Dear Victoria University of Wellington,

To recap: -
1 VIC has apparently followed the central Government directives re the Traffic light regime
2 Government has now advised that the jab related traffic light requirement is to be dropped from 4/4/2022
3 VIC may well ignore the Government recommendations in #2 above so holding on to #1 instead.

This OIA, please provide the following: -

A. The Health and Safety Risk Assessment as completed that then resulted in the 31/1/2022 decision to deny the unjabbed access to campus, book shop and or the dormitories onsite?

B. Apparently a survey was carried out - a copy of all survey responses: - staff, students and or any others who responded.

C. Apparently you have relied upon MOH advice at some point/s, please provide a copy of all material obtained, received, communications to/from related to that.

D. Assuming that the above was "robustly" reviewed by person/s that are competent/experienced, please provide their review, report and supporting notes etc for or against the recommendation/s.

E. Since and so recently, the risk assessment as per A. above is being reviewed now, when available please provide a copy.

F. I then repeat in relation to E. items B. to D. and request that any new/additional/related data/documents etc related to E. obtained since A. was completed are also provided.

G. With respect to any/all persons reviewing, reported and advising, please detail the experience, qualifications, conflict of interests related to the subject matter and or recommendation/s made.

H. Has VIC completed a review of the effectiveness, efficiency, safety, test outcomes and or outcome/s achieved from the exclusion of the unjabbed on campus/Dormitories etc at anytime to date? If so then please supply the report/s and the data and supporting material etc, i.e. as per B, C, D and G above.

I. Please confirm if VIC and or any person related has obtained a confirmed list of contents of the jab?

J. Recently, there was a server outbreak in the campus dormitories (late Feb to mid Mar-2022). Please confirm the following: -
(a) How many jabbed person/s were onsite?
(b) How many unjabbed person/s were onsite?
(c) How many reported infection/s and or cases were reported daily, say for the period 20/2/2022 to date
(d) How many required medical attention?
(e) How many required hospitalisation?
(f) How many have been reinfected i.e. more than once?
(g) Please confirm that VIC, in its reports etc as per A. and E. is fully aware that the jab manufacturers have noted that clearly at all times that: -
(i) The jab testing is not completed, perhaps until 2023-2025?
(ii) That the jabbed are still able and are able to be infected after being jabbed?
(iii) That the jabbed can be infectious so passing on the Covid-19 virus to the jabbed or not?
(iv) Assuming the above is correct (because it is as per Zfizers website) what processes, prevention measures have been taken to protect the jabbed from the jabbed? What processes, prevention measures have been taken to protect the unjabbed from the jabbed? What processes, prevention measures have been taken to protect the jabbed from the unjabbed?
(v) That there are numerous rare diseases noted by Zfizer resulting from being jabbed. Have you factor this confirmed risk into your assessments and or reports?
(vi) What support, assistance, remediation has VIC put in place for students and or staff and or others onsite for the health risks mandated by VIC?
(vii) Does VIC have insurance, resources or otherwise to assure all that the measures taken, the consequences are fully covered and payable to those harmed? be that jabbed or not.

K. Has due and proper consideration been given to the Human Rights Act and any likely breach thereof as a consequence of these restrictions? That for example obviously includes segregation issues, obstruction of access to education and so on. Please provide any legal opinion, material or otherwise that robustly reviews this.

L. Has due and proper consideration of the Treaty of Waitangi (as signed), that the people of New Zealand (both natives and settlors) are to be treated equally under the Queens law i.e. New Zealand's law? Please provide any legal opinion, material or otherwise that robustly reviews this.

I look forward to your reply, in full within the 20 working day that statute provides.

Yours faithfully,

I Stevenson