<!--The Official Report of Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) of the Legislative Council and the House of Assembly of the Parliament of South Australia are covered by parliamentary privilege. Republication by others is not afforded the same protection and may result in exposure to legal liability if the material is defamatory. You may copy and make use of excerpts of proceedings where (1) you attribute the Parliament as the source, (2) you assume the risk of liability if the manner of your use is defamatory, (3) you do not use the material for the purpose of advertising, satire or ridicule, or to misrepresent members of Parliament, and (4) your use of the extracts is fair, accurate and not misleading. Copyright in the Official Report of Parliamentary Debates is held by the Attorney-General of South Australia.-->
<hansard id="" tocId="" xml:lang="EN-AU" schemaVersion="4.0" xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="hansard_1_0.xsd" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2007/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML">
  <name>Legislative Council</name>
  <date date="2024-03-21T14:15:00+10:30" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>55</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>1</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>Legislative Council</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="5187" />
  <endPage num="5235" />
  <dateModified time="2024-03-22T15:24:58+10:30" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates</name>
      <text id="20240321b37e7e6d88564de5a0000059">
        <heading>COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="6929" referenceid="53ca1cd2e19847a59766892bec169fa3" kind="question">
        <name>The Hon. S.L. GAME</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <questions>
          <question date="2024-03-21T03:45:00+10:30">
            <name>COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2024-03-21T14:29:19+10:30" />
        <text id="20240321b37e7e6d88564de5a0000060">
          <timeStamp time="2024-03-21T14:29:19+10:30" />
          <by role="member" id="6929" referenceid="53ca1cd2e19847a59766892bec169fa3">The Hon. S.L. GAME (14:29):</by>  I seek leave to make a brief explanation before directing a question to the Attorney-General, representing the Minister for Health and Wellbeing, regarding COVID-19 vaccine mandates.</text>
        <text id="20240321b37e7e6d88564de5a0000061">Leave granted.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="6929" referenceid="53ca1cd2e19847a59766892bec169fa3" kind="question" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. S.L. GAME</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="20240321b37e7e6d88564de5a0000062">
          <by role="member" id="6929" referenceid="53ca1cd2e19847a59766892bec169fa3">The Hon. S.L. GAME:</by>  On 8 February, in this chamber, I voiced my concerns to the Attorney-General regarding COVID-19 vaccine mandates. My concerns were about the infringement of individual rights, specifically informed consent, referencing the Shepherd v The State of South Australia ruling, which supported Mr Shepherd, a victim of vaccine-related injuries.</text>
        <text id="20240321b37e7e6d88564de5a0000063">I asked the government about their plan for managing potential increases in COVID-19 mandate lawsuits and whether they recognise the issue of employees not being provided with full and informed consent. My concerns pertained to government guidelines relating to the COVID-19 vaccine mandates that allow employers to undermine employee rights, resulting in concerns for both employers and employees.</text>
        <text id="20240321b37e7e6d88564de5a0000064">As anticipated, on 8 February, 19 days following my initial query, news of another COVID lawsuit against the government surfaced. In that case the Supreme Court in Queensland ruled in favour of 86 parties representing police and ambulance officers challenging mandate legitimacy. The court cited the absence of full consent as a key determinant for their ruling, referring to Queensland's Human Rights Act 2019, a piece of legislation that unfortunately has no comparison in South Australia.</text>
        <text id="20240321b37e7e6d88564de5a0000065">My question to the Attorney-General is: does the minister acknowledge that in the absence of a human rights act in South Australia the government has enabled overreach on both their part and that of the employer?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="4697" referenceid="c1607c57d2294390bdc2b07c15f35010" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. K.J. MAHER</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Aboriginal Affairs</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Attorney-General</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Industrial Relations and Public Sector</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <startTime time="2024-03-21T14:30:55+10:30" />
        <text id="20240321b37e7e6d88564de5a0000066">
          <timeStamp time="2024-03-21T14:30:55+10:30" />
          <by role="member" id="4697" referenceid="c1607c57d2294390bdc2b07c15f35010">The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, Attorney-General, Minister for Industrial Relations and Public Sector) (14:30):</by>  I thank the honourable member for her question. I think I won't need to refer that. I can simply answer: no, I don't think there's been overreach. I know the Hon. Sarah Game has a fundamental difference of view both with this government and the former Liberal government when it comes to vaccinations. I think we, as the former Liberal government did, rely upon the best medical science and the best medical evidence and base our policies on that.</text>
        <text id="20240321b37e7e6d88564de5a0000067">The overwhelming good that vaccines have been shown to do since their introduction as a healthcare modality—they have saved thousands and thousands of lives, millions of lives. If there are a tiny percentage of adverse consequences, there are tribunals around the world that are designed for those, recognising the overwhelming good they do in saving people's lives. We have a fundamental difference of opinion with the Hon. Sarah Game, where both Liberal and Labor rely on scientific evidence.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>