Monday, July 15, 2024
HomeCOVID-19You don't need a vaccine pass in NZ (but woe betide if you haven’t...

You don’t need a vaccine pass in NZ (but woe betide if you haven’t got one)


UPDATED vaccine passes are now available for download in New Zealand – the current ones expire on June 1 – and will be valid for six months.  

The legislation governing their use is curiously deceptive. Although the government claims vaccine passes are no longer needed, it has allowed businesses to mandate them for entry if they wish. Moreover, employers can legally require that their staff be fully vaccinated – and many do.  

The government also orders a number of its employees to be fully vaccinated, including medical professionals, health, disability, and care workers, prison staff, and border workers. Most universities still require staff and students to be fully vaccinated.  

Currently over 700,000 workers and students (about 20 per cent of the over-12 population) are still covered by some form of vaccination mandate. Many more are put under various kinds of pressure to comply. To maintain their status as vaccinated, by June 1 presumably they will all have to have completed boosters.  

The vaccination requirements for students are especially egregious. The incidence of vaccine-induced myocarditis – inflammation of the heart muscle – among the young is concerning, and the risk increases with each inoculation.  

As the government’s own Covid infection, hospitalisation, and death rates show that vaccination is not conferring any statistically significant protective effect, why are any vaccination mandates still in effect? 

During the pandemic a network of legislation, regulations, and financial support has evolved to encourage vaccination. As the risk from Covid has subsided and new studies have demonstrated that mRNA vaccination is ineffective and even harmful, the regulations have not been dismantled.  

The net effect is that there is now a regulatory framework which protects government, businesses, and medical professionals from liability if they harm the people they are supposed to be protecting.  

No one wishes to be responsible for any damage done. Moreover, so many people are involved, it is not all clear who you can complain to if you are affected or wish to opt out.  

The government happily claims it is no longer requiring vaccine passes, merely issuing them. Yet is still funding the media to promote mRNA vaccination and paying for saturation advertising affirming that it is safe. The government is also working hand in glove with social media companies to ensure that information about risks is removed.  

Medical professionals claim that vaccination is safe and effective by definition and they are only doing the job they were trained to do. Faced with this all court press, businesses requiring mandates argue that they are just being sensible. Vaccine manufacturers are not liable because they are protected contractually from blame.  

Such convoluted buck-passing is not rare in business. A few years ago, our photocopier had frequent breakdowns. My predecessor had been faced with the same situation and he had signed a piggy-back contract to acquire a replacement photocopier.  

The contract rolled up the financial obligations of the earlier contract with the costs associated with the new copier, but the replacement had quickly acquired similar deficiencies.  

I found that our charity was liable to fulfil financial obligations amounting to a whooping 120,000 dollars over the five-year term of the contract, yet the cost of a new copier was just 16,000 dollars.  

The problem was that the useful life of a busy photocopier was less than the five -year term of the contract, so inevitably you ended up with a worn-out copier you hadn’t yet paid for.  

There was the manufacturer who sold you the copier, the leaseholder (usually a bank) to whom you were legally required to make payments for five years, and the repairer who came if you called in a fault. All of whom passed the buck.  

I sorted it out by reading the small print – which required that repairs be made – taking legal advice, and stopping the payments.  

If you think about it, we are in much the same situation with vaccination. The first course didn’t work and caused problems, now we are being told to take a second course. Our payment is actually the very real increased risk we are being asked to shoulder. If you are being mandated or coerced to be boosted against your will, I suggest you hold out and take legal advice.  

Only 70 per cent of those eligible in New Zealand are boosted, and currently the rate of Covid hospitalisation of boosted individuals is higher than the unvaccinated.  

If you appreciated this article, perhaps you might consider making a donation to The Conservative Woman. Unlike most other websites, we receive no independent funding. Our editors are unpaid and work entirely voluntarily as do the majority of our contributors but there are inevitable costs associated with running a website. We depend on our readers to help us, either with regular or one-off payments. You can donate here. Thank you.
If you have not already signed up to a daily email alert of new articles please do so. It is here and free! Thank you.

Guy Hatchard
Guy Hatchard
Guy Hatchard PhD is a former senior manager at Genetic ID, a global food testing and certification company. He lives in New Zealand.

Sign up for TCW Daily

Each morning we send The ConWom Daily with links to our latest news. This is a free service and we will never share your details.