Both parties must commit to an inquiry into the pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has figured only sporadically in the election campaign but for some Australian families it remains a major source of anxiety.

The disease has killed almost 8000 Australians and is now killing about 45 people a day. Thousands more are struggling with the effects of long COVID.

Many families are asking for answers. TheHeraldtoday reports on Ian and Penny Lees,whose daughter Katie died from an extremely rare blood clotting disorder after taking the AstraZeneca vaccine. The couple are not opposed to vaccines but they question why their daughter was not offered a different option and would like an inquiry into the management of the vaccine roll out.

Opposition Leader Anthony Albanese has promised to hold some sort of inquiry. “I can’t envisage a circumstance whereby you wouldn’t have a proper inquiry into the handling of the pandemic. The pandemic is still here now.” But he has not said what an inquiry would look like or when it would commence.

A report in April by the Senate select committee on COVID-19,however,was split on party lines on the issue. While the Labor majority called for an inquiry with broad terms of reference and royal commission powers,Coalition senators dissented.

They said that their Senate inquiry – which heard 679 witnesses at 56 public hearings and published more than 555 submissions – had already scrutinised the federal government more closely than state parliaments.

They said Labor had used the Senate inquiry as a vehicle for partisan attacks on the government,despite the generally successful response to the pandemic which saved tens of thousands of lives.

TheHerald understands some of the Coalition’s concerns. There is no point in a backward looking inquiry designed to score political points.

There have been plenty of those in the past,including some called by the Coalition such as the royal commission into trade unions which raked over Julia Gillard’s relationship to her boyfriend 15 years before she became prime minister.

Yet,given the continuing human and economic toll from the current pandemic and the need to prepare for either a more deadly variant of SARS-COV-2 or another highly contagious virus,Australia must hold a complete and independent inquiry into what happened.

Three leading philanthropic groups last month saidthey would fund a private six-month review led by former senior public servant Peter Shergold.

That report could play a role but what is needed is a royal commission modelled on the 2009 Victorian bushfires inquiry which was given the power and resources to make comprehensive findings without fear or favour.

It should look not just at the vaccine rollout but at co-ordination between state and federal agencies,lockdowns,quarantine rules,stranded Australians,the stockpile and procurement of medical equipment and testing kits and efforts to combat disinformation about the disease.

Some people will probably be embarrassed by the findings,but without such an inquiry,politicians will be fumbling in the dark. Albanese said on Wednesday he would seek briefings on “a national strategy” to reduce the death toll in his first week in office. That is welcome but Canberra public servants represent only one point of view.

If he is re-elected,Prime Minister Scott Morrison could also benefit from holding a proper inquiry. On Wednesday,he challenged Albanese to join him in pledging never to go back to the lockdowns of the past two years.

No one wants to go back to lockdowns but Morrison’s promise is empty posturing unless he explains what alternative he proposes if Australia faces the conditions it faced in March 2020.

Only a royal commission will give Australians confidence that we will be ready the next time disaster strikes.

Bevan Shields sends an exclusive newsletter to subscribers each week.Sign up to receive his Note from the Editor.

Since the Herald was first published in 1831,the editorial team has believed it important to express a considered view on the issues of the day for readers,always putting the public interest first.

Most Viewed in Politics