Perin Davey (NSW, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

I agree with the calls for all of us to share accurate information about the efficacy of COVID vaccines. I would also say that it is incumbent on all of us to share accurate information about jurisdictional reach and to share accurate information about what we as a federal government can do unilaterally and what we can't do—about who is responsible for what. Let's also consider and be accurate about what people are currently protesting against because, yes, facts matter.

Those who are currently protesting are protesting against restrictions. They are not protesting against vaccine mandates, because there are no vaccine mandates. They are protesting against restrictions based on vaccination status and the different treatment of those who are fully vaccinated and those who are not. Those restrictions have been put in place by the state and territory governments. These are state and territory decisions under state and territory laws. They are following their public health orders. It is not the Commonwealth government's place to usurp those. The bill that we saw this morning, and that many people have referred to in this afternoon's debate, was designed to try to usurp state rights. That's a very slippery slope to start going down. Where do we stop? That bill from this morning—which was supposedly to stop government overreach—was government overreach writ large.

Our government's position has been, and always will be, that COVID-19 vaccination should be voluntary except in highly exceptional circumstances such as people who work in health and aged care. Senator Lambie said it very well this morning, and for anyone who didn't listen I encourage you to go and read the Hansard. She explained that vaccination is a choice, and in certain industries the choice is: you get a vaccination or find another calling. That is not new. Certain employment arrangements have had vaccination requirements for decades. In New South Wales, you haven't been able to be a nurse without being vaccinated against whooping cough. In many aged-care facilities it has been mandatory to get a flu shot not just once but annually. The issue we are currently seeing is not really about those accepted norms for vaccine requirements in exceptional circumstances—it is being driven by fear.

When I looked deeper into Senator Hanson's bill this morning, it caused me fear because that bill didn't just prohibit governments mandating vaccines for their own workers but it also prevented Commonwealth, state and territory governments from entering into an agreement with, providing funding to, or granting a licence or a permit to, an entity—be it government or private, a charity or an NGO—that is reasonably likely to discriminate on the basis of COVID vaccination. And that 'reasonably likely' test is, 'Have they put in restrictions in the past?' Are you serious? That bill would have seen organisations such as St John's Ambulance, which is a fantastic organisation that provides excellent first-aid support and community programs, restricted and prevented from receiving funding from, or contracting to, a state government. Our charities would have been impacted. Sorry, Red Cross, next time there are Black Summer bushfires, you can't have any money because you might require your first-aid instructors, who teach things like resuscitation, to be vaccinated against something like the COVID-19 virus! The Salvation Army and St Vincent de Paul, who work with the homeless and vulnerable, would have been prohibited from receiving grants or funding if they asked their volunteers who work with the most vulnerable people in society to vaccinate to protect them. And what about private hospitals? Sorry, St Vincent's Hospital in Sydney, part of St Vincent Health Australia, who provide a full-service public teaching hospital—not anymore under Senator Hanson's bill! Facts matter, and the fact of the matter is that our government believes in voluntary vaccination, but the states are applying restrictions— (Time expired)