Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing, Disabilities and Carers) Share this | Hansard source

We are pleased to see that at least this amendment has come forward. But in saying that, this is the role of the committee. This is what usually happens in the community affairs committee. This is where you have discussions about what the appropriate date should be for reporting. If it had not been that there was an opportunity, because we went into matters of public importance, for the parliamentary secretary and I and our advisers to have a chat, we would be arguing about a date that was six months earlier. This is the appropriate date, 31 December 2009, for this to be reporting. At that stage we will have 12 months of real data and six months in order to conduct the inquiry.

That is why you do not truncate Senate inquiries—so that you have time to talk through and think through the implications of proposed amendments before the chamber across those people who are interested and involved. Unfortunately, because of the truncation of the inquiry, we have done that here. That is a bit of luck. I do not want to legislate by luck. I want to have a bit of time to think things through properly to make sure that we end up with the right result. Labor would have preferred our amendment in terms of the conduct of the inquiry—that it be done by the Pharmaceutical Services Federal Committee of Inquiry. We understand the government’s position on that. We would have preferred as a second option to have a group of people independent of the minister to conduct the inquiry. That would be our preferred position. But we will support this proposal as it stands given that it is better than nothing.

I am pleased to hear the parliamentary secretary confirm that this puts into effect recommendation 2 of the Senate committee of inquiry. The concern of Labor has always been around the cost to patients and consumers. The language, which has shifted slightly from our proposal, talks about the cost of pharmaceutical benefits to patients. As long as the cost of pharmaceutical benefits to patients means the costs of medicines to consumers including copayments and special patient contribution or premium payments is clear—and that is what the inquiry will be about—then we are somewhat happier than if we were not to have an inquiry at all. I thank the parliamentary secretary for at least negotiating as far as we have got on this—I think it is better than having nothing—and I also want to put on record my thanks to the advisers for their assistance and to my adviser who has gone back over to the shadow minister for health’s office where she lives. Thank you.