Posts

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.

This is the third in a series of letters between the Prime Minister and I in regards to COVID-19. You can read my first letter and the Prime Minister’s reply below.

Dear Mr Morrison 

RE: COVID-19 RECOVERY PLAN 

Thank you for your reply dated 14 April to my letter of 25 March 2020

Noting that the government has put Australia’s parliament – and therefore democracy – into hibernation, I now raise questions that would in normal circumstances be asked of Ministers in the Senate or of their departments in Canberra. 

Before doing so I acknowledge again that there is no manual on how to respond to the serious and dynamic health and security crisis now confronting all Australians. I note that although we disagree with some aspects of your government’s COVID-19 financial packages, in the interests of ensuring swift support to people whose lives have been jolted through loss of income we voted to support both packages in full. In doing so, and of necessity, we gave your government an open cheque. 

As a Senator it is my duty to ensure accountability. Firstly, I note that your government and Australians generally can claim success in avoiding the scenario of overwhelmed health care services. Secondly, experience here and overseas is now such that the questions below need to be asked on behalf of the constituents I serve. 

While I empathise with the government’s challenge, people need answers. People are feeling confused, afraid, concerned; some feel lost, grieving for those dying and for our country. Some feel angry. Many are still living in disbelief and plagued with uncertainty. 

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 and emotional? It is the people who have to repay these big bills of up to around $300 billion to which your government has committed Australian taxpayers. 

People have a right to know the facts, yet your discussion of modelling lacked specifics on the duration of isolation nor the plan and triggers for releasing people. 

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.

These are questions that I ask on behalf of our constituents: 

1. Modelling 

a) What delayed your government so long before publicly discussing modelling as attempted in your media conference on Tuesday 7 April 2020? 

b) Does your modelling, like that from NZ and the Imperial College of London, show that after the lockdown the virus will still exist in the community and that unrestrained release of people from isolation would lead to an epidemic, unless successful treatments or vaccines are released? 

c) Why did your government not release the modelling at your conference? 

d) Why did your government not discuss the underlying assumptions including infection, transmission and mortality rates? 

e) Why did your government not discuss the variables modelled because without that people can make no meaningful conclusions? 

f) Why did the modellers release the draft version separately from you and not release the model? 

g) Why did your government not disclose and discuss the modellers’ result and various alternative future scenarios that could be the basis for a national plan? 

h) Did your government use the modelling as the basis for its COVID-19 support packages legislation? 

2. National Plan 

a) What is the government’s plan for maintaining health and safety while restoring the economy, and what is the time frame? 

b) On what medical or scientific data do you repeatedly state that people will be isolated in hibernation for six months? 

c) Is the government considering the latest data and facts from nations like Taiwan, and to a lesser extent South Korea, that are highly successful in combatting COVID-19, and if so what is your government learning? 

d) Is your government considering adopting their strategy of isolating the sick and the vulnerable, combined with wider screening of elevated body temperature and more widespread testing of the population for the virus, so that instead of isolating healthy people and destroying livelihoods we can isolate the sick and the vulnerable thereby allowing the healthy to get back to work and restore our economy while protecting lives and livelihoods? 

e) Experts are saying the likelihood of a vaccine for COVID-19 is low because after 17 years no vaccine for SARS, a coronavirus, has been developed despite massive investment. Despite possibly one hundred years of effort no vaccine has been developed for the common cold, another coronavirus. What is your plan for releasing people from isolation before a vaccine is developed? 

f) What is the government’s plan for treatment of people with the virus? Is it considering using hydroxy-chloro-quine, reportedly showing positive results in New York, and Ivermectin being 100% effective in Monash University’s laboratory tests? 

g) What is the plan for mental health issues that experts warn will likely rise as the isolation continues? One of the worst things that can be done to a person is to take their job from them. Humanity needs security, connection, family, and friends. The government’s shutdown is a ticking time bomb. 

3. Data 

a) Some medical specialists have suggested COVID-19 attacks human vascular, blood circulation and oxygen absorption, while other experts claim it attacks the human respiratory system. What is the government’s conclusion? 

b) Are casualties and deaths from influenza and pneumonia, both here and overseas, being reported as being due to COVID-19? 

c) How many people die WITH the virus and how many die FROM the virus? In some nations is the number of deaths attributed to COVID-19 inflated? 

d) Data suggests Australia’s testing for the virus is narrowly focussed and well below the world’s best in terms of testing per capita. Why? 

e) Will your government establish a website at which it will openly post the scientific data and basis for its plan and allow public scrutiny – a cornerstone of science? Will it openly post the modelling on which it depends? 

f) To ensure a diversity of medical views and to prevent group-think, will your government establish a fully funded independent scientific team to question and hold accountable the government’s medical advisers? 

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 that reflects our lifestyle, culture, values, freedom, democracy and potential. 

All people want is a fair go and governance that we can all trust to work for our country. What many Australians want, looking beyond our health and financial safety, is to make sure that we leave COVID-19 behind us with the same, or more, freedoms and liberties that we had before. 

Yours Faithfully 

Malcolm Roberts

Senator for Queensland

200416-PM_ltr2

On 25 March I sent a letter to the PM in regards to COVID 19. You can read that here:

This is the reply I received from the Prime Minister.

Dear Senator

Thank you for your letter of 25 March 2020 about the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic.
The priority for the Commonwealth, State and Territory Governments is the health and wellbeing of Australians, their livelihoods, their jobs and ensuring that Australia is positioned to emerge strong and resilient.

We are working together as Australians do. We all have a part to play: employers, employees, governments, health workers and every one with social distancing.
From the earliest days, Australia has understood the seriousness of COVID-19.
We quickly established travel bans and scaled up screening on our borders. We evacuated Australians from virus hotspots and set up quarantine facilities.

We funded a $2.4 billion national health response plan to set up more than 100 pop-up clinics, and to provide extra support for those more at risk including the elderly, those with chronic conditions and Indigenous communities.

We have increased funding to public hospitals and aged care, boosted our National Medical Stockpile of essential medicines and masks, and have secured alternative supplies of vital personal protective equipment for our healthcare workers.
At the same time, we are taking action to keep Australians in jobs and businesses in business.

Already we have announced $320 billion in measures across the forward estimates, representing 16.4 per cent of annual GDP.

We are focusing these efforts on those in the frontline – those who will be feeling the first blows of the economic impacts of the coronavirus. Our measures support households including casuals and sole traders, retirees and those on income support. They include doubling the JobSeeker Payment, through the introduction of a temporary coronavirus supplement.

We are providing a historic wage subsidy to around 6 million workers who will receive a flat payment of $1,500 per fortnight through their employer, before tax. The $130 billion temporary JobKeeper Payment scheme will help businesses significantly impacted by COVID-19 with the costs of their employees’ wages so more Australians can retain their jobs and businesses and can restart quickly when the crisis is over. Further detail is available at the Treasury website (www.treasury.gov.au/coronavirus).

We are working to ensure Australia can bounce back stronger than ever once the virus has run its course. As our economy bounces back, so will our Budget.
We can take this action now because we have worked hard to bring the Budget back into balance, to maintain our AAA credit rating and work with State and Ten-itory Governments to provide a world-class health system.

As well, a National Cabinet has been formed with myself, Premiers and Chief Ministers. This is Australia’s first National Cabinet made up of all Australian governments.
I have also publicly reiterated the role that all Australians play. By practising social distancing, maintaining good hygiene practices and looking out for one another we will be able to limit to spread of the virus.

I trust this information will be of use to you.

Yours Sincerely

Scott Morrison

P.S. I strongly disagree with your assessment of the Government’s approach and the comparison made to Italy.  To the contrary our experience more closely follows that in South Korea.

I followed this response with a second letter, which you can read here:

Dear Prime Minister

RE: COVID-19

Your Treasury staff are commended for the Coronavirus legislation package your government presented to the Senate on Monday 23 March 2020. 

With the enormity of the challenge our country faces and the urgency to present your government’s COVID-19 package we anticipated written legislation may have had a few ragged edges yet our office is impressed with your product’s quality. 

Although we disagree with some aspects of your Coronavirus support package, in the interests of ensuring swift support to the people of Australia whose lives have been jolted through loss of income we voted to support it in full. 

We acknowledge that there is no manual on how to respond to the serious health and security crisis now confronting all Australians. The situation is dynamic and initially you needed to act promptly based on minimal data. 

Fourthly and most importantly, overseas experience has now produced a large and growing yet still incomplete body of data, evidence and experience. Countries like Italy, France, Spain and possibly the USA and UK are floundering with healthcare systems either overwhelmed or facing overwhelm. They seem to have focussed on balancing human health against economic impact and in doing so have seriously compromised both. 

Countries such as Italy aiming to mitigate the virus’ impact and to “flatten the curve” are floundering and their people dying needlessly in droves. 

It seems that South Korea started on Italy’s path to disaster yet reportedly quickly learned from initial experience. It instituted massive body temperature testing of its people as a front-line filter to testing for COVID-19 that in turn led to isolation of people with the virus. People vulnerable to the virus were isolated as well. That apparently meant that the bulk of South Korea’s workforce could return to work safely. Page 2 of 3 

As expected countries such as South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore that are focussing their efforts on ensuring people’s health and security are succeeding at protecting their people. A second benefit to protecting people is that through quickly getting people safely back to work these countries are suffering much less economic impact. 

Having taken some time to appreciate your government’s package and actions to date I am left wondering what strategy our country is following: the Italian and western strategy of mitigation or the South Korean and East Asian strategy of virus suppression

It seems that your government has chosen a path similar to that of Italy that will soon lead to our health system being overwhelmed and in turn possibly lead to tens of thousands of needless and otherwise avoidable Australian deaths. 

My experience across many fields shows accurate data is the key to making sound decisions and while we acknowledge the initial lack of data, we understand that data is now becoming available. 

My son is a layperson and without medical qualifications yet his basic research alerted me to the dangers we face. Although I was initially blasé, my conversations with him prodded me to investigate further. The emerging data then swung me into realising that my initial response was wrong and that we must prioritise public health and safety as our primary goal. 

I offer you the following articles that illustrate the concepts involved, the lessons that can be learned and provide empirical data. 

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-f4d3d9cd99ca

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-the-hammer-and-the-dance-be9337092b56

Further, I strongly support mobilising our defence forces, and especially its well-trained medics and relocatable hospitals to strengthen virus hot-spots with front-line health care and triage that could ease the coming pressure on hospital emergency departments and Intensive Care Units. 

Finally, I take this opportunity to stress that our country’s future depends on restoring our national productive capacity and economic resilience that have been weakened severely over the last three decades. A second unfortunate result of the political mantra preaching globalisation and interdependence since World War Two has been dependence on foreign nations and corporations. 

I believe that dependency and weakness need to be reversed. We must address this urgently and I am willing to assist in implementing policies based on solid data that will restore the fundamentals that people need to be productive, resilient and secure. 

We remain ready to assist in the immediate and medium terms to bring back Australia. 

Everyday Australians expect our governments to protect us and our economy.

I implore you to change strategy if required based on evaluating the emerging data and to make the hard and possibly initially unpopular decisions. If you do so I am confident that within months the people will appreciate what will come to be seen as you demonstrating strength, leadership and care. 

Yours Faithfully 

Malcolm Roberts

Senator for Queensland

200325-PM_ltr