Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to make a contribution to this MPI debate. Apparently we're being political if we dare raise concerns about the so-called national plan. That plan for 80 per cent of the eligible population conveniently does not include children under the age of 16. There are a lot of human beings not included in the targets. When I asked the government today about children being included in the targets they conveniently didn't answer that question. They said, 'We're going to ATAGI and we're going to get vaccines out to children sometime in the future,' but they did not commit to include it in the plan. Let's be very clear: children continue to be at risk because an 80 per cent target that doesn't include those under 16 means that we are dealing with around 65 per cent of the population, and that's pretty scary, folks.

Don't accuse us of being political when we raise very genuine concerns. We too look at the science. We too look at the modelling. The Doherty institute's modelling is slightly out of step now with the current situation, which I think the government acknowledges. But there is also other modelling. ANU modelling came out today—the pre-published report. The Grattan Institute modelling clearly shows that young people—children, kids—need to be included in the targets. When are they going to be included? It is our job in this place to question government, hold them to account and raise these issues—the same as we have done with many other issues, such as JobKeeper and increasing the coronavirus supplement. We all acknowledge that the government did the right thing there. We raised those issues.