Stephen Andrew MP for Mirani has provided a pathway to opt out of the vax passport
The Commonwealth Government’s Vaccine Certificate system relies on information sharing agreements between the Commonwealth and the States. Because the Australian Immunisation Register is run by the Commonwealth, the sharing of data is essential for States to receive updates on its citizens vaccination status. Without this data, State Governments will not be able to know who is and who isn’t vaccinated for Covid-19.
Under Federal Privacy Law, Australians can ‘OPT OUT’ of allowing the government’s data service provider, Services Australia, to share their data with any third party – which includes the States and any private partners of government.
So if there are people out there who want to protect their right to privacy, then they can OPT OUT by completing the relevant ‘Services Australia’ form.
THE ‘OPT OUT’ FORM is AVAILABLE ON ‘SERVICES AUSTRALIA’ WEBSITE – (link below)
Unfortunately it doesn’t allow you to lodge ONLINE, so you need to print the form out, complete and sign it – then post to the following address:
Department of Human Services Australian Immunisation Register
PO Box 7852
CANBERRA BC ACT 2610
For more information Go to www.humanservices.gov.au/air
Please share this information so that everyone is given the chance to opt out of the system if they want to – we need to do it now though, while we still have the option.
The President of the Queensland Law Society (QLS), Elizabeth Shearer, has called on the Queensland Government to “reinstate checks and balances” and begin the process of restoring“ Rule of Law” in Queensland. Appearing before the ECG Committee last week, in relation to the further extension of emergency powers in Queensland, Ms Shearer said people’s fundamental human rights, such as “the right to freedom of movement, the right to enjoyment of property and the right to humane treatment in detention” had been “significantly” restricted under the current legislation.
“The usual system of checks and balances have been suspended,” she said. “Effectively, the RULE OF LAW has been suspended, because a range of decisions of Executive Government have been put beyond challenge.”
Ms Shearer called for the creation of a Parliamentary Committee that would have “oversight” powers over all future Covid-19 related legislation and Executive Action in Queensland. This Committee she said, “should be able to inquire into these matters without a specific referral from the government and should be able to receive submissions by the public”. Without the reinstatement of ‘checks and balances’, Ms Shearer said, the extension of the two-year period proposed by the new Bill, would be “inappropriate”.
President Shearer also highlighted another serious human rights issue around lawyers being prevented from visiting their clients in residential aged-care facilities, hospitals or disability accommodation.
Here is a link to an excerpt from Ms Shearer’s testimony.
** Also – Just a reminder to sign and share our Queensland Parliamentary Petition, if you haven’t already done so. Thank you.
Stephen Andrew statement on Freedom Marches
“FILTHY, DISGUSTING & SELFISH” – HOW AUSTRALIA’S ELITES RESPONDED TO YESTERDAY’S MASS FREEDOM MARCHES
On Saturday, hundreds of thousands of people sick to death of the border closures, harsh social restrictions, draconian lockdowns, and home confinement, took to the streets of our major cities, chanting “Freedom!”
The freedom marches were all peaceful and orderly, although there were a few clashes with police, which the media predictably focussed on again and again in their reporting on the event. The media outdid themselves with expressions of sanctimonious outrage. Propaganda was well to the fore with the arrest of a heavily tattooed man featured repeatedly in mainstream news images. That’s the kind of propaganda they know works best – no words necessary, just a few carefully chosen images of anyone in the crowd who looks scruffy or disreputable– it’s a tactic they use often to discredit those who oppose the elites’ agendas and narrative.
What they will never show you – and didn’t yesterday – is all the footage of ordinary Aussie families, tradies, middle- and low-income workers, young students, hard-working small business owners, a big contingent of people with disability and many others who showed up in their thousands to march across Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne and Canberra.
Instead, reports were filled with Australian elites accusing these ordinary Aussie battlers of being ‘filthy’, ‘selfish’ and ‘disgusting’. Millionaire celebrities joined the attack with a serious of self-righteous tweets, like that of Ben Lee, who was holed up at his Sydney mansion. Lee pompously complained that “while I’m obediently in lockdown with my family in Sydney trying to flatten a curve, you are protesting for your right to fire-twirl #Selfish!”.
Crackdown on freedom march ‘violators’
State leaders, meanwhile, were virtually salivating as they told us police had issued hundreds of fines and would spend many weeks combing through footage looking for more “violators” to fine.
The NSW Deputy Police Commissioner said police were forming a ‘strike force’ team to root out and punish all the “violent, filthy, risky” behaviour, while NSW Premier Berejiklian, said she was “absolutely disgusted” by the mass gatherings. She also urged anyone who recognized any of the marches to dob them in to police immediately.
From all sides, we heard calls for harsher penalties and restrictions, with one suggestion being strict curfews from 7pm to 7am. The hatred of ordinary people was palpable throughout.
That’s why Queenslanders need to send a strong message that Democracy and Freedom Still Matter, before it is too late. We have over 17,000 signatures but we need a lot more to try and force a debate on the floor of Parliament.
Please sign and KEEP SHARING as much as you can!
Stephen Andrew statement on sedation for vaccine
Why is the government talking about sedation for vaccine in connection with people with a disability? The Commonwealth Advisory Committee on the “Health Emergency Response to Coronavirus for People with Disability” have released the ‘Key Outcomes’ from their meeting on 14 July 2021. Right at the bottom, I found a sentence saying: The Advisory Committee will consider approaches to SEDATION or ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES to support Covid-19 vaccination at a future meeting. I went back over earlier Advisory Committee meeting minutes and quickly found a number of other mentions to “sedation” in the context of the vaccine roll-out.
At the 4 March 2021 meeting, the Committee recommended: “leveraging local health districts and other relationships in group homes to inform PLANNING AROUND SEDATION”. Under “Next Steps”, the Committee said: “The Department will liaise with state and territory governments about opportunities to work with local health districts in “administering the vaccine” and “ACQUIRING SEDATION”.
So who, exactly, does the Committee have in mind, when they talk about “sedation” and “alternative strategies”? It is a question every one of our ‘vulnerable’ groups, especially those living ‘in care’, need to know. Because, going by some of the recent Disability Royal Commission Testimony, the use of chemical or mechanical restraints by authorities cannot be ruled out. Not by a long shot.
According to testimony heard at the Disability Royal Commission earlier this year, a number of witnesses recounted instances where medical procedures were forced on them against their will, saying it had caused a lot of “trust” issues for them regarding the vaccine roll-out.
Queensland’s Public Guardian is quoted in the Commission’s interim report as saying there is still a lot of “unwarranted use” of chemical and mechanical restraints in disability care homes. One young woman told the commission how simply raising her voice was interpreted as ‘violence’ and used to justify ‘chemical restraint’. Others told of forced electric shock treatments and even forced ‘contraception’.
The PM needs to reassure these people that “informed consent”, given in writing, will be a prerequisite before any jab is ‘administered’, secondly, that every individual’s decision will be fully respected and finally, that the use of ‘sedation’ or any other form of coercion, will only be used in extreme cases and only after a Court Order authorising it, has been obtained.
Where is the Human Rights Commissioner on this issue?
FOOTNOTE:
Sadly, Australia’s most “fierce and passionate” disability advocate, Sue Salthouse, died in a tragic accident last year. If ever there was a time when ‘vulnerable’ groups like those living with a disability needed a powerful defender like Sue, that time is now. RIP.
Stephen Andrew – statement on Queensland’s COVID app
Here is some important information regarding the COVID-19 Check In Qld App
- The use of COVID-19 Check In Qld App is NOT MANDATORY for people entering business and or conducting business transactions. It is not compulsory for an individual to physically write their contact details on paper provided by a business. Check in Qld Privacy Policy – https://www.covid19.qld.gov.au/check-in-qld/privacy
- Providing your name and place of residence verbally is required.
- CONSENT – It is NOT MANDATORY for people to provide CONSENT for businesses to keep private information electronically.
- PRIVACY – Relevant Qld Department CHDE is not responsible for any loss as a result of your use, or your inability to use, Check in Qld. This includes any loss, damage, cost or expense, including loss of profits or income, loss or denial of opportunity, loss of use and loss of data.
- If you do not agree with the COVID-19 Check In Qld App Policy then do not use Check in QLD.
- The COVID-19 Check In Qld App is not compulsory or mandatory for human beings. However, providing your name and place of residence is required by law when a police officer is asking for your identity. You can provide this information verbally. Businesses are required to record and store that information electronically, however you may advise that you do not consent to this. Any coercion by an individual or business against a human being in order to force the usage of electronic devices and/or consent to having personal details recorded on an electronic device, is breaking our constitutional law. See Australian Privacy Act 1988 Sect. 94H, Australian Bio Security Act Section 60, Australian Bio Security Act Section 61.
Stephen Andrew statement on cash for influence
Here’s what the media won’t tell you about cash for influence. Today, thousands of wealthy Billionaires, Foundations, NGO lobby groups and Think Tanks are forming highly unethical financial “partnerships” with many of our most “trusted” news outlets. None more so than the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Through its Global Media Partnerships subsidiary, the Foundation “often directly subsidizes news reporting” on many of the topics dear to Gates’ heart, like public health, mass vaccination programs, climate change and population.
Miguel Castro, CEO of Global Media Partnerships said in 2018, “we invest a lot of time and effort into research”, especially on working out “what are the levers that can be pushed and pulled to affect change? Who are the right actors? What are the media consumption habits of the populations we are trying to impact?”
According to Columbia, out of nearly twenty thousand funding grants made by the Gates Foundation in 2019, more than $250 million went to journalism. As one journalist is quoted as saying: “When money is offered, we listen”. Recipients included major news outlets like Reuters, BBC, NBC, Al Jazeera, ProPublica, National Journal, The Guardian, The Conversation, Univision, Medium, the Financial Times, The Atlantic, the Texas Tribune, Gannett, Washington Monthly, Le Monde, the Centre for Investigative Reporting; the New York Times, the Pulitzer Centre on Crisis Reporting, the National Press Foundation, and the International Centre for Journalists; to name just a tiny few.
Here in Australia, Gates and dozens of other rich Foundations provide hundreds of millions in funding to newspapers and media organisations every year to push their agendas. As the Guardian says on its website, they are “finding that grantmakers and funders are becoming strategic in their approach, looking at how causes can align with their own impact goals, or the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)”.