Steven Ciobo (Moncrieff, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to support the amendments moved by the member for Bowman. In principle, this is because I recognise—and I commend this to the chamber—that the debate on the bill that is before the chamber today is more than merely a debate on the safety and efficacy of RU486. It is more than merely a debate about saying whether or not we as a parliament can delegate authority to the TGA or whether we as a parliament can rely solely on the advice of the TGA when it comes to restricted goods under the Therapeutic Goods Act. Much more than this, the reason the member’s amendments should be supported—the reason an amended bill should go through the chamber—is that the fact we have had 2½ days of debate on this topic underscores the fundamental importance and recognition in the Australian community that this debate is about more than safety and efficacy.

There is a third dimension to this debate, and that is the question of morality in these kinds of debates. In saying that, I hasten to add that I am not someone who is seeking to impose my personal viewpoints on others—quite the contrary. What is clear from survey after survey throughout the Australian community is that Australians—irrespective of whether they are Christian, Muslim, atheist or agnostic—hold very strong views on the issue of abortion. The simple fact that there are strong views highlights the fact that this issue embraces so much more than merely a consideration of safety and efficacy, particularly with respect to RU486.

So if we accept the notion that there is more at stake than merely the safety and efficacy of RU486 and that there is this third issue dealing with the morality of these kinds of drugs and dealing with the fact that in the future we can expect there to be an increasing encroachment on moral and ethical issues with respect to restricted goods as science develops them further, then surely there is no better place than the floor of this parliament for us to consider whether or not we wish to have these kinds of drugs imported, legalised or restricted in any particular way by the TGA.

I readily admit that the structure of the current bill is flawed. I indicated that in my speech last night. But we now have before us an opportunity to correct that flaw. We now have before us an opportunity to make an informed decision whereby this parliament can take the very best advice offered to it by the TGA and then put it in a much greater and more detailed matrix—one that looks at those other considerations and does not merely say that the only issues here are safety and efficacy.

If we do only that it will be a sell-out for the Australian people. We could say to them that we are doing this because those who are opposed to the bill as it currently stands do so because they seek to impose their will on others, but that would be untrue. This is not about the imposition of any particular religious faith. This is not about whether or not the minister for health happens to be a Catholic. This is a fundamental decision that is underwritten by the Australian people, who have indicated their very strong views that abortion needs to be debated and that we as representatives of the people must exercise the will of the people by making these decisions come back to us to incorporate that third element. Certainly, no-one would argue that safety and efficacy considerations are best left to the TGA. This bill in no way undermines the ability to do that. But to deny that there is this third element—a third consideration—is to close one’s eyes to the fact that, irrespective of background, all Australians know that there is this third element to be considered.

I strongly urge all members to get behind the amendments moved by the member for Bowman. They are considered amendments. They enable us to take the very best advice from the TGA, but also ensure that supreme in the decision making is the will of the Australian people. We, as representatives of the Australian people, should be the final arbiters on these very facts.

See this speech in context