The DCC CEO is proposing to exclude unvaccinated people including Elected Representatives from all Council buildings in a draft proposal, and has asked for feedback which I have provided as below. Unless other Elected representatives have provided anonymous feedback, I am the only one to date to do so.
As the only Elected Representative at the DCC to publicly confirm that I am not yet prepared to submit to the latest vaccination for many reasons, primarily because our government is forcing it on us, I am being subject to all kind of suppression, and now with the threat of physical exclusion.
Auckland and Wellington Councils have excluded all unvaxed staff and Elected Representatives from Council buildings already.
My response to the “DCC draft Covid Protection (Vaccination) Policy” is as below.
“As with the common cold, there is always a risk of contracting or transmitting Covid variants.
Hence the phrase “require that anyone entering DCC premises is vaccinated, where there is risk of contracting and transmitting COVID-19 to others.” means a blanket ban on those who have not provided proof of vaccination. There is always a risk, as the NZ Ministry of Health document quoted below makes clear.
The latest MoH advice to Health Professionals of 19 Nov 2021 says amongst other things “The legislation will be very clear that access to essential services, including healthcare services, cannot be restricted based on vaccination status.”
With regard to those seeking medical consultation MoH advice also states “Vaccination status is one of many risk factors for infection and transmission. There is currently no evidence that the application of an alternative pathway based solely on vaccination status, or the routine incorporation of unvaccinated asymptomatic individuals into a high-risk pathway is justified.”
Further the MoH advice states “When the rate of community spread is zero or very low, the risk of transmission from any consultation will be very low, unless a person is known to be at higher risk because they are symptomatic or a close contact of a confirmed case. In addition, in this situation the difference in the risk of transmission between vaccinated and unvaccinated people will be negligible. When the prevalence of disease in the community is high, the risk of transmission from any individual is not negligible and is likely to warrant application of mitigations for all consultations.When there is high COVID-19 vaccine coverage (i.e., above 80 percent of eligible people are fully vaccinated), transmission is more likely to occur from a vaccinated than an unvaccinated individual.”
Referring to patient testing in a medical consultation setting the MoH advice is very clear “Asymptomatic infection is the issue, not the vaccination status of the patient.”
The DCC Policy is premature in advance of traffic lights detail from Government and in conflict with the latest MoH advice, and appears to foster misconceptions about transmission ex vaccinated or unvaccinated individuals.
The DCC Draft Protection Policy has an inappropriately added (VACCINATION) to the title indicating that (vaccination) is synonymous with ‘protection’, which is untrue.
The draft further claims that “The COVID-19 vaccines will help protect people by either preventing or reducing symptoms of COVID-19 in the person who has received the vaccine.” There is no evidence that the Pfizer Vaccine prevents symptoms or reduces rates of transmission. It merely reduces the intensity of some symptoms in some patients, and at a significantly lower rate than initially claimed.
Finally, there is the overarching concept of how deadly Covid 19 and its variants has been to date. The DCC Draft claims that “When elimination is not possible, they must reduce the risk so far as reasonably practicable.” Elimination has never been possible, and Government death-rate data shows little if any additional deaths in many western counties. Relevant data on very low death risk is at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3odjlEn8qXY
Cr. Lee Vandervis”