Regardless, there's no precedence for it, and if there weren't restrictions already then you'd be introducing them, so I'm wondering what you think the trigger is for an adjacent state to introduce or retain restrictions locally when another state has an outbreak, and why we wouldn't be worrying about QLD or SA not responding to NSW's outbreak right now by introducing restrictions (relative to the NSW outbreak, not relative to the local QLD cases currently)?
I mean, it sounds a lot like asking why didn't VIC predict the future to me. You'd have had stricter restrictions within VIC which is 7 hours away by road than you have today in the ACT, totally enveloped by NSW. How would that have been explained to the 6.7 million affected Victorians? Genuinely curious. Would you have had the restrictions run until Sydney's lockdown is over, or would you have guessed some maskless removalists would have crossed into the state around the time they did?