NEW Zealand’s former “boy Prime Minister” Chris Hipkins says he will give written responses to questions sent to him under phase two of the country’s Royal Commission of Inquiry into Covid 19 Lessons Learned.
Reality Check Radio journalist Peter Williams (inset above), says Hipkins seems decidedly unenthusiastic about appearing before the inquiry in person.
“But we don’t know what questions Hipkins has been asked by the Commissioners,” Williams said on his RCR program.
But he notes that the former Prime Minister, who took over the job from the “Covid Queen” Jacinda Ardern, has gone onto the front foot by claiming that the terms of reference for phase 2 of the inquiry have been “deliberately constructed to achieve a particular outcome, particularly around providing a platform for those who have conspiracy theorist views”.
Williams would like to ask Hipkins the following questions: When the former Labor Government approved the Pfizer vaccine in February 2021, were you as the Covid 19 Response Minister, aware that:
(1) the duration of vaccine protection was not established beyond two months?
(2) That there was limited evidence of protection against severe disease?
(3) That there was no long-term safety follow up information, and
(4) That prevention of disease transmission had not been established by that stage?
Williams goes on to point out that on February 10th, 2021, Hipkins was told in writing by NZ Director General of Health Ashley Bloomfield, that, quote: “We do not yet have conclusive evidence on the effectiveness of the Pfizer vaccine at preventing or reducing transmission to be confident of the public health value of this vaccination beyond the individual level”.
The statement continued: “So, unlike testing, which had a clear public health benefit, vaccination at this point in time is expected to reduce risk through a reduction in the likelihood of severity of disease and onward transmission. This may change as more evidence becomes available, however at this time mandatory vaccination is unlikely to be a justified limitation of the right to refuse medical treatment under Section 11 of the Bill of Rights Act.” Unquote.
“You see there is no conspiracy theory here, Mr Hipkins, these are facts,” says Williams. “The Medsafe group manager Chris James wrote to Pfizer Australia on January 28th, 2021, and said, quote: “Having reviewed the information supplied in your initial application and in your further responses, I am not satisfied that I should give my consent to the distribution of the product.” Unquote.
This is the same Pfizer product that state and federal health ministers and chief health officers across Australia assured the public was “safe and effective” and made mandatory in order for people to keep their jobs.
But New Zealand’s Medsafe body then passed the application on to another bureaucratic body called the Medicines Assessment Advisory Committee whose members remain anonymous to this day, and did not take on any further evaluation of testing of the Prizer product
And then, mysteriously, the anonymous members of the MACC wrote back to Medsafe on February 23rd, 2021, recommending that Medsafe “grant provisional consent to the distribution of the following medicine, Cominarty” (which is the Covid 19 MRNA vaccine).
Williams says it was only a week later that Bloomfield advised Hipkins that mandatory vaccination was unlikely to be justified under the Bill of Rights Act because there was just not enough information about either the safety or effectiveness of the vaccine.
“Yet the following May (only three months later) the Covid 19 Public Health Response (Vaccinations) Order 2021 came into force,” says Williams.
“Chris Hipkins and Jacinta Ardern knew that the Pfizer product was not going to make a lot of difference to the health of New Zealanders because Medsafe and the Director General of Health had already told them so.
“But they (like their Australian counterparts) still insisted on mandatory vaccinations if you wanted unfettered access to most aspects of life in New Zealand during 2021 and 2022. That’s why both Chris Hipkins and Jacinda Ardern need to appear at the Royal Commission.”
However, Ardern is overseas on a professorial junket at Harvard University and cannot be subpoenaed to appear at the inquiry. Williams wants to know why the inquiry didn’t subpoena her during her recent visit to the country.
The Royal Commission of Inquiry appointed by the New Zealand Government is looking at its official response to the COVID-19 pandemic in New Zealand. Its focus is to look at lessons learned from the Government response to prepare for future pandemics.
Cairns News asks: Why isn’t one being held in Australia?
