Ruby Princess police investigation

[Pushka]

16 minutes ago, Cruisegroover said:

I am listening to the live stream and boy is NSW Health getting hammered and there are literally tears. The transcript is going to be very interesting reading. So far Ruby seems to have done everything as asked but so much more to come. The Commissioner is not mucking around. They must be in a government building as at one point there was a lot of noise from drilling somewhere and he said get this stopped saying "I will not have this hearing obstructed, particularly by the same government that called it."

😀  Goodness, who is the Commisioner and what is their background? Sounds like they have complete independence. A good thing for all. 

[Blackduck59]

33 minutes ago, Cruisegroover said:

I am listening to the live stream and boy is NSW Health getting hammered and there are literally tears. The transcript is going to be very interesting reading. So far Ruby seems to have done everything as asked but so much more to come. The Commissioner is not mucking around. They must be in a government building as at one point there was a lot of noise from drilling somewhere and he said get this stopped saying "I will not have this hearing obstructed, particularly by the same government that called it."

 

Wow, I take it this is the what we here in Canada would call a "Royal Commission" as opposed to the NSWP investigation that so many think is biased? I have said so many times and believe that people on both sides of this argument want is the truth. Follow the evidence to the conclusion which is the truth.

We all have our opinions I defend mine robustly but I do listen and respect other opinions (even if I don't agree) but there is only one truth; let's hope that comes out and proper lessons can be learned.

[Aus Traveller]

41 minutes ago, Blackduck59 said:

 

Wow, I take it this is the what we here in Canada would call a "Royal Commission" as opposed to the NSWP investigation that so many think is biased? I have said so many times and believe that people on both sides of this argument want is the truth. Follow the evidence to the conclusion which is the truth.

We all have our opinions I defend mine robustly but I do listen and respect other opinions (even if I don't agree) but there is only one truth; let's hope that comes out and proper lessons can be learned.

We also have Royal Commissions but this inquiry is not as 'high-powered'. Let's hope it gets to the truth.

[Porky55]

2 hours ago, Blackduck59 said:

 

Wow, I take it this is the what we here in Canada would call a "Royal Commission" as opposed to the NSWP investigation that so many think is biased? I have said so many times and believe that people on both sides of this argument want is the truth. Follow the evidence to the conclusion which is the truth.

We all have our opinions I defend mine robustly but I do listen and respect other opinions (even if I don't agree) but there is only one truth; let's hope that comes out and proper lessons can be learned.

Blackduck59 you can follow it yourself if you like:

https://www.rubyprincessinquiry.nsw.gov.au/hearings/
 

[christodan]

Well well well. Just watched the 6 o'clock news.  Strong words indeed by the investigator. NSW Health's  actions have been described as a 'reprehensible  shortcoming'. And he even said he was concerned that the NSW Health worker he was interviewing was being "misleading". Not sure what he was exactly referring to.

I think all those class actions against Princess will fail now.

[Aus Traveller]

The NSW Health Department made the decision at 4.30pm on the 18th March that the Ruby Princess was 'low risk' so it could dock and disembark passengers as usual. The decision was made in normal working hours. I wonder whether they didn't want to pay overtime to have staff at the dock early the next morning.

 

I thought it was 'red hot' when the department complained that they made the decision on information that wasn't up to date (at the time of arrival of the ship). The rate of infection reported to the department on the last afternoon was .95 (or thereabouts), therefore less than the 1% that would raise the 'low risk' level to the next level. They have to be kidding!! If the department wanted an up-to-date report on the illness on the ship, they should have asked for a report around midnight or when the ship was tying up around 2am. But no, that would mean someone in the department would have to work during the night.

 

The next point is that later on the day the ship docked (19th March), the department changed the protocol for arriving ships. Now they seem to be blaming officers on the Ruby Princess for not being aware of the new protocol that hadn't even come into force when they arrived and, most probably, had not even been announced. Issues surrounding COVID were changing very rapidly.

 

As the mishandling of the Ruby Princess by the NSW Health department becomes public knowledge in this hearing, the Police won't be able to ignore it in their enquiry.

[DiamondFour]

54 minutes ago, Aus Traveller said:

The NSW Health Department made the decision at 4.30pm on the 18th March that the Ruby Princess was 'low risk' so it could dock and disembark passengers as usual. The decision was made in normal working hours. I wonder whether they didn't want to pay overtime to have staff at the dock early the next morning.

 

I thought it was 'red hot' when the department complained that they made the decision on information that wasn't up to date (at the time of arrival of the ship). The rate of infection reported to the department on the last afternoon was .95 (or thereabouts), therefore less than the 1% that would raise the 'low risk' level to the next level. They have to be kidding!! If the department wanted an up-to-date report on the illness on the ship, they should have asked for a report around midnight or when the ship was tying up around 2am. But no, that would mean someone in the department would have to work during the night.

 

The next point is that later on the day the ship docked (19th March), the department changed the protocol for arriving ships. Now they seem to be blaming officers on the Ruby Princess for not being aware of the new protocol that hadn't even come into force when they arrived and, most probably, had not even been announced. Issues surrounding COVID were changing very rapidly.

 

As the mishandling of the Ruby Princess by the NSW Health department becomes public knowledge in this hearing, the Police won't be able to ignore it in their enquiry.

The ship docked on a Sunday. No worker would want to waste their weekend dealing with that ship so they cleared it.

 

What were they going to do if they kept them on and discovered the shock results??? How much money would that have cost the state of NSW if they had to deal with a ship infected with the chinachinaVirus?

[possum52]

6 minutes ago, DiamondFour said:

The ship docked on a Sunday. No worker would want to waste their weekend dealing with that ship so they cleared it.

 

What were they going to do if they kept them on and discovered the shock results??? How much money would that have cost the state of NSW if they had to deal with a ship infected with the chinachinaVirus?

Wasn’t it Thursday 19th in the early hours the Ruby Princess arrived? She sailed from Sydney on Sunday the 8th. 

Edited May 5, 2020 by possum52

[Cruisegroover]

The inquiry was also told the following by the witness

 

Later in the day it was revealed that the results of the Covid-19 swabs that were eventually taken were delayed because the laboratory forgot to put them into the system as a priority.

Counsel told the inquiry swabs were collected at 3am on 19 March and taken to a laboratory for testing. Usually, any swabs that arrived in the lab by 10am would have results back by 4pm. However, the swabs had not been processed by 4pm that day.

 

The witness said she understood “the technician didn’t realise they were cruise ship samples, and they were put into the queue as per normal, and were not tested as priority”.

 

Also of note during the Senate Inquiry into COVID-19 in Canberra this afternoon

 

Federal officials declined to commit to full cooperation with any future summons to appear before the NSW inquiry.

 

When Mr Walker led the South Australian Murray Darling Basin royal commission, the commonwealth went to the high court to resist subpoenas to call federal public servants.

The secretary of the Department of Home Affairs, Michael Pezzullo, said he expected the commonwealth’s position “wouldn’t change from issue to issue” as there were long-standing points of principle and jurisdiction, but he said his view was that “the better course” would be to engage cooperatively.

 

[BRANDEE]

Regarding the inquiry:  Ms. Ressler of NSW Health said on Mar 8th all other disembarking passengers who were not being tested by the NSW Health risk assessment team were able to leave.  Only the 170 who had visited the medical facility (ended up being 300 the morning of disembarkation) stayed until test results came back.

So if the NSW Health Risk Assessment team had come on board on Mar 19 to test the 102 passengers..all the other passengers would have been let go anyway.  Considering the claim that 600  sick Aussies  got off.. there still would have been spreading of Covid at airport, train, bus, home...I agree with Commissoner that this seems a"dumb" procedure..  my words not his.

 

Would have appreciated a question to NSW Health, why embarking passengers on Mar 8 were not temperature screened.  Also got a new catch phrase..Explore your memory!  Going to use that instead of ..do you remember?

 

So far..looks like big holes in NSW Health policies and  procedures.

 

Also the realization that  b2bers  who stayed on for the Mar 8th cruise did not get screened..so they could have been spreading it too.   

 

 

[Scromes]

7 hours ago, christodan said:

Well well well. Just watched the 6 o'clock news.  Strong words indeed by the investigator. NSW Health's  actions have been described as a 'reprehensible  shortcoming'. And he even said he was concerned that the NSW Health worker he was interviewing was being "misleading". Not sure what he was exactly referring to.

I think all those class actions against Princess will fail now.

 

Really?

 

Well we already knew from the transcript of the doctor's testimony that she failed to send the final log before disembarkation and didn't send it until the following day after NSW Health queried why some people that were swabbed weren't on the log at all.

 

Now according to ABC news on TV earlier tonight it would appear NSW Health assessed Ruby as low risk based on the old illness log which had lower figures than the actual figures whereas if the correct figures were reported it would have been in the medium risk category which would have mandated health officers boarding the ship to conduct extensive screening.

Edited May 5, 2020 by Scromes

[BRANDEE]

41 minutes ago, Scromes said:

 

Really?

 

Well we already knew from the transcript of the doctor's testimony that she failed to send the final log before disembarkation and didn't send it until the following day after NSW Health queried why some people that were swabbed weren't on the log at all.

 

Now according to ABC news on TV earlier tonight it would appear NSW Health assessed Ruby as low risk based on the old illness log which had lower figures than the actual figures whereas if the correct figures were reported it would have been in the medium risk category which would have mandated health officers boarding the ship to conduct extensive screening.

The biggest mistake is allowing all other passengers who are not being screened to disembark before test results are back..that is what they did on previous cruise .

 

Procedure is for the doctor to send in "sick" list by 9am the day before the ship docks and that is how they asses if they board.  Obviously, this is normal procedure for all in coming ships in Sydney harbor.  

 

The prior cruise had 170 on list by 9am the day before..when NSW came on board for 170 , more than 1%  so a medium risk, it became 300 when the risk assessment came on board...That was a big increase, but not unusual according to Ms Ressler for a reporting on a ship.  So when Mar 8 sailing records came on Mar 18th with 102..the assumption that a few more would show up the next day.  Only 1 more would have given the 1% number to go from low to medium risk.  They did not need a new updated list..do not blame the cruise doctor..the NSW heath risk team did not do their job. 

 

Anyway..the rest of the sick Aussies would have been let off ,anyway, to go home even without results..again..just like the cruise before.

 

When asked if it would have  been prudent to keep everyone on board until tests came back..considering the covid spreading everywhere, Ressler's answer was we wanted then off the ship and home..it was the last cruise and a very hard week and we would have to find hotels for everyone and other ship's..Not her exact words but paraphrasing...I watched it all. 

 

The swabs from the sick passengers were not even labelled ASAP..really.  I sat at the airport over 8 hours!!

 

I said it the moment I got off the ship at 9:15 on Mar 19..they want us off this ship and out of the country. We were rushed like never before  (30+ cruises).

[christodan]

5 hours ago, Scromes said:

Really?

 

Well we already knew from the transcript of the doctor's testimony that she failed to send the final log before disembarkation and didn't send it until the following day after NSW Health queried why some people that were swabbed weren't on the log at all.

True.

 

But if I was working for NSW Health I would have asked the ship : is this the latest information that I have? Particularly when the numbers were so close to the threshold and with people catching illnesses so quickly. I personally would have been checking the date of the log as a matter of course. Have you ever have a pathology test and several times they check your name against what is on the vial and even get you to check it one last time?  There's a lot of checking in medicine. They should have been erring on the side of caution, not on the other side.   When the stakes are so high you don't just treat this like a pre-COVID disembarkation. It's the difference between between doing your job thoroughly and a half arsed one.

Edited May 5, 2020 by christodan

[By The Bay]

18 hours ago, Pushka said:

😀  Goodness, who is the Commisioner and what is their background? Sounds like they have complete independence. A good thing for all. 

Bret Walker SC. Info

[Aus Traveller]

10 hours ago, possum52 said:

Wasn’t it Thursday 19th in the early hours the Ruby Princess arrived? She sailed from Sydney on Sunday the 8th. 

Your dates are correct, hence my comment that the decision by NSW Health was made at 4.30pm on a working day - Wednesday 18th.

[Aus Traveller]

9 hours ago, Cruisegroover said:

The inquiry was also told the following by the witness

 

Later in the day it was revealed that the results of the Covid-19 swabs that were eventually taken were delayed because the laboratory forgot to put them into the system as a priority.

Counsel told the inquiry swabs were collected at 3am on 19 March and taken to a laboratory for testing. Usually, any swabs that arrived in the lab by 10am would have results back by 4pm. However, the swabs had not been processed by 4pm that day.

 

The witness said she understood “the technician didn’t realise they were cruise ship samples, and they were put into the queue as per normal, and were not tested as priority”.

It is interesting that the swabs weren't processed as a priority. This was another failure in the system in NSW, either by the Health Department not noting the swabs as priority on the accompanying paperwork, or the lab not entering the swabs as priority in their system. It's likely it wasn't a deliberate action by anyone, just another example of bungling.

 

An important point is that the swabs were collected from the ship at 3am (shortly after the ambulances took two ill passengers to hospital). Obviously the doctor on the ship was sufficiently concerned about COVID that she sent the swabs - and sent them urgently. This would probably result in Princess paying a charge for the pathology tests - they would not be bulk billed. If the doctor wasn't concerned, the swabs would not have been sent because the passengers were disembarking and Princess didn't need to know what virus passengers had after they had gone home. The only reason I can see for Princess to have tests done was so the NSW Health Department could be alerted if the passengers tested positive for COVID.

[Pushka]

It seems almost like neither Ruby Princess nor the Health Department wanted to verbalise that Covid was (most) likely onboard because in doing so would create a situation like Princess Diamond in the heart of Sydney Harbour. So they all rather tiptoed around the core issue without actually expressing nor referring to the word 'Covid'.  It was couched in terms of 'negative to influenza', febrile, respiratory etc. Ruby Princess didn't want to state Covid categorically, possibly deferring to the fact that this hadn't been clinically established but an average medical person might conclude it was given all circumstances, and NSW Health certainly didn't want to ask outright in case the response was something like "strong probability" of Covid. Because stating and asking that question opened Pandora's box. Which of course happened anyway once people returned home. 
 

Given that the Counsel hearing the case is strongly legalistic he would likely find in favour of Ruby Princess given that Covid had not been clinically established on berthing. And that the ship should not have disembarked until the test results were determined. 

Edited May 5, 2020 by Pushka

[OzKiwiJJ]

Many, many years ago Robert Heinlein wrote a book called Stranger in a Stange Land. In that book, Heinlein invents a profession called Fair Witness.  At one point, a character in the book is demonstrating what a Fair Witness does; he points to a distant house and asks the Fair Witness what color it is. She replies, “It appears to be painted white on this side.” A Fair Witness is trained to simply observe and report based on his or her direct experience, without inference or extrapolation.

 

It sounds like the Ruby Princess doctor was doing exactly that.

[rickays]

If you check out the exhibits on https://www.rubyprincessinquiry.nsw.gov.au/hearings/  you will see that NSW Health sent email to Ruby Princess 4.01pm March 17 for information   Ruby Princess answered 9.39am on 18th with spreadsheet showing swabs for covid19 were taken from passengers with flu A&B negative results.  This should have been the warning to NSW Heath.  They had that information in the morning of the 18th in ample time to make their decision by 4.30 that afternoon that should have been HOLD THE PASSENGERS UNTIL TESTS DONE.  The updated 20 March spreadsheet should not have been needed.

[Pushka]

2 hours ago, OzKiwiJJ said:

Many, many years ago Robert Heinlein wrote a book called Stranger in a Stange Land. In that book, Heinlein invents a profession called Fair Witness.  At one point, a character in the book is demonstrating what a Fair Witness does; he points to a distant house and asks the Fair Witness what color it is. She replies, “It appears to be painted white on this side.” A Fair Witness is trained to simply observe and report based on his or her direct experience, without inference or extrapolation.

 

It sounds like the Ruby Princess doctor was doing exactly that.

 

At what point does a judgement come into play if everyone plays Fair Witness? NSW Health could also state that completed tests for Covid (done in NZ) were negative.

 

It is the error of ommission here, that there were tests still outstanding. 

Edited May 6, 2020 by Pushka

[OzKiwiJJ]

4 minutes ago, Pushka said:

 

At what point does a judgement come into play if everyone plays Fair Witness?

That should be obvious, the judgement would be based on reliable facts. The facts still have to be analysed to determine where the problems occurred.

[Aus Traveller]

5 minutes ago, Pushka said:

 

At what point does a judgement come into play if everyone plays Fair Witness? NSW Health could also state that completed tests for Covid (done in NZ) were negative.

 

It is the error of ommission here, that there were tests still outstanding. 

It also looks like Princess did what was required. There were obviously errors, errors of judgement on behalf of NSW Health not to attend the ship and consult with ill passengers, and an error in not prioritizing the pathology work on the swabs.

[DiamondFour]

It looks like the Prime Minister of this country himself is getting directly involved in this case now in regards to the special commission of inquiry.

 

Read for yourselves: https://www.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/news/coronavirus-australia-pm-says-ruby-princess-questioning-was-out-of-line/news-story/fb4676f3721948c02275f631a74e1602

 

Normally they should keep out of those investigations. If we want the answers then ALL officials should be treated equally and asked the tough questions not just the Ruby Princess crew.

[BRANDEE]

36 minutes ago, DiamondFour said:

It looks like the Prime Minister of this country himself is getting directly involved in this case now in regards to the special commission of inquiry.

 

Read for yourselves: https://www.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/news/coronavirus-australia-pm-says-ruby-princess-questioning-was-out-of-line/news-story/fb4676f3721948c02275f631a74e1602

 

Normally they should keep out of those investigations. If we want the answers then ALL officials should be treated equally and asked the tough questions not just the Ruby Princess crew.

Another interfering leader..must know trump.  I have watched all the proceedings so far..it is long and slow..but not unfair.  Sorry Ms. Ressler broke down in tears..but sometimes the truth hurts..NSW health did not do their due diligence.

[DiamondFour]

6 minutes ago, BRANDEE said:

Another interfering leader..must know trump.  I have watched all the proceedings so far..it is long and slow..but not unfair.  Sorry Ms. Ressler broke down in tears..but sometimes the truth hurts..NSW health did not do their due diligence.

Its funny you say that because trump put on a massive banquet in his honour when he visited the USA.

 

I agree that he should be keeping out of proceedings. If mistakes were made by NSW Health then the truth needs to come out so that it does not happen again.

 

Just looking at the exhibits that are tendered to the commission, NSW Health was asking the ship if passengers had been to mainland china, Iran, South Korea in the past 14 days. Quite baffling given the ship was operating out of Australia and Australian borders for those countries were closed. Also by the time the ship got back it would have been well and truly past the 14 day mark for people who arrived in Australia a few days before the cruise.