Remember when Susan Pearce, Secretary of NSW Health, said that the ICU data shows, “irrefutably,” that Covid vaccines limit the severity of illness with Covid?
The crazy thing is, this is OUR data!!! I can't quite pinpoint the moment the government stopped working for the people, but I'm guessing it was a while back.
Its not a point in time, because they never were working for you. They only say they do, to win your sanction. Once they have you, they can do as they please. You just didn't know it. This is why I don't vote. I know 'most people think voting gets you relatively better outcomes'. You have Trump vs Biden (Dementia Joe) as choices, and the US is the better political system. Its the wrong standard of value. Popularity is not a proxy for truth. We need a rational standard. We need 100% responsibility. We need anarcho-capitalism. If you think that's a 'recipe for chaos', that's because of your state vs religious education /indoctrination as a false dichotomy in state custodianship. Its loving you, even if you don't love it.
It was never your data. It was a lot of people's gullibility, or risk carried, simply to get things done.
We don't have a choice in Australia, voting is compulsory. Many of us now vote for the smaller "freedom-friendly" parties, for whatever it's worth (probably not much).
Unfortunately it was the freedom vote peeling away from Liberals that granted Dan Andrews another 4 years. We need to get smarter about strategically allocating votes.
The LNP offers no opposition to Labor/Greens... anywhere. They’re two heads of the same beast. (Sarah Hanson-Young (Greens Senator) recently referred to jab injuries as “rubbish”.) and Net-Zero or Net anything is industrial suicide. Policy without proof.
If Libs are the second worst option then yes. Otherwise, I don't know. I don't have answers, I can only really see what's not working. That's the frustration.
Glad to see someone else that votes like I do. I put the major party I dislike the most last and the other major party second last. I notice both major parties primary vote dropping. Looks like more people are catching on 👍
Under GIPA, the NSW State Govt can charge you for their time.
I put in a GIPA to NSW Dept of Transport, requesting the advice/emails etc relied upon for one of their bus mask policies (mask exempt + unvaxxed = banned from driving a public bus = I lose money). While I did not request it in my submission, on their response the NSW Info commissioner released the GIPA docs I requested for free, stating it was in the public interest to perceive democratic decision-making processes.
I can dig up the exact wording they used & relevant sections of GIPA. You could request release of the information in the public interest and perhaps not pay anything.
Alrighty Rebekah. Here's a few of the interesting parts of my email from my previous interactions with GIPA back in January of this year. The GIPA 2009 legislation is here, which is referenced throughout:
The following are portions of the email I received from Transport for NSW regarding my GIPA request for information from them.
-------------
4 Reasons for Decision
4.1 Under section 9(1) of the GIPA Act you have a legally enforceable right to access the requested information, unless there is an overriding public interest against its disclosure.
4.2 Under section 5 of the GIPA Act there is a presumption in favour of disclosing government information, unless there is an overriding public interest against its disclosure.
Public interest test
4.3 To decide whether or not there is an overriding public interest against disclosure of contained in the records identified in the Table at Part 3.3 above, I applied the public interest test, which is set out in section 13 of the GIPA Act.
4.4 I applied the public interest test by:
a. identifying any public interest considerations in favour of disclosure;
b. identifying any relevant public interest considerations against disclosure;
c. attributing weight to each consideration for and against disclosure; and
d. deciding where the balance between them lies.
Public interest considerations in favour of disclosure
4.5 Under section 12(1) of the GIPA Act, there is a general public interest in favour of disclosing government information. Section 12(2) of the GIPA Act sets out some examples of other public interest considerations in favour of disclosure. However, I am not limited to those considerations in deciding the application. I find the following considerations in favour of disclosure are relevant to the application:
• Disclosure of the information could reasonably be expected to promote open discussion of public affairs, enhance Government accountability or contribute to positive and informed debate on issues of public importance.
• Disclosure of the information could reasonably be expected to inform the public about the operations of agencies and, in particular, their policies and practices for dealing with members of the public.
Personal factors of the application
4.7 Under section 55 of the GIPA Act I can also take into account any personal factors of your application. I have considered:
• That you are a person engaged in the transport industry and have an interest in the policy.
Consultation
4.8 The information you requested includes some business information of third parties. Under section 54 of the GIPA Act, I was therefore required to consult with before releasing the information.
4.9 There were no objections to the release of the information.
Public interest considerations against disclosure
4.10 When applying the public interest test the only public interest considerations against disclosure that I can take into account are those set out in the table to section 14 of the GIPA Act.
4.11 I have identified the following consideration against disclosure as being relevant to the possibility of releasing some information within the scope of the application: Clause 4 of the Table to section 14 of the Act relevantly reads:
"4 Business interests of agencies and other persons
There is a public interest consideration against disclosure of information if disclosure of the information could reasonably be expected to have one or more of the following effects:
.......
(d) prejudice any person’s legitimate business, commercial, professional or financial interests"
4.13 This applies to communications TfNSW received from State Transit and Sydney Trains.
Balancing the public interest considerations
4.14 I reviewed the information and took into account that there were no objections to releasing the information that was subject to consultation.
4.15 I considered the relevant public interest considerations in favour of and against releasing the requested information.
4.16 On balance, I have decided that the public interest considerations in favour of releasing the information acquire more weight and that, consequently, there is not an overriding public interest against release. I have decided to release the information in full under section 58(1)(a).
...[snip]...
6 Processing Charges
6.1 Under section 64 of the GIPA Act we may require you to pay processing charges, at a rate of $30 per hour, for the time spent dealing with your access application. The $30 application fee counts as payment of one hour of the processing charges.
6.2 Processing the application occupied more than 5 hours of searching time by SER and dispatching information to this Unit. This Unit spent about 10 hours reviewing the information, excluding duplicates, identifying information for consultation, conducting consultation, and, preparing the decision for release.
6.3 In light of the fact that TfNSW communications regarding the policy is a significant issue for those engaged in the industry, and, that the final risk assessments may be of interest to the wider public, I have decided not to impose any additional processing charges for dealing
with your application.
-------------
So processing charges are stipulated as $30/hr under s.64 of the GIPA Act 2009. 50% reductions can be acquired under ss. 65 and 66. Section 65 has to do with the demonstration of financial hardship; section 66 is probably more applicable to your request so I will post it in full here as well:
GIPA Act 2009
66 Discounted processing charge—special public benefit
(1) An applicant is entitled to a 50% reduction in a processing charge imposed by an agency if the agency is satisfied that the information applied for is of special benefit to the public generally.
(2) If the information applied for was not publicly available at the time the application was received but the agency makes the information publicly available either before or within 3 working days after providing access to the applicant, the applicant is entitled to a full waiver of the processing charge imposed by the agency.
(3) The Information Commissioner may, for the assistance of agencies, publish guidelines about reductions in processing charges under this section.
It also seems to have been a sole decision of the officer dealing with my request not to collect any processing fee at all for the reasons cited above from my letter, so that option is available but I did not explicitly ask for it (they simply gave me the stuff for free *shrug*).
You might also want to consider exploring sections 6-8 of the GIPA Act 2009 as they refer to agencies making "open access information" freely available. I would enquire as to whether Susan Pearce's "irrefutable data" is "open access information" and attempt to acquire it for free that way.
Thanks Rebekah for all you're doing. To me, that reply is evidence that she never had that data,she obviously made it up. I'd like to invite you to one of our meetings, RDAactive Warwick. We'd love to hear you speak. Send me an email if interested 🙂 [email protected]
Amazing that they can break down cases of hospitalisations and deaths etc by vax & unvax, but they never present the ages of the vax vs unvax, even though they have age data for overall stats.
This irrefutable age data would likely show that the vax are suffering at much younger ages with significantly worse results, which is why that refuse to release it as it would destroy the narrative...
They own this corrupt and criminal system… how dare you question the Elite$ … vermin peasant .. away with you
Same in WA even from a higher in the system standpoint. Exit their system… it is the only way unless the military grow some.
View this email in your browser
From Hon Nick Goiran MLC
As promised, here is a final update on Petition no. 49 - State of Emergency Declarations which called for the health advice and modelling which informed the ‘state of emergency’ declarations to be made publicly available.
This petition, according to the Standing Committee on Environment and Public Affairs which is tasked with inquiring into all petitions, is finalised.
The most shocking aspect of this inquiry is the arrogant response from the Health Minister, Amber-Jade Sanderson, who rather than providing the information requested or clearly explaining why she cannot, states:
“The State Government’s management of the COVID-19 global pandemic continues to be world class. It is disappointing to receive a petition from members of the community and tabled by a Members (sic) of Parliament, that seek to undermine the Government’s efforts to keep Western Australians safe.”
In other words, how dare West Aussies ask the Government they elected, why it was necessary to shut down entire businesses and schools, and coerce people to be vaccinated!
Unfortunately, Premier McGowan appears to endorse his Health Minister’s arrogance and contempt, given his reply to the Committee that:
“The WA Government has also announced that an independent review of WA’s response and management of the COVID-19 pandemic will be commissioned...Any inquiries by the Standing Committee on Environment and Public Affairs (the Committee) would duplicate the work of the independent review.”
Don’t worry, nothing for Parliament to see here, according to the Premier.
One does wonder how ‘independent’ this review will be if the attitude of the Premier and his Health Minister are any guide.
With such ‘gold standard’ transparency, why would the people of W.A. be concerned?
It would be easy to be disheartened by this contemptuous response to Petition No.47.
However, I want to remind you about our great success with Petition No.57.
Petition Number 57 (No Further State of Emergency Declarations to be made), really put the pressure on the Premier.
That petition remains the third largest on record and resulted in the Premier announcing his Government would desist from renewing the “State of Emergency” declaration that had dragged on for more than two years.
However, given the attitude of the Premier and his senior ministers, we cannot afford to be complacent.
Case in point: The McGowan Labor Government recently bulldozed legislation through Parliament that includes extraordinary measures such as “COVID-19 officers” to be given the power to break into and enter your house or vehicle without a warrant!
This is why I am asking you to sign and share this third petition, calling for No more Emergency Powers without Oversight.
SIGN NOW
You have a right to have your voice heard and to be answered with respect.
It has become clear that this Government only starts to listen if more than 10,000 Western Australians officially petition Parliament.
We are more than 50% there already. With your help we can reach this target.
Yours in holding the Government to account,
Nick
P.S. If you are not sure if you have already signed this official petition, just give it a shot anyway as the system will alert you if you have already used your email address for this petition. Most importantly, can you share this update with one or two friends who share our concern about this Governments attitude and overreach?
Government never " worked" for the people. People ALWAYS paid for government to "serve" them. Hence, people had a perception that Governments worked for them. If you work in public service in Australia, pick up any HR policy and you will see who is in charge of you and who/what is being protected. HR policies serve to protect the Department. Not the tax payers. Not the public servants. They serve the interest of the Department = Bureaucracy
Here in Canada, B.C.'s health minister claimed the flu shots are "50%-70%" effective. Which probably means closer to 25%-35%. Which would make more sense because we never ever reached those levels of 'efficacy' for flu shots. Flu shots are worthless. Nothing more than gravy for pharma to keep cash flow going. In the U.S., White House Covid boss "Dr." Jha said boosters prevent death.
Here we are. Fighting disinformation straight from the state. This is our war.
Corruption with a Capital C... While the community still suffers from cognitive dissonance and are generally myoptic, I still feel that they are experiencing more truth about governments, the media, the judiciary, law enforcement, big business and the not so elite billionaires of the world. Sadly, our governments are even more corrupt than they already were prior to the past 3 years and so much ground needs to be made up for people in general to see how corrupt they actually are. Thanks for your part in shining the Light!! :-)
On my return from Coles I passed a F & V store. A man selecting some broad beans from a big box openly SNEEZED into them! A woman to his left pretended not to notice.
The crazy thing is, this is OUR data!!! I can't quite pinpoint the moment the government stopped working for the people, but I'm guessing it was a while back.
exactly!!!
Its not a point in time, because they never were working for you. They only say they do, to win your sanction. Once they have you, they can do as they please. You just didn't know it. This is why I don't vote. I know 'most people think voting gets you relatively better outcomes'. You have Trump vs Biden (Dementia Joe) as choices, and the US is the better political system. Its the wrong standard of value. Popularity is not a proxy for truth. We need a rational standard. We need 100% responsibility. We need anarcho-capitalism. If you think that's a 'recipe for chaos', that's because of your state vs religious education /indoctrination as a false dichotomy in state custodianship. Its loving you, even if you don't love it.
It was never your data. It was a lot of people's gullibility, or risk carried, simply to get things done.
We don't have a choice in Australia, voting is compulsory. Many of us now vote for the smaller "freedom-friendly" parties, for whatever it's worth (probably not much).
Unfortunately it was the freedom vote peeling away from Liberals that granted Dan Andrews another 4 years. We need to get smarter about strategically allocating votes.
The LNP offers no opposition to Labor/Greens... anywhere. They’re two heads of the same beast. (Sarah Hanson-Young (Greens Senator) recently referred to jab injuries as “rubbish”.) and Net-Zero or Net anything is industrial suicide. Policy without proof.
And the Federal election. What's the answer though? Continue to vote for the treacherous Libs?
If Libs are the second worst option then yes. Otherwise, I don't know. I don't have answers, I can only really see what's not working. That's the frustration.
Glad to see someone else that votes like I do. I put the major party I dislike the most last and the other major party second last. I notice both major parties primary vote dropping. Looks like more people are catching on 👍
Well, its possible, just not easy, if you have a registered address. I don't.
when government was corporatised under Fraser.
It's a merry dance, isn't it?! Check out my (un)success rate with UK agencies - https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/user/joel_smalley.
83! You have the patience of a saint. Saint Joel.
Is there a pattern to what they’re not giving you? Perhaps the unsuccessful requests are a clue into what they’re trying to hide.
Under GIPA, the NSW State Govt can charge you for their time.
I put in a GIPA to NSW Dept of Transport, requesting the advice/emails etc relied upon for one of their bus mask policies (mask exempt + unvaxxed = banned from driving a public bus = I lose money). While I did not request it in my submission, on their response the NSW Info commissioner released the GIPA docs I requested for free, stating it was in the public interest to perceive democratic decision-making processes.
I can dig up the exact wording they used & relevant sections of GIPA. You could request release of the information in the public interest and perhaps not pay anything.
Watch this space.
Please do JP I’d like to see it.
Alrighty Rebekah. Here's a few of the interesting parts of my email from my previous interactions with GIPA back in January of this year. The GIPA 2009 legislation is here, which is referenced throughout:
https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/whole/html/inforce/current/act-2009-052
The following are portions of the email I received from Transport for NSW regarding my GIPA request for information from them.
-------------
4 Reasons for Decision
4.1 Under section 9(1) of the GIPA Act you have a legally enforceable right to access the requested information, unless there is an overriding public interest against its disclosure.
4.2 Under section 5 of the GIPA Act there is a presumption in favour of disclosing government information, unless there is an overriding public interest against its disclosure.
Public interest test
4.3 To decide whether or not there is an overriding public interest against disclosure of contained in the records identified in the Table at Part 3.3 above, I applied the public interest test, which is set out in section 13 of the GIPA Act.
4.4 I applied the public interest test by:
a. identifying any public interest considerations in favour of disclosure;
b. identifying any relevant public interest considerations against disclosure;
c. attributing weight to each consideration for and against disclosure; and
d. deciding where the balance between them lies.
Public interest considerations in favour of disclosure
4.5 Under section 12(1) of the GIPA Act, there is a general public interest in favour of disclosing government information. Section 12(2) of the GIPA Act sets out some examples of other public interest considerations in favour of disclosure. However, I am not limited to those considerations in deciding the application. I find the following considerations in favour of disclosure are relevant to the application:
• Disclosure of the information could reasonably be expected to promote open discussion of public affairs, enhance Government accountability or contribute to positive and informed debate on issues of public importance.
• Disclosure of the information could reasonably be expected to inform the public about the operations of agencies and, in particular, their policies and practices for dealing with members of the public.
Personal factors of the application
4.7 Under section 55 of the GIPA Act I can also take into account any personal factors of your application. I have considered:
• That you are a person engaged in the transport industry and have an interest in the policy.
Consultation
4.8 The information you requested includes some business information of third parties. Under section 54 of the GIPA Act, I was therefore required to consult with before releasing the information.
4.9 There were no objections to the release of the information.
Public interest considerations against disclosure
4.10 When applying the public interest test the only public interest considerations against disclosure that I can take into account are those set out in the table to section 14 of the GIPA Act.
4.11 I have identified the following consideration against disclosure as being relevant to the possibility of releasing some information within the scope of the application: Clause 4 of the Table to section 14 of the Act relevantly reads:
"4 Business interests of agencies and other persons
There is a public interest consideration against disclosure of information if disclosure of the information could reasonably be expected to have one or more of the following effects:
.......
(d) prejudice any person’s legitimate business, commercial, professional or financial interests"
4.13 This applies to communications TfNSW received from State Transit and Sydney Trains.
Balancing the public interest considerations
4.14 I reviewed the information and took into account that there were no objections to releasing the information that was subject to consultation.
4.15 I considered the relevant public interest considerations in favour of and against releasing the requested information.
4.16 On balance, I have decided that the public interest considerations in favour of releasing the information acquire more weight and that, consequently, there is not an overriding public interest against release. I have decided to release the information in full under section 58(1)(a).
...[snip]...
6 Processing Charges
6.1 Under section 64 of the GIPA Act we may require you to pay processing charges, at a rate of $30 per hour, for the time spent dealing with your access application. The $30 application fee counts as payment of one hour of the processing charges.
6.2 Processing the application occupied more than 5 hours of searching time by SER and dispatching information to this Unit. This Unit spent about 10 hours reviewing the information, excluding duplicates, identifying information for consultation, conducting consultation, and, preparing the decision for release.
6.3 In light of the fact that TfNSW communications regarding the policy is a significant issue for those engaged in the industry, and, that the final risk assessments may be of interest to the wider public, I have decided not to impose any additional processing charges for dealing
with your application.
-------------
So processing charges are stipulated as $30/hr under s.64 of the GIPA Act 2009. 50% reductions can be acquired under ss. 65 and 66. Section 65 has to do with the demonstration of financial hardship; section 66 is probably more applicable to your request so I will post it in full here as well:
GIPA Act 2009
66 Discounted processing charge—special public benefit
(1) An applicant is entitled to a 50% reduction in a processing charge imposed by an agency if the agency is satisfied that the information applied for is of special benefit to the public generally.
(2) If the information applied for was not publicly available at the time the application was received but the agency makes the information publicly available either before or within 3 working days after providing access to the applicant, the applicant is entitled to a full waiver of the processing charge imposed by the agency.
(3) The Information Commissioner may, for the assistance of agencies, publish guidelines about reductions in processing charges under this section.
It also seems to have been a sole decision of the officer dealing with my request not to collect any processing fee at all for the reasons cited above from my letter, so that option is available but I did not explicitly ask for it (they simply gave me the stuff for free *shrug*).
You might also want to consider exploring sections 6-8 of the GIPA Act 2009 as they refer to agencies making "open access information" freely available. I would enquire as to whether Susan Pearce's "irrefutable data" is "open access information" and attempt to acquire it for free that way.
I hope this helps somewhat.
Thanks Rebekah for all you're doing. To me, that reply is evidence that she never had that data,she obviously made it up. I'd like to invite you to one of our meetings, RDAactive Warwick. We'd love to hear you speak. Send me an email if interested 🙂 [email protected]
Will email tomorrow 🙏
Amazing that they can break down cases of hospitalisations and deaths etc by vax & unvax, but they never present the ages of the vax vs unvax, even though they have age data for overall stats.
This irrefutable age data would likely show that the vax are suffering at much younger ages with significantly worse results, which is why that refuse to release it as it would destroy the narrative...
With $29.3b spent on Health in 2021-2022, how else do you expect Health to recoup monies (that are not appropriately accounted for) spent? https://www.audit.nsw.gov.au/our-work/reports/health-2022
it’s not working.
The games these people play. Excellent reply.
They own this corrupt and criminal system… how dare you question the Elite$ … vermin peasant .. away with you
Same in WA even from a higher in the system standpoint. Exit their system… it is the only way unless the military grow some.
View this email in your browser
From Hon Nick Goiran MLC
As promised, here is a final update on Petition no. 49 - State of Emergency Declarations which called for the health advice and modelling which informed the ‘state of emergency’ declarations to be made publicly available.
This petition, according to the Standing Committee on Environment and Public Affairs which is tasked with inquiring into all petitions, is finalised.
The most shocking aspect of this inquiry is the arrogant response from the Health Minister, Amber-Jade Sanderson, who rather than providing the information requested or clearly explaining why she cannot, states:
“The State Government’s management of the COVID-19 global pandemic continues to be world class. It is disappointing to receive a petition from members of the community and tabled by a Members (sic) of Parliament, that seek to undermine the Government’s efforts to keep Western Australians safe.”
In other words, how dare West Aussies ask the Government they elected, why it was necessary to shut down entire businesses and schools, and coerce people to be vaccinated!
Unfortunately, Premier McGowan appears to endorse his Health Minister’s arrogance and contempt, given his reply to the Committee that:
“The WA Government has also announced that an independent review of WA’s response and management of the COVID-19 pandemic will be commissioned...Any inquiries by the Standing Committee on Environment and Public Affairs (the Committee) would duplicate the work of the independent review.”
Don’t worry, nothing for Parliament to see here, according to the Premier.
One does wonder how ‘independent’ this review will be if the attitude of the Premier and his Health Minister are any guide.
With such ‘gold standard’ transparency, why would the people of W.A. be concerned?
It would be easy to be disheartened by this contemptuous response to Petition No.47.
However, I want to remind you about our great success with Petition No.57.
Petition Number 57 (No Further State of Emergency Declarations to be made), really put the pressure on the Premier.
That petition remains the third largest on record and resulted in the Premier announcing his Government would desist from renewing the “State of Emergency” declaration that had dragged on for more than two years.
However, given the attitude of the Premier and his senior ministers, we cannot afford to be complacent.
Case in point: The McGowan Labor Government recently bulldozed legislation through Parliament that includes extraordinary measures such as “COVID-19 officers” to be given the power to break into and enter your house or vehicle without a warrant!
This is why I am asking you to sign and share this third petition, calling for No more Emergency Powers without Oversight.
SIGN NOW
You have a right to have your voice heard and to be answered with respect.
It has become clear that this Government only starts to listen if more than 10,000 Western Australians officially petition Parliament.
We are more than 50% there already. With your help we can reach this target.
Yours in holding the Government to account,
Nick
P.S. If you are not sure if you have already signed this official petition, just give it a shot anyway as the system will alert you if you have already used your email address for this petition. Most importantly, can you share this update with one or two friends who share our concern about this Governments attitude and overreach?
SIGN THE PETITION TODAY
Facebook
Website
Copyright © 2022 Hon Nick Goiran MLC, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this because you are on the email list for communications from Hon Nick Goiran MLC, Member for the South Metropolitan Region.
Irrefutable...like Earth being the centre of the Universe.
Whatever happened to "public servants."
Pathetic pecksniffian bureaucratic suppurating carbuncles, a disgrace to humanity.
But then, the public reaps precisely what it sows.
Government never " worked" for the people. People ALWAYS paid for government to "serve" them. Hence, people had a perception that Governments worked for them. If you work in public service in Australia, pick up any HR policy and you will see who is in charge of you and who/what is being protected. HR policies serve to protect the Department. Not the tax payers. Not the public servants. They serve the interest of the Department = Bureaucracy
I like your capitalist efficiency Rebbie. Also, seeing a glimpse of the insanity from Down Under. Thank you.
haha thank you... truly insane down here, though many are sleepwalking through it...
What's Susie's phone number? I'll give her a call.
They're quadrupling down on the lies.
Here in Canada, B.C.'s health minister claimed the flu shots are "50%-70%" effective. Which probably means closer to 25%-35%. Which would make more sense because we never ever reached those levels of 'efficacy' for flu shots. Flu shots are worthless. Nothing more than gravy for pharma to keep cash flow going. In the U.S., White House Covid boss "Dr." Jha said boosters prevent death.
Here we are. Fighting disinformation straight from the state. This is our war.
Corruption with a Capital C... While the community still suffers from cognitive dissonance and are generally myoptic, I still feel that they are experiencing more truth about governments, the media, the judiciary, law enforcement, big business and the not so elite billionaires of the world. Sadly, our governments are even more corrupt than they already were prior to the past 3 years and so much ground needs to be made up for people in general to see how corrupt they actually are. Thanks for your part in shining the Light!! :-)
Off-topic goss:
On my return from Coles I passed a F & V store. A man selecting some broad beans from a big box openly SNEEZED into them! A woman to his left pretended not to notice.
Incredible, Barry.