Deborah O'Neill (Robertson, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on this motion concerning the funding of chemotherapy drugs. I note the opening remarks of my colleague who spoke first for the government in this debate that it is indeed a motion brought to the House by the opposition, one that might well have been much better handle more quietly and with less alarm for those who are, with their families, facing the very significant challenge of managing a diagnosis of cancer and then the treatment of cancer. The fearmongering which has become part of the methodology of those opposite, the generation of headlines over more judicious and more careful and more responsible management of key policy issues for this country, is seen on display here today. Nonetheless, I would like to put on the record a few of the important facts with regard to the issue before the chair.

The reality is that, since the initial concerns were raised in 2012 about the price reduction of Docetaxel and the potential impact on patient services, the Department of Health and Ageing has been undertaking some pretty detailed investigations into chemotherapy and the funding arrangements to make sure that these can be continued in a safe and stable way. Some chemotherapy providers were using the inflated price the government paid them to cross-subsidise the cost of delivery. I do not think we can underestimate the complexity of some of these chemotherapy drugs being produced, distributed and administered to patients.

But, with the price drop of several of the chemotherapy drugs—because the generic drug became available and entered the market—some providers complained that they could not continue to use that model. They could not continue to use that model because, instead of the government paying an excessive price for a drug which was now generic and available at a reasonable price, the government decided to get good value for money for Australian taxpayers—while continuing to provide for the highest standard of medical care for Australian people. So this broken model needed review.

I note that, in the period between this private member's matter being brought before us and now, we had, very importantly, the outcome of the Senate Community Affairs References Committee inquiry into chemotherapy funding. The report was tabled as recently as 10 May. It recommended that the government and industry parties, through the review—they had proposed a review—continue the examination of issues in chemotherapy drug pricing to ensure that existing funds under the Fifth Community Pharmacy Agreement are appropriately directed to reflect the costs and benefits of the supply of chemotherapy drugs and to ensure the ongoing supply of these drugs across all services, particularly in rural and regional areas. That is exactly what is going on and I am pleased to note that the member for Dickson put on the record that there is agreement between the government and the opposition with regard to the Expanded and Accelerated Price Disclosure policy.

This policy continues to work the way it was intended—bringing the price the government pays for the drugs into line with the market price of those drugs. That is transparency and that is fairness. It also saves taxpayers' money and that money has allowed and will allow the government to make investments in critical treatments for consumers and for sufferers of cancers other than the one the Docetaxel drug—which seems to have been the real stimulus for this conversation—is intended for.

Since 2007, this government has committed $1.5 billion for cancer medicines. I know, from my own family and personal experience, that the provision of these drugs is vital. I hope that, as things move forward, some of the unnecessary vitriol in this debate dissipates and that a quieter, more thoughtful and careful conversation proceeds to achieve the best outcomes for the Australian population. (Time expired)

See this speech in context