Susan Lamb (Longman, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak on the My Health Records Amendment (Strengthening Privacy) Bill 2018. The reason I do so is to stand up for health care for all Australians. I stand up to call on the government to ensure that our healthcare system is the very best it can be. Truly there is nothing more important than our health. That's not only my view; ask the people who have just been to a by-election in Longman how important health care is. They will tell you very loudly and proudly that they have a very strong view that health care is the most important thing.

Any good representative always prioritises what's important, but unfortunately that cannot be said for the new Prime Minister, Scott Morrison, or any of those who make up his government. While the government lagged in the polls for many months under Turnbull's leadership, the solution wasn't for the coalition to change their leader; it was to change their priorities. Until this government starts listening to the people they are supposed to represent about what is important to them, the new Prime Minister won't be any better than the last. If this government listened to what people wanted in their government's priorities, they would hear health care over banks, but instead this government wasted months trying to give multibillion dollar handouts of taxpayer money to banks.

Let's not forget that this government fought tooth and nail against holding a royal commission into the banking sector. In fact Prime Minister Scott Morrison voted against it 26 times. He ignored what the people of Australia were calling for and sided with the banks over everyday Australians 26 times. Instead of wasting time sticking up for the banks Prime Minister Morrison should have been working on ensuring our healthcare system is the best it can possibly be. He could have started by putting back the $2.9 million he ripped out of our local Caboolture Hospital, which would have huge positive outcomes for the people in my area.

He should have also taken more care with the rollout of the My Health Record system. This is a truly significant step towards modernising the way medical experts access patient records. As with so many other important steps forward that this government has taken, though, Labor has led this change. When we were last in office we began formulating the delivery of an electronic health record system. Implemented correctly by a government that truly cared about health, an e-health system could deliver tangible healthcare improvements and significant financial savings through fewer errors in the diagnosis, treatment and prescription process, but this is not a government that cares about health.

Labor had a plan. We were working on an opt-in system that we saw to be the right approach. It ensured that anyone who participated had to give informed consent. They had to want to be part of this. But for whatever reason, and I'm not going to even try to think about what reason that was, the government changed that. They turned instead to an opt-out system. The thing is that this government has never really explained why they've made this change. Maybe they have a reason. I can't speak for them; I don't know. But that's exactly what the issue right here is: we just don't know what that reason was. If there is in fact a justifiable reason for this abrupt change to an opt-out system, then all the government has to do is share it. What is it? Justify it. What is it? They owe it to the people of Australia. They use it to the very people who use this system, the very people to whom this government is supposed to be accountable to. It really does raise eyebrows about what this government's focus really is.

The government doesn't have the very best record when it comes to privacy and personal security. We have seen inexcusable failings time after time. Now, no-one has forgotten that last year, under this government, there was a serious breach where private Medicare data was being sold on the dark web by fraudsters. I actually remember that day. We were holding a press conference in my seat of Longman with the shadow minister, Linda Burney, when this news broke. I do remember that day very, very clearly. But to make matters worse, the department—under then minister Alan Tudge—knew about the shocking breach, but refused to let Australians know that their data was at risk for weeks and weeks. I find it just appalling, just disgraceful, that that information was known but not shared. Though this was clearly a huge embarrassment for the government, they have absolutely no right to hide their failings from the Australian public when it comes to the public's own data.

Of course, that wasn't the only recent breach of sensitive personal data that has occurred under this government. In fact, just in the past few months, we've also seen breaches of Centrelink data, as well as serious flaws in the online portal of the NDIS. What makes things worse is that this government had been aware, again, of a breach of the NDIS's security. They had known about the security risk for over a year and a half, but refused to take any necessary steps to fix it. Time and time again this government have let Australians down when it comes to their privacy and the security of their very sensitive and personal data. With this sort of track record, I find it hard to think there would be any Australian who would have any trust in this government when it comes to something as important as the roll out of the My Health Record system.

Labor holds a number of serious concerns with the My Health Record system in its current form, and we're calling on the government to fix them. This bill may address two of these concerns, but there are more yet remaining. The concerns that this bill seeks to address are certainly important—I'll give it that—and in all honesty should not have ever been written in the act to begin with, but this bill does seek to address them. I will acknowledge that.

Firstly, this bill amends the act to require a court order or a consumer's express consent before any health information from their My Health Record is disclosed to a law enforcement agency or another government body. This was a glaringly obvious omission from the original drafting of the act. A person's personal medical information should not be something that is readily available for a government employee to access, so this is a very welcome amendment. However, for whatever reason, the government has exempted the Auditor-General, the Ombudsman and the Information Commissioner from the requirements of this amendment. Perhaps this is necessary; perhaps this is not. We'll test this in a Senate inquiry to seek some certainty. I look forward to reading the report from that inquiry so that we can be confident and certain around this exemption.

This bill also amends the act to require the permanent deletion of all health information for all consumers who opt out of the system. In its current state, the act dictates that the My Health Record system should retain all information, albeit in a locked-down state. This just makes no sense. The government has turned the system from an opt-in system to an opt-out system but, in doing so, the government has also made it impossible to truly opt out of this system. These are both amendments that strengthen the act and add some much-needed integrity to the government's My Health Record system.

Again, I raise that there is still more that needs to be done. There are still a number of remaining concerns with the system that the government simply must address. For example, what is really troubling is that this legislation still has done nothing to address the serious concerns that the My Health Record may risk the safety of women fleeing abusive partners or of children needing privacy from non-custodial parents. Advocates have flagged that, in its current form, the My Health Record system could conceivably be used by some persons with intentions to track the location and treatment of vulnerable people. Obviously, this is deeply worrying and should be rectified immediately. So it begs the question: why didn't the government do that when they were drafting these amendments?

Another suite of concerns that the government should have addressed have been flagged by working people, by their unions and by legal representatives. They recognise that the current legislation opens the door for the mistreatment of workers by way of discrimination on the basis of their health, be it physical or mental, as well as their disability status. This discrimination could potentially come in many forms. In a submission from Maurice Blackburn Lawyers, it was flagged that a new employee may be required to provide access to their My Health Record to a doctor conducting a pre-employment assessment. Even if a particular ailment or disability has absolutely no impact on a person's ability or capacity to work, it provides another avenue for unscrupulous employers to discriminate.

Maurice Blackburn further flags that, in somewhat similar circumstances, employers may gain access to workers' data during workers' compensation claims. It's already difficult enough navigating through what can be quite an aggressive insurance environment, and allowing employers and insurers access to this sensitive data, particularly when such information may be wholly irrelevant to the claim at hand, seems like very dangerous territory.

I'll also pick up that Maurice Blackburn further notes that their concerns could have flow-on effects, with people becoming unwilling to discuss health issues, particularly those with relation to their mental wellbeing, for fear of future consequences. People should feel free, very confident and safe about going to their doctor—safe to disclose anything at all that they think is necessary. Making it possible to undermine the comfort of confidentiality is serious and deeply troubling. In fact, in effect it could see the My Health Record doing more harm than good.

Labor remains of the view that the government should suspend the rollout until these concerns have been fixed and, as I mentioned, there is an inquiry at hand. I'm looking forward to what that report uncovers, ventilates and exposes. I think it's wise to wait and see what that report hands down. I'm not quite sure why this government continually refuses to suspend the rollout until those concerns have been fixed. It just seems that they're determined to proceed regardless of any damage it may cause. As I've mentioned a number of times in this speech today, it is serious and it's very, very troubling.

Like I said, we've initiated a Senate inquiry into the rollout. It's imperative that we investigate these concerns in great detail to ensure the system is rolled out effectively and as safely as possible. This is too important not to get right the first time. We must get it right first go. We cannot risk people's privacy, we cannot risk people's health and we cannot risk people's safety.

See this speech in context