Pandemic review shows royal commission is vital

Most Victorians are no doubt so sick of thinking about the pandemic that they only want to view it in the rearview mirror. That might, in part, explain why the many contentious decisions the Victorian government made over lockdowns and restrictions, including school closures, are barely making a mark during the state election campaign.

But, quite rightly, some are looking back to analyse and reflect on how Australia’s governments performed during that time. Coolly considering what went right and what went wrong are vital steps in ensuring that if something similar were to happen again, we would not repeat our errors.

Former top public servant Peter Shergold led an independent review of how Australia handled the COVID-19 pandemic.Credit: Wolter Peeters

Funded by three leading philanthropic groups, the first substantial review has been completed by a panel chaired by Peter Shergold, a former head of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet. His inquiry drew on 350 confidential submissions and consultations with health experts, public servants, economists and business and community groups.

First, the good news. It found that Australia “has much to be proud of” in the way it responded to the pandemic. Many lives were saved, particularly in the pre-vaccine environment. Much of that success the inquirers put down to advantages including an ability to close and enforce international borders, a strong economic and fiscal position and a citizenry that broadly trusted its governments.

There are, however, plenty of areas in which it found governments wanting. Decision-makers were forced to deal with unprecedented health, social, economic and humanitarian considerations quickly, with no road map to guide them. However, according to the report, politically driven health orders and excessive use of lockdowns failed to protect the old, disregarded the young and abandoned some of the nation’s most disadvantaged communities.

The authors saved some of their sharpest criticisms for policies towards schools and aged care homes. They state that while “it was sensible to close schools where there was an outbreak and when little was known about how the virus spread ... it was wrong to close entire school systems, particularly once new information indicated that schools were not high-transmission environments”.

“For children and parents (particularly women), we failed to get the balance right between protecting health and imposing long-term costs on education, mental health, the economy and workforce outcomes”.

On aged care homes, the report found that the “decision to restrict aged care residents from going to hospital when they contracted COVID-19 was a mistake that cost lives”, and that restrictions on family visits to aged care homes, long past the end of the outbreak, “caused unnecessary pain and distress”.

The report offers a range of recommendations on transparency, planning, avoiding overreach when making decisions, caring for the most vulnerable, and better balancing competing trade-offs. Australia is fortunate to have such a comprehensive evaluation conducted by an eminent panel. But The Age believes the Shergold review of this nation’s pandemic response is a good start rather than the final word.

Its findings underscore how important it is for the federal government to go further and conduct a royal commission on how the nation dealt with the pandemic. Only such an official inquiry would have the powers to demand evidence from governments and bureaucracies that would require them to reveal what truly happened, often behind closed doors, and bring their decision-making processes into the light.

In April, a Senate committee into COVID-19 chaired by Labor senator Katy Gallagher called for a royal commission into Australia’s handling of the crisis. Governments have in the past dodged calls for such an inquiry, saying you can’t scrutinise the nation’s response while still actively dealing with the pandemic.

With almost all restrictions now effectively lifted, that time has passed. It’s time for a proper, warts-and-all uncovering of the way states and the federal government acted. It could be painful, but it is utterly crucial, and must be started as soon as possible while memories remain fresh.

Michael Bachelard sends an exclusive newsletter to subscribers each week. Sign up to receive his Note from the Editor.