Nick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I support the second reading of the Australian National Preventive Health Agency Bill 2009. I understand the coalition’s criticisms of this bill, but I believe that it is an important way forward. It is important because having a preventive approach to sickness is pretty fundamental to any good health system, and I commend the Minister for Health and Ageing for going down this path. The fact that this will be a statutory body is welcome as well, but I think that it also needs to be independent and to give advice that it is clear, unbiased and free of any government interference. That is why I believe that the amendments to be moved by the Australian Greens have a lot of merit when it comes to the independence of this body.

Australia does not need a bigger health bureaucracy without more information and better advocacy. That is why it is important that the focus of this agency be on making robust recommendations on bettering the health of Australians in order to prevent illness and disease. It is important that the agency provide leadership on preventive health surveillance and data and to promote standards of preventive health. This body has an enormous opportunity to do a lot of good in the community when it comes to health, and I commend the health minister for introducing it, but I believe that it could be more independently structured. I note that the Australian Greens have proposed amendments to the bill that relate to the agency’s scope for looking at alcohol and tobacco. I also note Senator Fielding’s very genuine concerns about alcohol abuse in the community. It is important that this body look at preventive strategies in that area. Other substance abuse also needs to be covered. We cannot underestimate the devastation that substance abuse such as crystal meth and heroin abuse causes to individuals, families and communities. That is why this bill must have a clear focus on dealing with other substance abuse.

I have a concern about the independence of the body, which should be embedded structurally. I also have concerns about the recommendations that this body makes, which should be as transparent as possible. After all, if we are dealing with an issue of public health, those recommendations ought to be transparent and subject to public scrutiny. That is why I will be moving an amendment that will ensure that recommendations made go on the web. That does not require the government to actually implement those recommendations, but it does require a degree of transparency and robustness in the debate on this.

I expect that I will have much more to say about this in the committee stage. I support the second reading of this bill. It is important that we get it right. It is also important that the government be transparent in any negotiations that it has undertaken with all parties on this bill and that we do not lose this opportunity to make some significant advances in preventive health in this country. I commend the minister’s focus on that. I also commend Senator Cormann for his forensic and robust advocacy of his concerns—