How is the fair work commission independent when they follow whatever the government says? (Gerard Rennick)

The behaviour of the Fairwork Commissioners throughout Covid is another reason why we need an Independent Judicial Commission.

The judgements of the Fairwork Commissioners in regards to Covid mandates were quite frankly callous, uninformed and just plain wrong.

Take some of the downright stupid statements from Commissioner Colman in the Coopers Brewery case:

• “[39] First, it is a matter of public record and a notorious fact that ATAGI is an expert body whose role is to provide evidence-based advice on the administration of vaccines to the Commonwealth, and also to the general public. ATAGI’s fifteen members hold senior positions at major universities, hospitals and research institutions around the country. ATAGI’s status as an expert body that provides advice to government and the public cannot seriously be doubted and indeed the applicants did not seek to impugn that status.

Wrong. Colman’s job was to test ATAGI’s expertise and advice for accuracy. ATAGI provided no evidence based testing around the safety of the vaccine and ignored well known phenomenons such as original antigenic sin. To fail to do proper diligence shows Colman was negligent in his duty.

• “[40] Secondly, ATAGI has been continuously evaluating the epidemiological state of the country in respect to COVID-19 at its weekly meetings and updating the advice that it provides to the public on its website. Its advice has therefore remained current. I note that the formulation of ATAGI’s advice about the effect of vaccines on transmission of the virus changed over the relevant period. In updates from September to December 2021 ATAGI stated that vaccination was an intervention to ‘prevent infection, transmission and severe disease’. A statement on 24 December 2021 said that booster doses were ‘likely to increase protection against infection with the Omicron variant’. Then on 17 January 2022, an ATAGI update stated that vaccination ‘prevents serious disease and death, and reduces disease transmission’.”

Wrong. The fact that ATAGI kept changing its advice in such a short period of time as it become evident the vaccine didn’t work shows ATAGI had no idea of what it was doing.

• “[41] The fact that there may be views in the scientific community that differ from those of ATAGI about the effect of vaccines on transmission of the virus is neither surprising nor a reason to doubt the reliability of ATAGI’s advices.

Wrong. Either Colman’s mental capacity needs to be seriously questioned with this statement or his impartiality. If there are different scientific views to ATAGI then that is a reason to question ATAGIs advice, especially when their initial advice was shown to be incorrect and they kept changing it after evidence showed they were wrong. Experts know in advance what is going to happen, not after the horse has bolted.

You can read the rest of the findings yourself below but there is no way Commissioner Colman should be allowed to get away with this judgement.

It is seriously flawed and yet again the question needs to be asked - who will hold the judges to account.



The authorities at every level got things drastically wrong, and did not take in the dissenting evidence that clearly pointed out all the relevant problems. Almost no one along the chain seemed to comprehend some very BASIC things and just differed to other establishment authorities. Like their brains were switched off. It's their JOB to objectively consider various situations that come before them.

How hard is it to understand the inherent dangers of the mRNA tech, and that the virus posed little harm to those of good, or even average, health? How hard is it to understand that the jabs were never intended to stop the transmission of the virus - but they talk about intention of the shots to do just that? How hard is it to understand that the jabs being rolled out in Australia at the time were out of date when it came to the current strains of the virus, and were almost certainly useless? How hard was it to look at overseas data to see that the more jabs you got the more likely you'd end up in hospital - which showed they did not work and made things worse (NSW health records later confirmed this fact)? How hard is it to understand that coercing or tricking people into taking an experimental drug is a crime against humanity? The Fair Work Commissioners acted like Na zi judges approving a crime against humanity. Under International Law (ICCPR) they should also be held to account for their actions. Without accountability the crime of tricking and coercing people into take these harmful experimental shots will continue.

[Posted at the SpookyWeather2 blog, October 11, 2024.]