Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

This motion on chemotherapy drugs is one of the most disappointing motions I have debated in this parliament. I believe that members on both sides of this House want to ensure that patients who are living with cancer, are being treated for cancer, get the best possible medications available. I believe that members of this parliament want to see the list of available drugs expanded, and I believe that people who are undergoing cancer treatment do not want to see members of parliament politicising an issue as important as this.

Both sides of this House have done many things that they can be proud of in relation to cancer treatment and the ongoing research that provides cutting-edge treatments for people who are living with cancer or who have just been diagnosed with cancer. All members would be well aware of the proud history that we have here, in Australia. We have the best cancer survival rate in the world. That does not come about because the government is shirking its responsibility; rather, it comes about because the government is committed to ensuring that cancer patients receive the best possible treatment and that there is investment in cancer services.

Members on this side of the House have already stated that, since 2007, the government has committed $3.5 billion to improve the detection, prevention and treatment of cancer. It includes an extra $226 million in this year's budget over four years to deliver the government's World Leading Cancer Care package to improve cancer prevention, detection, support and research. Critically ill patients waiting for bone marrow transplants will have a better chance to get life saving help under this initiative. In addition, it will provide new funding for CanTeen, the Australian organisation for young people living with cancer. It will also provide extended funding for the McGrath Foundation, which I think every member of this House would acknowledge has been very successful. In my own electorate, many constituents have spoken to me about the need to expand cancer treatment and detection and then later they have come back to me saying, 'Thank you very much for what the government has done in this area.'

Today we are looking at chemotherapy drugs—and here I would like to turn to the motion moved by the member for Dickson and say that what he should be doing is working with the government. He has given some initial cooperation. He has indicated his cooperation but when you see this sort of motion before the House you know exactly where the member for Dickson is coming from. On 5 May this year, the minister announced a review into the funding of chemotherapy services, because we know how important it is that people receiving treatment continue to get that treatment. We know how important it is to ensure that new treatments come on line. We know how important it is to ensure that, as a government, we pay the correct amount of money for the drugs that people are using, and we need to know that the people who are receiving the treatment are paying the amount of money that they need to. The broad aim of this review is to gain a detailed understanding of all aspects of chemotherapy funding. It is not an ad hoc approach, as those on the other side are suggesting. The broad aim of the review is to ensure that there will be consultation with all stakeholders. It is a very inclusive review and, as members have previously mentioned, there was also a review undertaken by the Senate committee.

It is time that those on the other side of this House stopped playing politics. They should stop trying to prey on people who look to government for support. They should stop trying to create fear and uncertainty. They should stop trying to prey on people whom they should be supporting and looking after. I think there has been enough of this. It just says to me that, if this opposition were ever allowed to become the government of this country, there would be much more of this and the people of Australia could be well and truly let down. (Time expired)

See this speech in context