The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) claims there are no side effects from COVID Vaccines.  I’ve asked them multiple times to search their medical records database and report how many times the word “myocarditis” and other conditions have appeared over the years.

They tried telling me that conducting such a search wasn’t possible, however they seem to have forgotten that they advised they had done such a search, in a previous Question on Notice, proving it can be done.

The real issue is that they are unwilling to conduct a search for the subsequent years because they know the number of matches have increased over the years, which would force them to admit there is a problem.

Transcript

CHAIR: Welcome back. Senator Roberts.

Senator ROBERTS: Thank you for appearing again. CASA has again refused to provide, in SQ24-001131, the number of times myocarditis and other conditions are mentioned in your medical records system. What are
you hiding?

Ms Spence: Nothing. As we’ve explained before, the medical records don’t allow themselves to be interrogated in the way that you’ve asked. But, as we have indicated previously, we have no evidence or examples of any pilot who has been impacted by a COVID vaccination in a way that has meant they weren’t airworthy.

Senator ROBERTS: You don’t take the word of British courts and our own health authorities here?

Ms Spence: I’m simply explaining to you what’s in our system. We have no-one who’s reported having become unairworthy as a result of a COVID vaccination. Nothing has changed from when we provided evidence
to you on this basis in numerous estimates hearings.

Senator ROBERTS: Okay. We’ll come back to that. This is a simple matter. You simply search your database for the word myocarditis, and you give this committee the number of matches that are returned. Why do you
refuse to do that?

Ms Spence: Because, Senator, as I think—again—we’ve explained previously, if we were to do that, it wouldn’t necessarily align with any examples of myocarditis. I can’t explain it anymore than I have previously, and that Andreas Marcelja has and Kate Manderson has. We’ve got nothing more to add, I’m sorry, Senator.

Senator ROBERTS: Then you say it is an unreasonable diversion of resources. That’s freedom-ofinformation talk, and I don’t know if you realise this, but that excuse doesn’t fly in the Senate. You’re in parliament. How many hours did it take you to answer SQ23-003267, dated 13 February 2023?

Ms Spence: I’d have to take that on notice, Senator.

Senator ROBERTS: Okay. How many resources did it take you to answer that question?

Ms Spence: I’ll take that on notice, Senator.

Senator ROBERTS: Thank you. CASA seems to change between two different excuses on this issue—the same issue. Most recently you’ve said it’s too hard and voluminous. Before, you just said it wouldn’t be useful
without context. It seems like you can do the search; you just don’t want to. My question is: can you do this search for those words in your medical records system?

Ms Spence: Senator, the—

Senator ROBERTS: Yes or no?

Ms Spence: Yes.

Senator ROBERTS: Thank you. I can’t imagine that answer is no, because you’ve already done it. Thank you for confirming it. What specifically has changed since you answered SQ23-003267 in February 2023 that means it’s impossible for you to answer the same question in the same way in SQ24-001131?

Ms Spence: My recollection, Senator, was—the issue that we’ve got is that we could do a search and the word could come up. We’ve got no way, without significant resources, to actually determine how often that word is actually linked to someone who has experienced that condition. We’d have to review every time that the word came up to determine whether it’s actually linked to a specific example, sorry.

Senator ROBERTS: I’m concerned. You mean that you’re telling me that CASA won’t get off its backside and examine something unless the answer’s easy?

Ms Spence: No, Senator, that’s not what I said.

Senator ROBERTS: There’s a bit of work involved here. You’re responsible. You’re the sole person responsible for the safety of our commercial aviation system.

Ms Spence: And we put our resources where it makes the most difference.

Senator ROBERTS: I want the question answered. What specifically has changed—then we can come back to this hearing and talk about the context. Right now, I’m asking why the Senate shouldn’t refer you for contempt, for blatantly refusing to do something you can do—seemingly out of convenience or to try to hide the answer.

Ms Spence: Senator, I’ve got nothing further to add. I’m not trying to hide anything. I’m simply saying that to get the answer that you’re after would require us to go through what could be a voluminous number of examples of the word, with no way of being able to determine which one is actually related to a specific example of that, and that’s what we’ve said consistently throughout our appearances.

Senator ROBERTS: Can you just provide the answer to the question? The number of times—

Ms Spence: I’ll take that on notice, Senator.

Senator ROBERTS: Thank you. AstraZeneca has been withdrawn. AstraZeneca was found to be dangerous and not effective in the British court system. You refuse to give me, after many attempts, the name of any agency or person—expert—as to who you’ve based your assessment that vaccines were safe.

Ms Spence: Senator—

Senator ROBERTS: AstraZeneca has been withdrawn. What is CASA doing to test—

CHAIR: Senator Roberts, I’m going to let Ms Spence answer that, in all fairness. I’m going to—

Senator ROBERTS: I didn’t get to my question yet.

CHAIR: I think you said ‘you refused’ or something like that. You were going along ‘who was the expert that said’. And I remember sitting in this building when our Prime Minister was carried out on a sultan’s chair with every Premier because of AstraZeneca and all that sort of stuff. But I think you should at least allow Ms Spence just to answer that claim—

Senator ROBERTS: Fine, but I haven’t asked my question yet.

CHAIR: No, but you made a claim—an assertion. I do want to give her the chance, Senator Roberts. Thank you.

Ms Spence: Unfortunately, Senator, you could go through Hansard and find it as well. We have relied on the health experts—

Senator ROBERTS: Go through what?

Ms Spence: Sorry, Senator; if you want to follow up on issues around AstraZeneca, they should be referred to the health department, not the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.

Senator ROBERTS: I want to know what you’re doing to make sure that pilots who took AstraZeneca are not at risk.

Ms Spence: We have not seen any example of a pilot being incapacitated as a result of a COVID vaccination.

Senator ROBERTS: Again it seems to me that CASA is waiting for the evidence to jump into its face.

Ms Spence: I have nothing else to add, I’m sorry, Senator.

Senator ROBERTS: Have you checked?

Ms Spence: Before we came to Senate estimates, yes, I asked whether there had been any examples of a pilot coming up in our system as having been incapacitated as a result of a COVID vaccination, and the answer has not changed from the last time we appeared before this committee.

Senator ROBERTS: Specifically, AstraZeneca?

Ms Spence: No, Senator, all COVID vaccinations.

Senator ROBERTS: Would it be worth checking, because we now know that AstraZeneca is dangerous?

Ms Spence: Senator, it wouldn’t matter what vaccination they had. The question is: has any pilot been incapacitated as a result of a COVID vaccination? That would include AstraZeneca, as well as the other types of
vaccinations.

Senator ROBERTS: I get that, but do we need to remind you that some pilots are afraid to report their injuries?

Ms Spence: Senator, if you’ve got pilots who you know are incapacitated, or if pilots are approaching you who said they are incapacitated, as a result of a COVID vaccination, I can only encourage you to get them to report that. They can do it anonymously through the ATSB response, but I cannot act on what I have no knowledge of.