A 'privatised' review of the COVID pandemic is not the answer

This review's lack of any investigatory powers like a royal commission to procure information means it will not be able to assess accurately some of the different responses to the pandemic like what medical evidence was used for some of the apparently absurd restrictions imposed on citizens, businesses and schools by some governments?

There are many legitimate concerns about Australia's response to the pandemic which ought to be investigated including: the vaccine rollout; the contrary nature of different state chief health officers' advice; border closures and lockdowns; school closures and education impacts; the different testing regimes; loss of civil liberties; and the economic impacts especially on small business.

However, any proper review ought to be done by an open, independent and expert public inquiry with statutory powers of investigation with an ability to call and cross-examine witnesses, public hearings, and supported by all governments. Such an inquiry properly constituted would also provide legal protection to witnesses, employ independent research, have wide ranging terms of reference based on extensive consultation and have expert and independent membership.

This review supported by some philanthropic groups, might be well-meaning, but is less than ideal and should not be accepted as being good enough. It is taking the privatisation of our public policy too far.

By contrast, Sweden has held a multi-tiered, independent inquiry supported by all parties while the British government has announced a genuine independent public inquiry chaired by a former senior judge to "report on preparations and the response to the pandemic" and provide advice on "lessons to be learned" for the future.

Australia deserves the same.