Immunisation Policy

One of the main principles of the Rise Up Australia Party is to protect every individual’s right to freedom of speech, of thought, of action, and freedom of association.  We oppose unnecessary intervention by the state.  We do not accept that ‘it is the responsibility of the village to raise the child’.  We believe it is the right of every parent to decide the discipline, the education and the medical care their child will receive; therefore we advocate that the decision to immunise/vaccinate or not to immunise/vaccinate lies ultimately with the parents.

Increasingly, governments around the world are usurping parent’s rights. In Australia, on our governments websites immunisation is promoted; there is without exception, a disclaimer which wavers all responsibility should a child have a serious negative reaction to immunisation.  Our research has revealed that there are undisputed risks with vaccinations, and the decision to take that risk must lie with, the parent/s whose primary motivation is their child’s wellbeing.

The Rise Up Australia Party stands opposed to big business/drug companies usurping the rights of parents by putting pressure on governments to make the decision on their behalf, what is best for their children. The pharmaceutical industry is a trillion dollar business which stands to profit greatly from forced and subsidised immunisations.  Perhaps we could dare to suggest that the biggest risk from children not being immunised is to the pharmaceutical industries profits and certain political party’s sponsorship.

We do not support the belief that immunised children are at risk from unimmunised/unvaccinated children?  Is not this the reason for immunisation; to obtain protection from the environment that you are exposed to? How then can immunised children be at risk from unimmunised children if immunisations provide immunity?  You could argue that unimmunised children are at risk from others who have not been vaccinated and that is a fair call, however; there is much evidence to suggest that the unimmunised build up a greater resistance to their environment than do the children that have undergone immunisations?  (1)

Also it is well known and documented by pharmaceutical companies that a child is possibly still contagious for up to 10 days after being vaccinated. Therefore the immunised child/children can still pose a risk to others in our community.

Here with is an extract from the dialogue of a concerned member of our party.

“After much research I, S– C–, an enrolled nurse, decided against immunisation.  During my son’s primary school years there was an outbreak of mumps and he wasn’t immunised.  While many of his immunised peers succumbed to the disease, my son did not.  Although, he was exposed to the same risk, he no doubt developed immunity to mumps; he did not develop any symptoms presumably because his immune system wasn’t compromised by the immunisation itself. My son’s unimmunised state could not and did not affect his peers.” (2)

We acknowledge that the government has a duty of care to advocate vaccinations, but also as part of that duty of care, there is the responsibility to provide comprehensive documented information on the risks involved in vaccinating, versus the statistics and documented information which supports vaccinations, leaving it up to the informed parent to make the final decision, without rebuff.

The party realises that vaccination is a ‘hot’ topic due to Liberal Party policies trying to enforce it, and those actively opposed to such policy advocating for the rights of the individual to make choices.

We also recognise that as a responsible party we need to consider other factors when it comes to immunisation. Primarily this being, at all times what is in the best interest of the child; therefore we would need to consider:

  • The social circumstances and habitat in which the child exists.
  • The general health and wellbeing of the child and siblings
  • Family health and history regarding child raising abilities

Although we would not use any of the above to enforce vaccinations against a parents will, if parents were found by health authorities to be neglecting the wellbeing of their children, and because of their actions and circumstances a child was at risk of illness or circumstance threatening their life, then that child should be removed from the parent/s to a healthier environment. If in these circumstances the prescribed health authority felt that vaccination was in the child’s best interest, then the parent due to their lack of duty of care for their child would have to accept the decision of the health authority.

Our Stand:

1] The Rise Up Australia Party believes that unless special circumstances exist, it is the parents right to decide whether their child should be vaccinated.

2] Children that are not vaccinated are not putting vaccinated children at risk.

3] The parent that chooses not to vaccinate should not be punished by services or benefits being withheld from them; this would only serve to disadvantage the child.

4} The government should not intervene in the policies/decisions private schools, kindergartens or childcare centres make regarding whether they will, or will not  accept unvaccinated children.

5] Public schools, preschools, and childcare facilities will not differentiate between vaccinated and unvaccinated children.

6] A parent has the right to withdraw their child from a school they believe is putting their child’s health at risk; however that parent must insure that their child is receiving the required education stipulated by their state’s laws.

7] We would ensure that the public have access to informative literature, and comprehensive documented information on the risks involved in vaccinating, versus the statistics and documented information which supports vaccinations.

8] Free vaccinations will always be provided by the Government and promoted by them, (but not enforced) as part of the national health policy to effectively combat disease of epidemic nature.

We suggest Parents do their own research and are fully convinced in their own minds that the decision they make is for the best interests of their child/children. Below is a start in the journey of investigation.

(1)  Against:–Know-the-risks-and-failures-.aspx



(2) Name has been suppressed; however contact details may be available upon request, depending on the circumstances.

Back to Top