COVID-19 Vaccine Compensation Reaches $23 Million, 8 Percent of Claims Successful

The Australian government has received 4,389 claims, The Epoch Times can reveal.

A medic prepares two vials of COVID-19 vaccines. Hazem Bader/AFP via Getty Images

The Australian government has received more than 4,300 vaccine injury claims and delivered about $23 million (US$15 million) worth of compensation.

Figures provided to The Epoch Times reveal that 8.34 percent of claims to the government’s compensation scheme have resulted in a payout.

“As at 31 July 2024, the COVID-19 Vaccine Claims Scheme has received 4,389 claims and paid 366 claims to the value of around $23 million,” the agency told the Epoch Times.

The COVID-19 vaccine claims scheme allows individuals to claim losses above $1,000 in relation to “moderate to severe adverse reactions to COVID-19 vaccines.”

The scheme covers vaccines approved by the TGA including the AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Moderna, and Novavax jabs.

Government agency Services Australia administers the claims on behalf of the Department of Health and Aged Care.

To make a compensation claim, individuals must meet the definition of harm, be admitted to hospital as an inpatient, or have a waiver if seen in outpatient care.

Under the scheme, the claimable conditions range from anaphylactic reaction to erythema multiforme (major), myocarditis, pericarditis, and thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome.

Also included, are shoulder injuries from the vaccine, or other moderate to significant physical injuries that caused permanent impairment or need an extended period of medical treatment.

“In both cases, the injuries must have been sustained during the physical act of being given the vaccine,” Services Australia states. 

“You must also have been admitted to hospital as an in-patient. Presenting to an emergency department is not recognised as being admitted to hospital.”

Those individuals who were not admitted to a hospital as an impatient or treated in an outpatient setting need to “seek a waiver.”

Vaccine Compensation Scheme Due to End Soon

The health department website confirms that claims for compensation under the scheme can continue to be lodged until Sept. 30.

“It was agreed by government in the 2023-24 mid-year economic and fiscal outlook that the scheme would close to new claims on 30 September 2024,” a health department spokesperson told The Epoch Times.

“Claims submitted by that date will continue to be assessed in line with the scheme policy.”

The scheme does not cover harm from contracting COVID-19, psychological and psychiatric conditions, and secondary injuries.

Other side effects not covered include headache, fatigue, and injection site reaction.

Politicians from across the political spectrum recently wrote to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese expressing concern the scheme will end at the end of September.

They urged the government to extend the COVID-19 vaccine compensation scheme and broaden its eligibility criteria.

“While the Australian government indemnifies vaccine manufacturers and continues to promote the take up of boosters, it makes no sense for the ’safety net' of the scheme to be removed,” the letter states.

The letter was signed by Teal MP Monique Ryan, United Australia Party Senator Ralph Babet, Nationals Senator Matt Canavan, Liberal Senators Gerard Rennick and Alex Antic, One Nation Senator Malcolm Roberts, and former Liberal turned independent MP Russell Broadbent.

Former Premier Says Vaccine Mandates Were a Mistake

The news comes as former New South Wales Premier Dominic Perrottet admitted vaccine mandates were a mistake in a valedictory speech to parliament.

“Without dwelling on every decision we got wrong, I believe it is important to point out one mistake which was made by governments here and around the world. That was the strict enforcement of vaccine mandates,” he said in the NSW Parliament.

“Health officials and governments were acting with the right intentions to stop the spread, but if the impact of vaccines on transmission was limited at best, as it is now mostly accepted, the law should have left more room for respect of freedom.”