In the latest edition of Politician Does Doublespeak, Finance Minister Senator Katy Gallagher says that Australia’s Covid vaccination policy is voluntary and that infringements on human rights were justified because of the government’s good intentions, even if they were completely wrong.

It is very important to understand what the word ‘voluntary’ means to Senator Gallagher, as she is currently working to legislate Digital ID, which she maintains will also be ‘voluntary.’

In the wake of this month’s Queensland Supreme Court ruling that Covid vaccine mandates for emergency workers were ‘unlawful’, Senator Gallagher answered questions on human rights and the Federal Government’s Covid policies in the Senate Chamber last week.

In her capacity representing the Prime Minister in the Chamber, Senator Gallagher said,

“The Government’s position on Covid-19 vaccinations is that it is voluntary, as are all vaccinations in Australia, although we do encourage and aim to vaccinate as many people as possible.”

Fact check: Under Australia’s No Jab, No Pay policy, family assistance payments are withheld from parents of children who are not vaccinated according to the National Immunisation Program schedule. Vaccination objection is not a valid exemption.

Additionally, in most states and territories, unvaccinated children cannot attend early education or care services.

‘Voluntary.’

And of course, under Covid vaccine mandates, unvaccinated Australians couldn’t work, couldn’t travel, couldn’t visit grandparents in aged care, couldn’t go to a gym, couldn’t sit in a restaurant, couldn’t attend their school ball.

‘Voluntary.’

Though most Covid vaccine mandates have now lapsed, there are still industries and workplaces requiring proof of vaccination.

Senator Gallagher continued,

“In times of emergency, a pandemic, a one in a hundred year pandemic, decisions that state governments and the Commonwealth Government took were difficult, and they balanced up, as is always the case with human rights, they balanced up a range of factors when making those decisions.”

Fact check: The Supreme Court ruled that the Queensland Police Service Covid vaccine mandates were ‘unlawful’ because the Police Commissioner Katrina Carroll didn’t balance up human rights against other factors. 

Justice Glenn Martin found that the Commissioner “did not consider the human rights ramifications” before issuing Covid workplace vaccination directives.

Neither did the Commissioner, nor the Director-General of Queensland Health at the time, John Wakefield, consider all the possible alternatives to their policies which infringed on human rights.

“Each was presented with a proposal for mandatory vaccination with little in the way of well-developed critiques of alternative means of reducing illness and infection,” stated Justice Martin in the decision.

Senator Gallagher continued,

“You know, that is always the case. Human rights are not absolute. They are seen in balance, and I think governments did what they believed was in the best interests of their communities of protecting Australia, whether it was the border closures, whether it was the vaccines, whether it was closing schools, whether it was having lockdowns.

“I think with the benefit of hindsight, people will always argue whether those decisions were right, but I think those decisions were made in the interests of the community.”

In other words, if there is an emergency, governments can ride roughshod over human rights, and as long as they say it’s for the good of the people, it doesn’t matter if the results are beneficial or catastrophic.

It is helpful to know that this is how Senator Gallagher views things, because she is heading up the push to legislate a national Digital ID program, which she says will be ‘voluntary.’

One can only imagine what cyber emergencies are around the corner to justify a ‘voluntary’ Digital ID program in which you will not be able to work, travel or socialise without ‘voluntarily’ opting in.

Not that an emergency is required. The Australian state, territory and federal governments already see fit to withhold benefits and access to services to drive ‘voluntary’ uptake of vaccination.