Questions & Answers: Forum on  No Jab No Pay No Play !
Channel: Freedom of Choice event
Date: 2016-06-18

Vaccination is a hot topic and a Q&A style discussion was filmed on October 15th 2015 to give people an  opportunity to express views and questions about the issue .  The forum was organised by a  UTS student as part of her Masters major film project who originally wanted to film a debate with those for and against vaccination.   Approximately 45 government and public health officials were invited to attend this forum to  discuss this new legislation but all of these experts declined to attend and are named in the video.
This forum looked at the No Jab No Pay policy that makes vaccination mandatory for parents/adolescents who wish to receive government welfare benefits and childcare assistance and looked at the question. : HAS THE SAFETY, EFFICACY AND NECESSITY OF VACCINES IN THE GOVERNMENT’S SCHEDULE BEEN CONCLUSIVELY DEMONSTRATED?  Dr Judy Wilyman  PhD did accept the invitation to present her case against the implementation of the No Jab No Pay policy and presented her research from her  PhD on the  Australian Government’s rationale for the expansion of the national vaccination program. 
In this video Dr Wilyman PhD  expresses concerns about the policy and the influence of lobby groups such as the SAVN ("Stop the Australian Vaccination Network" ) Australian Skeptics  on the vaccination debate in Australia. She demonstrates that this Social Services policy does not provide evidence that this policy is for a legitimate public health purpose, that it is proportionate to the risk of infectious diseases in Australia or that it is supported by public health legislation.
Dr Judy Wilyman also describes in the  video how the precautionary principle that is used to protect human and environmental health in government policy, has been reversed to protect industry interests in government policy and not the health of the community.  
According to Dr  Wilyman PhD  " This new Social Services legislation has removed the individual's right to conscientious objection to vaccination, that is, the personal, philosophical and religious right to refuse vaccines This policy has been implemented without any public debate of the limitations on human rights and the public 's voice has been removed from the debate by simplistic labels such as 'anti-vaxers' and 'conspiracy theories'