Foreign Minister Julie Bishop is expected to make a statement as early as tomorrow on the dispatch of Australian personnel to west Africa after the government was embarrassed on two fronts in relation to its response to the Ebola crisis.
This morning at the Senate Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade committee estimates hearing, Foreign Affairs officials admitted that the United States and the United Kingdom had approached Australia to provide both personnel and funding in relation to Ebola three weeks ago. The department also revealed that the US and European countries had advised they were happy to co-operate in the evacuation of any infected Australian personnel — the justification on which the government had been relying to do nothing but offer money for the crisis, having declared that sending Australian personnel to west Africa would be “irresponsible”.
Yesterday afternoon, the government was also embarrassed when the Chief Medical Officer of the Department of Health, the most senior Health official after the Health Secretary and the principal source of medical advice to the government, was forced to retract evidence given to the Senate Community Affairs Committee about the preparedness of Australian health teams to fight Ebola. After telling the committee Australian teams were untrained and would take two weeks of training to be able to deal effectively with the disease, Chris Baggoley tendered a “clarification” that contradicted his earlier evidence, advising he had just learnt that 20 healthcare workers had already been trained and were ready for deployment to deal with Ebola.
The remarkable error, from a senior official at estimates, for which bureaucrats intensively prepare, adds to the sense of chaos within the government around the issue, despite broad public support the government’s lack of interest in fighting Ebola offshore. Ebola features in the list of issues Immigration Minister Scott Morrison — who savaged Labor over its calls for the government to dispatch personnel last week — has made a grab for in a bid to elevate himself into a new Homeland Security-style super portfolio, and Health Minister Peter Dutton has been singly unable to successfully explain the government’s decision not to dispatch personnel.
The Prime Minister is reported as having discussed the Ebola effort with Barack Obama in a phone call overnight. Crikey understands that the government has now decided it will commit personnel, an announcement likely to be made by Julie Bishop, rather than Dutton. The government is expected to declare the commitment is only possible because of evacuation agreements secured by DFAT in recent days. If so, it’s an outcome that won’t do anything but strengthen perceptions Julie Bishop is one of the few competent ministers in a stumbling government.


15 thoughts on “Embarrassed government to change course on Ebola?”
Dogs breakfast
October 23, 2014 at 1:45 pm“The Department also revealed that the US and European countries had advised they were happy to co-operate in the evacuation of any infected Australian personnel …”
I look forward to Alan Jones and all the other shock jocks incessantly referring to members of the government as ‘liars’.
However they could all just claim incompetence, and using Occam’s Razor, one would have to side with them on that.
negativegearmiddleclasswelfarenow.com
October 23, 2014 at 1:53 pmObama sends troops while Cuba sends health
professionals. Abbott with Labor support will follow
US instructions.
Luke Hellboy
October 23, 2014 at 2:20 pmGiven most of the rest of this government’s policies, I think they are incapable of feeling embarrassment or shame.
klewso
October 23, 2014 at 2:48 pmAnother Bishop coo?
klewso
October 23, 2014 at 2:52 pmAnd Bagolley – maybe Ebola just isn’t a big enough thing to take an interest in what your own department is doing?
Secondus Tertius
October 23, 2014 at 3:00 pmYet another pandemic.
Some years ago when AIDS was all the rage, I looked for statistics of death rates in Africa that might show the increased mortality. Death rates declined right through.
Meanwhile how many millions die from influenza?
Karen
October 23, 2014 at 3:10 pmThank God.
Karen
October 23, 2014 at 3:26 pm@Secondus Tertius – what are you trying to say? No big deal if Ebola wipes out a few more Africans because the death rates in Africa overall are decreasing?
Ebola is a far deadlier disease than influenza and, unless tackled at the source, remains a global bio security threat, unlike influenza. And, yeah, Ebola is far more gruesome as well. Like, who wants to turn into pea soup. Show some compassion.
malcolm
October 23, 2014 at 5:21 pmActually Karen influenza is a global bio security threat far greater than Ebola ever will be. Yes if you contract Ebola you have a far higher chance of dying than if you contract Influenza but, as far as is known now Ebola is only passed from person to person by direct contact and sharing of bodily fluids in some way. Influenza’s main means of transmission is airborne and therefore spreads much more easily rapidly infecting vast numbers of people. There have been many incidences of influenza pandemics, the best known of which was the Spanish Flu pandemic of 1918 to 1919 which seriously disrupted international trade and killed far more people than the whole of World War One. Also influenza has been implicated in being the cause of some serious debilitating chronic neurological illnesses.
bushby jane
October 23, 2014 at 6:42 pmAwful how Abbott was so quick to go to war in Iraq that he nearly preempted the US in getting there, but he has been so reluctant to send Australians ‘in harm’s way’ to help with Ebola in Africa. You’ve got to be pleased that he chose not to become a priest!