For nearly a decade, policymakers have made active attempts to counter anti-vaccination movements and their influence within Australia. While objections to vaccinations are as old as vaccinations themselves, the anti-vaccination movements that arose in the mid-1990s have approached the issue from a new perspective compared to its previous counterparts. Contemporary anti-vaccination movements are diverse, ranging from individuals who are hesitant about the idea of vaccinations to rather radical anti-science activists. Understanding previous policies and engagement with individuals who belong to anti-vaccination movements or who are vaccine-hesitant is crucial in understanding the vaccination discourse preceding the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and the emergence of large-scale vaccine hesitancy associated with COVID-19. In the context of political science, political theorists have sought to explain the lack of trust in contemporary society, ranging from Beck’s Risk Society in the 1980s to Richards’ theories of Emotional Governance in the 2000s. However, there is still a significant gap in the scientific literature on the engagement between policymakers and individuals who reject vaccination science. Additionally, little research has focused on the Australian experience, instead often focusing on the United States or Europe. This thesis examines how Australian policymakers have engaged with the concerns of individuals who are vaccine-hesitant or who reject vaccination science. It examines the policy process surrounding the ‘No Jab No Pay’ policy-package implemented on January 1, 2016, with a focus on path dependency, concerns presented by vaccine-hesitant individuals, and engagement between individuals who opposed the policy-package. It was one of the most significant contemporary changes to vaccination policies and the last major change to vaccination policies in Australia before the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. This thesis examines the policy process surrounding ‘No Jab No Pay’ including the Senate Committee process, public discourse, and speeches from policymakers during the Second Reading of the Bill. It examines the question why Australian policymakers have not successfully engaging with individuals who reject vaccination science and their concerns. This thesis argues that the ‘No Jab No Pay’ was a missed opportunity for policymakers to engage with the concerns presented by individuals who are vaccine-hesitant or hold anti-vaccination beliefs.