Australia's COVID-19 response frayed after early successes, damaging the public's trust and making it unlikely that lockdowns or other harsh restrictions will be tolerated again, a federal government review has found.
An independent inquiry into Australia's response to COVID-19 has released their findings in Canberra.
And that's where we'll leave it, with the government announcing $251m for the establishment of a national Centre for Disease Control to monitor and prepare for future epidemics and pandemics.
You can stay up to date with more news alerts on the ABC News app, or catch up with today's developments as they happened below.
The review hailed "courageous decisions" taken by leaders early in the pandemic, without which it concluded the pandemic death toll would have been several times larger, but said cracks started to emerge as the pandemic wore on and communication was often poor, undermining public confidence.
"Trust has also been eroded, and many of the measures taken during COVID-19 are unlikely to be accepted by the population again," the reviewers said.
Recommendations focused on better preparedness and co-ordination between levels of government, to improve readiness for future pandemics. Studies of the impact on children and on population-wide mental health were also recommended.
But the reviewers – senior public servant Robyn Kruk, epidemiologist Professor Catherine Bennett and economist Dr Angela Jackson – also offered wider commentary on the effectiveness of border closures, lockdowns, school closures, vaccine mandates and aged care strategies.
While they did not draw conclusions about the appropriateness of those measures, they did find that decision-makers often failed to give enough weight to the human rights implications of their decisions, and to communicate the evidence behind their decisions to the public.
"Governments could legitimately restrict certain human rights in implementing their response to COVID-19 … [But] some restrictions were poorly justified in extent and/or duration, disproportionate to the risk and inconsistently applied across the country," they said.
Health Minister Mark Butler welcomed the review, which he said did not seek to "scapegoat" any individuals but also "did not pull any punches".
"It is very human … to want to move on, and to avoid raking over what was a very distressing time for our community," Mr Butler said.
"But we have a responsibility … to build a high-level playbook for the next pandemic, because we know there will be a next pandemic.
He said cabinet had agreed on Monday to task the public service to consider how to action the recommendations.
He added the government would seek to have a new Centre for Disease Control, a national public health body which was a key Labor election promise, operational by January 2026.
The reviewers said Australia was "recognised globally" for elements of its public health response and that its rates of infection, hospitalisation and death were among the world's lowest in the first 18 months of the pandemic.
"We lost too many lives, but we also saved thousands, and this needs to be understood as we reflect."
But it found Australia's preparedness wanting, pointing in particular to a lack of prior collaboration across the federation to agree how a pandemic would be handled.
Setting those roles for next time — including responsibility for quarantine, medical stockpiling and border decisions — was a key recommendation.
So too was a better series of action plans, especially for vulnerable populations. Reviewers pointed to the new Centre for Disease Control as the place to co-ordinate these plans.
"One of the most common phrases we heard during the Inquiry was 'building the plane while it was flying,'" the reviewers said.
"There was little clarity as to roles and responsibilities, particularly between the Commonwealth and state and territory governments … [This] caused significant distress, delays and increased risk of harm in key areas of the pandemic response."
Loading
