Ash Ambihaipahar (Barton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Australian Centre for Disease Control Bill 2025. This bill responds directly to the recommendations from the COVID-19 response inquiry report released in October last year. It reflects on a health crisis that quickly became a crisis of information, trust and certainty. We are still dealing with the effects of a loss of trust in government and public health now.

Let me take you back to when I was seated on a couch in my pyjamas, a rapid antigen test on the counter beside me and the daily press conference on the TV—a time that no-one remembers very fondly. We tuned in to listen to the latest bungle of the Morrison government, be it vaccine rollout delays, the procurement failures, the crisis in aged-care facilities or the breakdown in quarantine arrangements. The now Minister for Health and Ageing, Mark Butler, said at the time that it was the biggest public policy failure in living memory. Australia's response to the pandemic was delayed, unresponsive and uncoordinated. It left many of us on the couch disappointed in the government of the day and frustrated that successive governments had not had the foresight to plan for such a public health crisis.

They say if you want something done you've got to do it yourself or you've got to be the change you want to see in the world. I'm proud to have swapped the couch for these plush benches and the PJs for a suit. The Albanese government has committed to ensuring that the Morrison government's failures will not happen again. One part of this commitment will be delivered through establishing the Australian Centre for Disease Control, or CDC, as recommended by the COVID-19 response inquiry report and delivered by this bill.

At the time of the COVID-19 pandemic, most comparable countries had a body like the CDC and, because of that, the rest of the world's response, vaccine rollout and lockdowns were clearer and more effective than our own. We cannot lag behind next time a public health disaster strikes.

In this speech, I want to step through some of the key parts of the Centre for Disease Control and why they are important. These include: making the CDC a central, authoritative public health institution; having it provide better data and analytics; and publishing credible, accessible public health information. In examining these elements, we can see how transparency, accountability, efficiency and equity are at the heart of these reforms. These are words I find myself using again and again in this chamber because that's what our government stand for and what we strive to achieve in every piece of reform we introduce.

The Australian Centre for Disease Control will be an authoritative public health institution. Authority is not something you would say that the Morrison government had during the pandemic. They were all over the place. They ducked responsibility at every turn. It was 'not their job'. We all scratched our heads when the premiers recommended closing schools and the federal government did not, when three people were allowed to attend weddings but nine were able to join in outdoor group exercise. We had no clarity on what would end lockdowns, who should get what vaccine or when border restrictions would be lifted. I'm not saying that any one of these directives were right or wrong; they were simply confusing. This sort of confusion undermines confidence in our public health system. In times of crisis, we need clear, independent, timely and transparent decision-making. Otherwise, we risk people taking their health into their own hands and, ultimately, endangering the health of others.

The Australian Centre for Disease Control will rectify this gap in authority because it is independent. It need not worry about the politics of the day or the different priorities of state governments. Instead, it is a statutory agency that will act on scientific evidence and high-quality analysis built up over time. Of course, there will always be a place for politicians to lead people through a crisis, but, in doing so, this leadership should be based on evidence and effectiveness. The CDC will provide this strong, non-partisan basis.

In turn, it will partner with other Commonwealth agencies, state and territory governments, leading organisations in the scientific and research communities, peak bodies and community groups to navigate through these times of crisis. So waiting for the post National Cabinet press conference in the future may not feel like waiting for a new episode of MAFS to come out. Good government is not entertainment. It's measured, thoughtful, trustworthy and confident leadership. That is exactly what the CDC will achieve.

As a former scientist myself, the detail is in the data. Data is at its best when it's collated over time. One of the most important things about the Australian Centre for Disease Control is that it will begin operating on 1 January next year, not when the next pandemic happens, because much of the preparation for the next public crisis starts now. By the time illness breaks out we are already behind.

The CDC will ensure that experts, labs and governments are already working in step, speaking the same language, sharing real-time information. That preparedness will save time, money and, most importantly, lives. Moreover, the CDC will modernise Australia's national disease surveillance and data systems as a frontline defence against sickness. This includes rolling out a national wastewater surveillance program to detect emerging diseases. At the same time, it will contribute to whole-of-government responses to these same emerging threats. This means it will connect data from across hospitals, laboratories and even agriculture, to be certain that no one warning sign goes unnoticed. It's about prevention just as much as response.

All in all, this will provide a modern approach to national public health data to enable quicker and more-accurate detection of risk as well as more-consistent responses across borders and a strong foundation for pandemic planning and management. Again, this evidence based approach provides certainty to Australians. They can be sure that when a decision is made it is fair, effective and essential.

These were not common sentiments during the COVID-19 pandemic. For example, people in the south-western parts of Sydney felt very unfairly targeted by area-specific lockdowns. One only needed to open their phone to see residents partying it up in Bondi, enjoying so much more of their freedom, breaking so many more restrictions than people living in south-west Sydney. It felt like our multicultural working and middle-class communities were being targeted while those on the beach side were living it up. The reasoning for these targeted lockdowns was poorly communicated, and it appeared as if there was a lack of evidence supporting the decision. As such, residents jumped to the conclusion that these lockdowns were yet another manifestation of discrimination by the coalition government.

The same story played out in remote communities that waited too long for vaccines, and in aged-care facilities that were left without proper PPE. In each case, the absence of clear, coordinated national leadership meant that people felt forgotten. Obviously such poor communication breeds resentment, disunity and noncompliance—all of this at a time when we should have felt like one country working together to get through the pandemic. On top of this we saw that when the data was delayed it cost lives. If Australia had faster genomic sequencing and clearer data sharing we could have contained outbreaks sooner and may have avoided many of the long, blunt tools like lockdowns and curfews that hurt families and small businesses.

The CDC will make sure that labs and states share their information and findings efficiently. In future, the CDC will be trusted to make equitable and effective decisions. Furthermore, the Australian Centre for Disease Control will publish credible, accessible public health information. This is essential to rebuilding trust that public health delivery will be done well and will be done right. Too many of us were scared by misinformation about Pfizer versus AstraZeneca or airborne versus surface-borne spread. We were scrambling with whispers of RATs posted on a Facebook community group. We were lining up for hours down on King Georges Road at Roselands waiting to do a test.

This bill explicitly frames the CDC as an authoritative source of public health advice and information. This puts it above the reaches of Scotty from marketing. Indeed, its mandated public function is to be above the spin. The interim CDC has already proven its dedication to this purpose. Last year it held public consultations, and in doing so the interim CDC stated that it understands that people have concerns about the way governments use their data. So they asked Australians to share their concerns and expectations. Such an open, genuine approach is essential to the idea of credibility and trust, because if we don't bring people with us we let conspiracy and misinformation bloom.

I think this is particularly important in CALD communities like mine. I remember, during the COVID-19 pandemic, poorly translated materials spreading like wildfire through group chats. People laughed at these government directives rather than following them. Then, in some cases, there was simply not any material available in translated form. Instead, family members were tasked with communicating complex but often contradictory messaging to their loved ones. Again, this created a lot of confusion. A lot of the time, this meant people were not following the actual public health advice. For advice to be credible, it must be context specific, informed by lived experience, accurate and efficient. The CDC will be dedicated to ensuring its advice embodies these principles.

As you can tell from my experience and what my electorate and, I'm sure, a lot of people across Australia have experienced, it is something we cannot go through again. My biggest concern is the amount of distrust and damage the coalition government did to the institution of the federal government and the public health system at a time when there was so much uncertainty—also letting down the state and territory leadership. The CDC is about never repeating the same mistakes that the coalition government made in the lead-up to and during the COVID-19 pandemic. This is about restoring faith in the people to trust good, independent public health advice—restoring their trust in government—because this Labor government is proactively working to address this through the bill.

While those across the chamber want to gaslight the rest of Australia, we on this side of the chamber understand that it is about giving public health policy to the Australian people, making sure that we are prioritising that advice and policy and ensuring that it enshrines preparedness, trust and equity in its approach. It is yet another example of evidence based, fair and practical reform by this Labor government. That will always be our priority.

See this speech in context