BREAKING: How NSW Health's Return to School Plan Was Replaced by a Vaccination Mandate in August 2021
Newly released documents reveal an abrupt policy shift from a return to face-to-face teaching to a vaccination mandate, in a matter of weeks, without any health advice to justify the change.
A sweeping vaccine mandate for all NSW school staff, first announced on 27 August 2021, appears to have followed a sudden internal policy reversal, newly released government documents reveal.
The internal correspondence, recently obtained by an applicant under GIPA (GIPA-24-2249-LD, dated 20 February 2025), was provided to this Substack and sheds new light on how an apparent consensus on returning students to face-to-face learning in August 2021 was swiftly abandoned.
An email on 3 August 2021 from Paul Wood (Executive Director of the NSW Department of Education’s COVID-19 Taskforce) reveals that the then Secretary of the Department (Georgina Harrisson) had been consulting with the Secretary of NSW Health (Elizabeth Koff) and Dr. Kerry Chant (Chief Health Officer of NSW) planning for the return to school for HSC (Higher School Certificate) students:
The “comprehensive COVID Safe Plan” which could have “flexibly [been] applied based on . . . local circumstances”, planned for the return of students from 16 August 2021:
Importantly, there was no mention of mandatory staff COVID-19 “vaccination” and schools were even encouraged to prioritise the return to school for staff and Year 12 students to facilitate student wellbeing, completion of exams and access to support that could not be provided remotely.
Less than one hour later, following receipt of Wood’s email, Caroline Sharpe, Senior Medical Advisor from NSW Health, replied and added comments to this plan originally devised by Harrisson, Koff and Chant. In these comments, Sharpe reminded Wood that she would “need to speak with Kerry [Chant] regarding Health’s position” on issues like mandatory testing for students.
But, no mention was made of mandatory vaccination for staff, even in the section called “COVID Vaccinations and testing”:
The original plan’s emphasis was on physical distancing, reduced mingling, and supporting wellbeing through flexible timetables.
As shown, staff were simply reminded to “get a COVID-19 test”, and even then, only under very specific circumstances (if staff had symptoms or they were instructed to do so by public health).
By the 12 August, these plans were still in place with an updated “HSC Advice for All School Sectors”, which again reiterated “COVID-Safe” precautions:
As part of the plan, staff could even remove their masks to sing to others (albeit at the naturally occurring SARS CoV-2 elimination zone of five metres):
But again, no mention of mandatory staff vaccination.
Importantly, in the above document dated 12 August 2021, the HSC examinations were planned to proceed from 19 October 2021:
Yet, an undated document in the released records shows how these plans changed, recommending the HSC examinations to start 9 November 2021. We can infer, therefore, that this document must have been authored some time after the 12 August 2021 given this new recommendation.
In this undated document, staff were only “recommended to be fully vaccinated” — not compelled — and only those staff in the “areas of concern” would be required to provide evidence of their “full vaccination status” to supervise HSC examinations and for face-to-face learning:
As shown (top-right) in the above document, these guidelines were “approved by NSW Health”. This document must have been authored some time in the period between 12 and 26 August 2021 because just over two weeks later, on 27 August, the Department announced that all school and preschool staff would be required to be double vaccinated by 8 November:
“Vaccinations are a critical element of our plan — alongside mask wearing, reduced mingling between cohorts, and staggered start and finish times. . . . Mandatory double doses of vaccinations will be required for all public school and preschool staff from 8 November.”1
This was a mere 24 days that separated a planned return-to-school framework and one of the most consequential workforce directives in NSW Education history.
Nothing in the released documents shows what shifted the thinking.
The tranche of documents released contains no such evidence, no updated advice from Chant, and no transmission modelling that justified ditching the plan she had helped create.
This raises a serious question:
What happened in those 24 days?
If the health advice changed, it must be shown and should have been released to the applicant.
If it didn’t, the mandate was made without justification.
The documents released as part of the GIPA request do not explain what caused the withdrawal of support for the original plan by Chant, followed by the Department issuing the mandate.
The applicant who supplied the released records to this Substack has shared the “valid application” made to the NSW Department of Education as part of this GIPA request:
Our analysis of the documents shows there are very few documents which were:
Authored by NSW Health;
Relate to the 27 August 2021 announcement by Secretary Harrisson; and/or,
Relate to the role of COVID-19 vaccination in reducing transmission of the SARS CoV-2 virus.
The lack of relevant records is extremely important.
Given that the initial plan was for the return of Year 12 students on 16 August 2021, some health advice must have caused the abrupt shift in policy to a vaccination mandate such a short time later.
But, in the released records, nothing explains what caused this shift in policy.
Who changed this draft that planned for the return to face-to-face teaching with only the recommendation for testing and vaccination and why was it changed?
Despite being one of the most far-reaching employment directives in the Department’s history, the released documents suggest it was an improvised response once Dr. Chant (and perhaps others not identified in this release of documents) rescinded support for the detailed reopening strategy for schools.
Now, the standard explanation is predictable: “COVID worsened during that time.”
Perhaps.
But worsening case numbers alone do not constitute health advice.
If worsening case numbers prompted new health advice, then where was this health advice in the released records?
Where was the information showing that the vaccines substantially reduced transmission which would have prompted the mandate?
The Public Health Order which was signed only one month later following the 27 August 2021 mandate announcement, ambitiously claimed would the “vaccines” could reduce transmission:
And we all know how that turned out.
That such a consequential policy was decided in private, without scientific justification, raises serious questions about how this decision was made.
For all the public messaging about “following the health advice”, the documents now show that the advice itself shifted so abruptly that what emerges is a picture of concentrated decision-making involving so few individuals.
There was no health advice in the released records explaining the mandate.
We should all be concerned about how these opaque decisions were made during the pandemic.
If health advice justified this mandate, where is it?
If it didn’t exist, who made this decision and why?
This mandate upended thousands of careers, livelihoods and families and, as our investigation reveals, it was announced without evidence, explanation, or accountability.
The official record shows no modelling, no advice, no consultation. It was just a backroom reversal rubber-stamped by a handful of names.
Share this article and demand answers from your MP.
Make your own GIPA request.
Raise this in your workplace.
Don’t let this disappear down the memory hole.
Harrisson, G., “Preparing for a Safe Return to School”, 27 August 2021.
The tabled WA parliamentary documents in this article may interest you - the CHOs regularly met: https://vicparkpetition.substack.com/p/dr-andrew-robertson-presided-over
We will likely never see the documents where the real decisions were made or the actual chain-of-command - they are military and classified.
Keep up the stellar work.
Edit: also I had to 'login and subscribe' TWICE to like your article and post the comment...and Substack sent me a link via email to confirm! I wonder if there are some wonky settings on your account?
The military took over the whole shindig & the information would/could be in OUR National Cabinet Documents.