Desperate measures needed to amend pandemic laws

The state opposition has said it opposes the controversial pandemic legislation “with every bone in our body” and will make a desperate bid to change it.

The state opposition will attempt a desperate bid to move a number of amendments if proposed changes to pandemic legislation passes through parliament’s upper house next month.

Under the new legislation, which passed the Labor dominated lower house on Thursday evening, the premier would be given the power to make a pandemic declaration following consultation with the chief health officer, and extend it in three-month blocks for as long as he considered it necessary.

The state’s chief health officer would also be stripped of the ability to make special orders – like issuing mask mandates and isolation orders – with that power to be transferred to the health Minister.

David Davis, who leads the Liberal Party in the Legislative Council, said the Opposition would “oppose this legislation with every bone in our body”.

Thousands of protesters rallied in Melbourne on Saturday against the pandemic laws. Picture: NCA NewsWire/Sarah Matray

The Bill is expected to be pushed through the upper house with the support of Greens leader Samantha Ratnam, Animal Justice Party’s Andy Meddick and Reason Party leader Fiona Patten.

The three crossbench MPs, who were all involved in negotiations over the legislation, have been the subject of vile online abuse for their support for state of emergency extensions.

Mr Davis told the Sunday Herald Sun that his party – as a last resort – would attempt to make a number of amendments to the proposed laws.

Any orders made under the Bill would be made disallowable by the parliament, and the health advice – including all previous briefings from the health department – would also be tabled in parliament regularly.

They would also push to remove an “offensive provision that seeks to allow explicit discrimination”.

Concerns have been raised about the particular clause which refers to a person’s “attributes”.

The state government maintains a person’s rights would remain protected by the proposed legislation, and the clause in question relates purely to an individual’s health attributes – like vaccination status – rather than personal attributes like sexuality and gender.

Even if the amendments are successful, Mr Davis said his party would uphold their pledge to scrap the laws completely if elected to government at next year’s state election.

“There are so many parts of this legislation that are so flawed that it’s impossible to repair or to fix the deep problems with a few amendments,” he said.

“This is one of the most draconian Bills that I’ve seen in my time, and it’s a sign of a government that believes it is born to rule.

“I think it’s disgraceful that the parliamentary watchdog is asleep on the job here.”

Mr Davis, who is a former health Minister, said he understood the need to implement public health orders.

“But without checks and balances, without transparency, without proportionality, these are very, very dangerous powers,” he said.

Health Minister Martin Foley has previously slammed the opposition’s repeated attacks towards the Bill, stating the legislation was exactly what they had called for in early October.

“Their contributions are increasingly hysterical and not informed by the evidence,” he said.