australians there are those being financially supported by charities.

cherry*135 · ‎18-10-2014

Icy - if you have done any background reading on this, you wouldn't need to ask that question. It is not what I think we should do, it is what WHO/UN has requested countries contribute.

I highlighted in red, the important parts of my quote, which answered your question.

The World Health Org/UN have asked for more funds ( they were down to $100 000) and personnel to be sent to West Africa.. Australia's response a paltry $18m and no personnel to be sent.

They need more money and people on the ground.

Anonymous · ‎18-10-2014

Ms Bishop has previously cited the government's inability to safely evacuate any Australian personnel who might be infected with the virus in west Africa.

But Labor says the government should negotiate with other nations to provide care and evacuation arrangements for any Australian personnel who may become ill while contributing to the international effort.

are they still negotiating?

what's taking so long?

cherry*135 · ‎18-10-2014

United Nations News Centre

Ebola is a huge and urgent global problem that demands a huge and urgent global response,” Mr. Ban told reporters in New York. “The people and governments of West Africa are demonstrating significant resilience, but they have asked for our help.

“Dozens of countries are showing their solidarity. But we need to turn pledges into action. We need more doctors, nurses, equipment, treatment centres and medevac capacities.”

The Secretary-General appealed to the international community to provide the $1 billion that will enable the UN and partners to “get ahead of the curve” and meet the target of reducing the rate of transmission by 1 December.

Mr. Ban’s call to action echoes the stark warning issued to the Security Council last week by Anthony Banbury, head of the UN Mission for Ebola Emergency Response (UNMEER), who said the world must move quickly to ensure that at least 70 per cent of all people infected with Ebola are getting treatment by 1 December, and that 70 per cent of all burials occur without contamination by that date. Failing to reach those targets would mean “we fail entirely. With each passing day…the number of people infected grows exponentially,” he said.

cherry*135 · ‎18-10-2014

julia - ask Ms Bishop.

karliandjacko · ‎19-10-2014

"As the outbreak continues to grow – and it can and will continue to spread – the decision not to send Australian personnel to help contain Ebola is reckless itself," Mr Edwards said. "The money [provided by the government] is great, but it's not the solution. It can't create the doctors, nurses and medical teams needed to actually fight the disease."

The call came as British Prime Minister David Cameron called on countries other than the US and France to join his government in doing more to tackle the Ebola crisis at its source in Africa.

"It is time for other countries to look at their responsibilities and act in a similar ways ...other countries need to step forward," Mr Cameron said.

About 4555 of the 9216 Ebola cases that have been detected in west Africa to date have died, according to the World Health Organisation (WHO).

Foreign Affairs Minister Julie Bishop defended the government's response, saying Australia did not have the military capability to evacuate an Ebola sufferer and no other country had guaranteed to take and treat an infected Australian health worker.

"What we are doing is providing funding for the front-line services and we have over many years provided substantial funding to the WHO," she said.

"The UN asked for money and we immediately came up with an additional $10 million and we received thanks and praise from the UN. They said that was exactly the kind of response they wanted, not a pledge but actual money which we have provided."

Ms Bishop said Australia had plans to react if Ebola reached the country or the region.

"Particularly if it came to the Pacific we would consider it Australia's primary responsibility to respond," she said.

But Mr Edwards said he was aware of at least 12 internationals who had been evacuated to Europe under the current "ad hoc" system. Eleven were returned to their country of nationality for treatment and one, a Sudanese national, was accepted by Germany.

"You can't get a 100 per cent guarantee in these situations because there are so many variables at play. But we have a very high level of confidence that evacuations will happen when they are necessary. They have been happening to date."

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/national/abbotts-ebola-plan-under-fire-20141018-1184hx.html#ixzz3GXqlEwuH

cherry*135 · ‎19-10-2014

Further to the link above.

Today, 12.45pm

Labor's Tanya Plibersek steps up attack on Abbott government over lack of Ebola action

Mark Kenny Chief political correspondent

The Abbott government's hopes of pulling the opposition into line over Ebola have evaporated, with Labor's Tanya Plibersek stepping up the criticism of the current hands-off approach as short-sighted and wholly inadequate.

The response came after Health Minister Peter Dutton and Foreign Affairs Minister Julie Bishop wrote to the opposition branding its calls for sending in Australian health workers, reckless in the absence of third-country agreements to treat them if infected.

The Deputy Opposition Leader said it was curious that the government had seen fit to deploy Australian Federal Police to Ukraine even before any agreement on access to the crash site of MH17, and had deployed hundreds of defence personnel and assets to the Middle East before any decision to participate in Iraq, but was effectively sitting on its hands regarding the Ebola crisis in West Africa.

"Well I think it's a bit rough to call for bipartisanship when the government's plainly doing the wrong thing," she told the ABC's Insiders program.

"We were briefed at the beginning of October about all the impediments to Australia sending volunteers to West Africa to assist to get this virus under control, and in the weeks subsequent it appears that the government's made little to no effort to overcome those impediments.

The strong comments came as world leaders rejected isolationist tendencies from some countries following the outbreak, with Britain's Prime Minister David Cameron calling on the developed world to "wake up" to the crisis.

US President Barack Obama has told his nation that the US cannot simply cut off West African nations affected because that would merely make the situation worse.

To date the heavy lifting in response to the crisis is being done by the US, Britain and France, with many other countries hanging back and offering only piecemeal support.

Australia has reportedly sent $10 million to the fund but has allocated a modest $18 million to the Ebola effort so far.

Over the weekend, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon condemned excessive international caution, noting that his proposed $US1 billion Ebola fund had so far attracted just $100,000 – and that was from Colombia.

"We can't just cut ourselves off from West Africa … trying to seal off an entire region of the world - if that were even possible - could actually make the situation worse," Mr Obama said as some Americans have begun to campaign against US assistance for fear of an outbreak at home.

Ms Plibersek said the disease had to be contained in West Africa.

"This becomes a greater risk not just to the African continent, but to the world more generally – the best way that we can protect Australia and protect Australians is to help stop Ebola in West Africa.

The government has written to the opposition arguing that campaigning for greater involvement, including through putting Australian medical professionals on the ground, represents a reckless disregard for health workers because there is no reliable evacuation arrangement with another country, and Australia itself is too far away.

Ms Plibersek said, however, that other countries were putting in place facilities to deal with infected health workers such as proposed hospital ship in the case of Britain.

"It is beyond me why other countries are able to make arrangements for their health workers, including now Japan, are able to make arrangements for their health workers and the Australian government's not able to do that," she said.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/labors-tanya-plibersek-steps-up-attack-on-abbo...