7 Comments
author
Oct 6, 2023·edited Oct 10, 2023Author

Correction to the issue about one application for multiple staff, this isn’t correct according to the Wayback machine - only one App per staff member however one risk assessment plan for more than one staff member was acceptable for submission. We’d like to see copies of all those 11000-odd applications that were granted!

Expand full comment
Oct 6, 2023·edited Oct 6, 2023Liked by Ursula Edgington, PhD

Great article.

The correct action at the time would have been to not play their exemption games and walk off the job like the West Australians did in iron ore (click my photo).

Exemptions are like jabs - they play into the bankrupt system and are another form of compliance. McGowan said we would have mandates for 'years.' We called his bluff and they toppled in a few months. There were a few people that were so critical to the system that their absence put the entire system at risk. If 10 head surgeons in NZ did the same thing they would have had the same results.

Everyone then went back to work in the mines.

Expand full comment
Apr 3Liked by Ursula Edgington, PhD

I wouldn't trust these creatures as far as you could kick them. Hypothesis; were these exemptions ( rare as rocking horse shit) actually NOT given out to these mystery people but doled out to THEIR family members, friends, black market, etc. These people are slime & you could not dismiss any angle. The "reason" given that you need people to be available, just in case, contradicts the whole reasoning of their scam that it's the "scary virus" & the jab will save you. Doesn't pass the pub test & make no mistake they are & continue to be capable of anything.

Expand full comment
Oct 6, 2023Liked by Ursula Edgington, PhD

Hi Ursula. So I'm a tad confused by the data presented. IE Your original OIA request, which was broken down comes to circa 6,700 Health staff exemptions. The 2nd OIA request doesn't specifically request data on just Health staff though? I see in Guy's post that there's an assumption that all the (11,000) Severe Service Disruption exemptions will all be health-care related workers? Can't some of these also been teachers or port workers etc etc? I can't see the dissection in the OIA request or am I missing something here? I want to share some of this info as it directly impacts my family on two fronts, and I think it's vitally important, but I want to get the facts right first, thanks.

Expand full comment
author

If you check the FYI site link from the @NewZealandDoc OIA you’ll see they confirm its all health sector workers. I think the Ed workers were thrown back from the schools/institutions and GPs. More to come about this.

Expand full comment
Oct 6, 2023Liked by Ursula Edgington, PhD

There's another FIOA response (HNZ00027972) querying the industry category of the 11,005 that states, "All those who received 12A exemptions per the previous response (ref. HNZ00029378) were in health-related work."

Expand full comment
author

Yes, maybe ‘health-related’ but that in itself is ambiguous. We know now that many of the commercial sector ‘health (related) workers’ were exempted, thanks (probably) to their newly-minted CEO. See my ‘revolving doors’ post for more on that.

Expand full comment