Despite the emerging criticisms of our national and state responses to the pandemic, Western Australia is the only Australian jurisdiction to date that has established an external public inquiry to evaluate its pandemic policies.

While this inquiry is welcomed it is highly flawed given its membership, lack of statutory powers of investigation to call witnesses, take evidence under oath, or to procure documents, and narrow terms of reference.

Although the government says it has appointed "three independent experts to conduct the review" none have any health qualifications. Moreover, their previous roles as ministers, public servants leading arts departments or federal regulatory bodies and current roles serving on state government advisory boards covering gaming, energy, and the arts, hardly makes the inquiry appear to be independent from government.

Given the absence of health qualifications it is unclear how the committee is to assess the "effectiveness of public health levers on health outcomes" or the "government's programs and processes to support the health response" including "COVID-19 testing ... vaccine rollout".

Lacking any statutory coercive powers of investigation, unlike a royal commission, the inquiry will have to rely on the goodwill of the Western Australian government for access to departmental files, health department records and information from the pivotal State Emergency Management Committee.

Indeed, in announcing the inquiry Premier Mark McGowan could not confirm exactly what documents the inquiry would have access to admitting he hadn't "really considered that". So how is this inquiry going to "assess the best evidence"? While the inquiry is expected to consult with "public sector agencies and other stakeholders" it lacks the power to call witnesses or to offer legal protections for those wanting to make critical submissions.

That Premier McGowan has stated there's nothing he would change about his government's management of the pandemic, seems to have already pre-empted the inquiry's findings making it appear as nothing more than a 'whitewash'.

Meanwhile, the Albanese government, although quick to appoint a royal commission into its predecessor's robodebt program, has failed to implement recommendations of the Senate COVID inquiry chaired by Senator Katy Gallagher, now federal finance minister, that a "royal commission be established to examine Australia's response to the COVID-19 pandemic to inform preparedness for future COVID-19 and future pandemics".

MORE OPINION:

Perhaps the Albanese government is concerned what independent scrutiny might find about the five Labor states and territories given some of their controversial actions during the pandemic.

Although Australia had one of the lowest pandemic death rates in the world, and its economy has bounced back, many concerns remain about our responses to the pandemic including: the vaccine rollout; contradictory state policy responses; the constitutionality and impacts of state border closures and lockdowns; suspension of parliamentary sittings and civil liberties; impacts of schools closures; and the role of the National Cabinet.

Other countries have done it better.

Sweden, appointed a judge-led expert review at the beginning of COVID and in the United Kingdom a statutory-based public inquiry chaired by a former senior judge is underway. Only last December New Zealand announced a royal commission into the pandemic because there "had been criticisms of NZ's preparedness to deal with COVID-19, of the organisation of its response, and of particular health measures and their impact on people's lives".

There are many challenges in forming a royal commission into the pandemic in Australia. It needs to be a joint federal-state inquiry, have wide ranging terms of reference, and a mix of independent expert members. It has to be done if we really want to learn the policy lessons from the pandemic rather than just to play the blame game that now dominates current politics. And in our increasingly politicised system of government, only a royal commission will do. They are, after all, the 'institution of last resort'.