A Senate committee discussing terms of reference for a potential royal commission into Australia’s COVID-19 response has been told it was the “worst ever public health failing.”
Labor promised a royal commission during the 2022 election campaign, but reneged on that commitment in September 2023, instead announcing a special commission of inquiry.
A royal commission has coercive powers including the ability to request documents and summon witnesses, takes evidence under oath, and holds public hearings.
A special commission, as proposed by the government, would look at vaccinations, treatments, and mental health support, but would not investigate lockdowns, mask mandates, and other controversial aspects of the response.
Scott Prasser of the Australian Institute for Progress (AIP) told the Senate committee on Feb. 1 that the best form of inquiry was a royal commission.
Expertise Not Diverse Enough
AIP Executive Director Graham Young said in his opinion, federal and state government management of the pandemic “the worst ever public policy and public health failing in this country.” He believed the people responsible for the decisions were not diverse enough to take into account the needs of the whole community.
The Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) believes a joint federal and state royal commission would be the “best option.”
“While the commission has welcomed these inquiries ... they are not sufficient substitutes for a properly constituted royal commission,” AHRC Commissioner Lorraine Finlay wrote in her submission.
“Australians lived with some of the most restrictive pandemic response measures in the world ... [which] all had impacts on individuals, families and communities,” Ms. Finlay wrote.
“A royal commission is recognised as being the ‘highest form of inquiry on matters of public importance’ and as such is the appropriate form of inquiry.
The Views of Legal and Medical Bodies
A submission by the Redfern Legal Centre argued that any inquiry needed to look at the use of rapidly changing health orders, on-the-spot fines, and heavy reliance on policing.While medical bodies such as the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners agreed that the inquiry needed to assess the vaccine rollout and mental health impacts, they also believed the terms of reference should include health response measures like lockdowns, public messaging, and more.
The Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation has suggested focusing on hospital working conditions, funding and staffing levels as well as preparedness and training, while civil liberties groups want an examination of movement restrictions such as state border closures and the use of emergency powers.
The 2022 Senate inquiry was highly critical of the then government’s lack of transparency around the COVID-19 response.
Obstruction Alleged
The report went as far as accusing ministers of “obstruction,” noting that, “This lack of transparency is illustrative of a pattern of behaviour in which the government has routinely obstructed the Senate’s access to information.”“The Senate passed a motion rejecting public interest immunity claims made in relation to the National Cabinet on the grounds of cabinet confidentiality. Yet, the government has continued to withhold such information from the Senate and the Australian public, denying either’s right to scrutinise its deliberations and decisions or those of the National Cabinet,” it said.
The hearing comes two years after the Senate Select Committee on COVID-19 published its final report containing 19 recommendations including that “a Royal Commission be established to examine Australia’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic to inform preparedness for future COVID-19 waves and future pandemics.”
