Bruce Billson (Dunkley, Liberal Party, Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence) Share this | Hansard source

That is an interesting debating point but, again, the member for Hotham might care to actually look at the remarks of his colleagues and he will see that what is in there is very self-evident. The government’s primary concern is the health and wellbeing of those involved. Treatment will be provided to nuclear test participants for all forms of cancer, including throat cancer, prostate cancer and skin cancer. I again emphasise that it will not be constrained to the veterans, as was being called for by the Labor Party, but will be for the civilians, the contractors and the public servants who were also involved. This treatment is available to all the military personnel, public servants and third party civilian contractors who were present at the site.

All Australian participants in the nuclear tests who have an address recorded with my department have been sent a letter inviting them to register for health testing and possible treatment for any cancer. In addition, there have been advertisements placed in national newspapers, and that will alert people to the availability of this government funded cancer treatment for the nuclear test participants. Once the individual has been confirmed as a nuclear test participant, he or she, whether civilian, ADF personnel, contractor or APS member, will receive a white card for testing for and treatment of cancer.

In 1999 the Australian government commissioned a study into whether there was an increased rate of death and cancer amongst nuclear test participants compared to the general Australian population. This study has been completed and it has been referred to in some of the remarks following my release of it on 28 June 2006. There are two volumes to that study. Volume No. 1 is on radiation exposure. That is a topic that was canvassed, touched upon and skated over by some of those who spoke. Volume No. 2 was on the mortality and the cancer incidence.

In respect of that first issue of radiation exposure, the dosimetry work is world-class work. Some people often dismiss workers, saying, ‘Well, it’s not rocket science.’ This is rocket science. It has been critically assessed, peer reviewed and validated as being world-class research to establish the doses of radiation that would have been present and to which participants would have been exposed. That has been cross-calibrated against other records and peer reviewed internationally to be a world-class body of work.

From that world-class body of work, the second volume draws its insights around the mortality and the cancer incidence. The final report on the overall death rate for the nuclear test participants shows that it is similar to that of the general Australian population. However, there is an increase in the rate of cancer and cancer related deaths compared to the general population. In layman’s terms, this increase equates to five more cancer deaths per year amongst nuclear test participants compared to what would be expected for the general population. But, as I mentioned earlier, the study did not find any link between the increases in cancer rates and the exposure to radiation.

For those members with a genuine interest, we know that radiation has a scientific and medical impact on cells, on our health. It is not something that is just plucked out of the air. It does not represent a trigger or an impact factor on all kinds of cancer. The science, the medicine and the insights that guide those links are well established, and I would encourage those members opposite with a genuine and sincere interest in this topic to pay attention to that work. As the member for Batman said, science speaks for itself. He was absolutely correct, and I implore those members opposite to give effect to that and, as the member for Hotham said, to be honest with ourselves when we are talking about the scientific-medical causal link with health outcomes that can be related to and associated with people’s participation in these tests. I would encourage people to have a look at those things.

The majority of the nuclear test participants were exposed to additional radiation, the equivalent of one CAT scan per year. To put that in some context, the average Australian is usually exposed to an equivalent of one to two CAT scans per year. This is the science that has been robustly analysed, tested and validated through peer review. As I mentioned earlier, the nuclear test participants have for some time been able to claim compensation and treatment under the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act, under which equivalent benefits have also been made available to third party civilian contractors, pastoralists and Indigenous Australians as well as under a special administrative scheme.

So the machinery that the Labor Party is calling for is actually in place. It is actually in place, and claims under those mechanisms have been received, have been processed and have been accepted, and compensation and health care in relation to people’s involvement with activities at these tests have already been completed and continue to be accommodated by these processes that are in place. So the study is important. It is world-class. It differs from some of the earlier studies that were referred to by the previous speakers. Quite sadly, those studies were referred to by previous speakers as if to create some kind of criticism of previous Liberal governments and to somehow pump up and praise Labor in its own efforts.

See this speech in context