While Australia has been able to mitigate the deaths from Coronavirus, the Prime Minister still hasn’t given the country a plan for how we now get out of the lockdowns that are crippling the country. We need the modelling, we need the facts and we need a plan as soon as possible.
23rd of March speech
8th of April speech
First letter to the Prime Minister
Second Letter to the Prime Minister
Transcript
Hear that ticking? People’s frustrations. Building, with being kept in the dark. Because when it comes to the coronavirus, COVID-19, the government is sharing only part of the truth, and vital information seems to be withheld. To explain that, I will explain what seemed to be these three options.
Firstly, ending isolation with a sudden mass release, and why that is not on. Secondly, waiting for release until a vaccine is developed, and why that could hurt. Thirdly, isolating the sick and the vulnerable, and releasing the healthy, has proven successful overseas. And an added point, on treatment, for those with coronavirus. While I empathise with the government’s very difficult challenge, people need answers. There’s no manual on how to do this.
Yet people are feeling confused, afraid, concerned. Some feel lost, grieving for those dying, and grieving for our country. Some feel angry. Many are still living in disbelief, and plagued with uncertainty, and fear over how to pay their bills. People want to know what has to be done, why it has to be done, how long before it’s over, and what will be the cost, financial, social, personal, mental, emotional. It is the people who have to repay these huge bills of up to around 300 billion dollars, to which the government has committed Australian taxpayers.
People have a right to know the facts, yet the prime minister’s first discussion of modelling, on the 7th of April, lacks specifics on the expected duration of isolation, lacked a plan, lacked triggers for releasing people. Simply repeating the words, six month hibernation, is not enough. It kills people’s hope and raises their concerns. A solid plan is fundamental for trust and hope.
People expect governments to lead, and expect leaders to have a plan based on solid data and facts, and to share that plan, and the information behind the plan. We need to acknowledge successes, the government, and Australians generally, can claim success in avoiding the overwhelming of healthcare services, and avoiding a high death count. Sadly, 63 people have died.
Yet that is way better than many nations. In my speech in the first special one-day parliamentary session, on Monday the 23rd of March, I stressed the need to take hard, strong, and quick action. Because many politicians are afraid of being seen to be making mistakes, or being wrong. What would have happened if it had just been mild?
Two days later, I repeated that call in my letter to the prime minister. A little over two weeks later, in the second special one-day parliamentary session, on Wednesday the 8th of April, and in my letter to the prime minister yesterday, I discussed the need for a plan for recovery, and for sharing that plan with the people.
Now there are two health and safety aspects. Individual health, protecting people’s lives. Preventing an overwhelming of the healthcare services. After a lot of public pressure, the prime minister was pushed into a media conference on Tuesday the 7th of April, to discuss the government’s modelling of the virus’s potential impact. Disappointingly, he was light on details and fact, and big on words.
He did not release the modelling, did not discuss the key assumptions of infection, transmission, and fatality rates, did not discuss the variables modelled, discussed no results from the modelling. How then could people make meaningful conclusions? We couldn’t! The prime minister did not discuss various alternative strategies for a national plan. Our staff found the New Zealand modelling report, and, it’s worth noting, the Kiwis thanked Aussies for helping them build their model.
Yet the Kiwis released their report many days before the prime minister’s media conference! And the UK’s Imperial College of London model has been released for some time. Both show that unrestrained release of people from isolation would lead to an epidemic, unless successful treatments or vaccines are released. A key point is that the virus still exists in the community, and releasing restrictions without monitoring would be disastrous. Because when we’re let out, the virus will still be waiting for us.
Now the graph you see is from the Kiwi modelling report. The left-hand side, with blue background, shows isolation, the period of isolation. And the government strategy of lockdowns could be seen as the green line, the number of infections that hugs the baseline until isolation ends. Then, in the white background, that’s the period where isolation ends.
And the epidemic breaks out, because the virus is still among us. Now I’m no expert, and want you to make sure that you know that I don’t think I purport to be. I’m not an expert. I simply accessed information, and listened to people, including our staff who have done our basic research, and I convey the basic ideas and options to you.
The first option of quick, mass release of people from isolation, would mean an epidemic, many more people dying, and possibly our health system being overwhelmed. We can’t do that. That means we either need treatment, or a vaccine, or somehow build people’s immunity across the entire nation. A second option, is to keep people in isolation, lockdown, until a vaccine is developed.
We can’t do that for two reasons. Firstly, the emotional and mental health toll would be too high. And secondly, our economy would be slaughtered. There’s a third option, and that is to adopt something like an Australian version of the highly successful strategy used in East Asian nations, especially Taiwan, and latter, South Korea.
That involves isolating the sick, and those who have the virus, and isolating the vulnerable, the aged, and those with compromised immune systems, adding massive screening of healthy people for elevated body temperature, and then testing those with high temperatures, and with other symptoms of the virus. Then those with the virus are sent to isolation.
Those without the virus go back to work, or keep working. The point is that Taiwan has a population of 24 million people, almost the same as Australia, yet has recorded just six fatalities, despite heavy contact with the virus, before Australia, because it is near to China. And their economy had hardly missed a beat. So far, the prime minister and his medical advisors spend their time telling us what has happened, when we need to know what is going to happen next.
The prime minister has not shown us two things, the whole plan, including what happens next, and how long this will continue. The second half of the model seems to be missing. We the people deserve to know, and want to know, the whole story. On what basis is the prime minister spending 300 billion dollars of our taxpayer money?
The prime minister needs to tell us his government’s plan, and the triggers for strategy changes. This builds understanding, trust, and hope. The government does not trust the people. And eventually the people will not trust the government. The government has put parliament, and therefore democracy, in hibernation.
So in my second letter to the prime minister, I asked three sets of questions, on the modelling, the data, and the plan. Some medical specialists are asking, does COVID-19 attack our vascular, our blood circulation, and oxygen absorption system, or our respiratory system? We need to know, honestly. The chances of developing a vaccine against a virus that attacks our respiratory or blood system, that determines our fate.
People have dreamt of vaccines for the common cold. A type of corona vaccine, virus, rather, for a century or more. Yet there is still none. SARS is a coronavirus, and after 17 years intense research and billions of dollars, there’s still no vaccine. Experts say chances of a COVID-19 vaccine are very low. What about treatment, treating people with a cure?
What are the government’s plans to consider using Ivermectin to treat people who have the virus? It’s been a hundred percent successful in laboratory tests at Monash University. Are there any plans to treat people with a proven drug, like the malaria drugs, including hydroxychloroquine, that reportedly is having wonderful results in New York.
In summary, Australians want to know, how long will I be working from home? Or not working, and stuck at home? When can we get back to work and school? When will we be safe from this virus? Politicians won’t solve the COVID-19 problem. Research and science will. Until a vaccine is found, and despite all that we are doing, COVID-19 is still out there, waiting for us.
From what I’ve seen of Australians behaving, as we have in recent weeks, it’s marvellous. And from what I’ve learned from successful strategies overseas, there is a reason for optimism, and real hope. We must, though, continue to be disciplined, and the government must base policies, strategies, and plans, on solid data, on empirical evidence. And share that data accurately and fully, and honestly, with the people.
When this is over, everyday Australians of all backgrounds expect to see, and deserve to be, a healthy, secure people, with a proud, independent Australia once more, that reflects our lifestyle, culture, values, freedoms, democracy, and potential. All people want is a fair go, and governance that we can trust to serve us and work for our country.
If you’re concerned about this issue, please contact your local member of parliament, and get your friends and relatives to contact your local member, and demand to get a fair dinkum explanation, because we all deserve to know.
I’ve spoken on your behalf in the Senate, and I’ve written to the prime minister twice, and will continue to hold the government accountable on your behalf.
