Natasha Stott Despoja (SA, Australian Democrats) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is addressed to Senator Santoro, the Minister representing the Minister for Health and Ageing. Is the minister aware of the findings of a report that was commissioned by the Prime Minister’s department to examine the developments in assisted reproductive technology, by Matthews Pegg Consulting? Can the minister outline to the Senate whether that report will be made public? Will it be tabled in the federal parliament? Given, according to the Prime Minister’s office, it was used ‘to assist Prime Minister and Cabinet in providing advice to the Prime Minister’, will the report be surfacing sometime soon?

Santo Santoro (Queensland, Liberal Party, Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Stott Despoja for her question and I acknowledge her very strong and outstanding interest in this area of vital government policy. I also extend my appreciation for the constructive attitude that she brings to the issue, even though, I should say, in so many cases I disagree considerably with the substance of what she is about.

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

Santo Santoro (Queensland, Liberal Party, Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I like to give credit where credit is due, honourable senators opposite, and I think that it is important we do show a generosity of spirit when that generosity of spirit is required. Getting directly to the answer that Senator Stott Despoja undoubtedly is expecting, the report was commissioned by the Prime Minister’s department to assist in developing advice to the government on the Lockhart review. The purpose of the report—and I want to stress this—was not to repeat the work of the Lockhart review or to judge the merits or otherwise from anybody’s perspective of the recommendations of the Lockhart review. I think that is a point that needs to be stressed, because it has been misconstrued, as I am sure Senator Stott Despoja would agree, by some commentators within the media who have sought to play very cheap politics about the report that the Prime Minister’s department thought was valuable enough to be commissioned to assist the government in its continuing consideration of issues which I know are of interest to everybody within this place.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and Conservation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Abetz interjecting—

Santo Santoro (Queensland, Liberal Party, Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I take the interjection from Senator Abetz that we are a very consultative government, and we will continue to be consultative. Seeking to be as specific as I can in response to Senator Stott Despoja’s question, I can say that the report provided advice about what scientific and ethical issues were considered when the legislation was debated in 2002. The report also sought to explore what changes or new issues were identified by the Lockhart review. To that extent, that report is obviously judged as being very important in terms of continuing to develop the government’s attitude and the government’s response to these issues as they are raised within the community from time to time.

I am sure that no senator in this place, or anybody else beyond this place, needs me to reiterate that these are complex matters and that it is not unusual for the Prime Minister’s department to seek additional expert advice on technical issues like this. We got a report which I believe adds to the sum of knowledge that is available to government on this issue. Whether the report will be released and made public—I have not yet been advised to that effect, but I can assure you that it is the Prime Minister’s intention to continue to have ‘a very lengthy debate about this issue’. He also went on to say over the weekend that there was a ‘very strong view expressed about the matter’ that resulted in the current legislation. I am sure that, as the debate continues, the contents of that report and undoubtedly other pieces of research that have been commissioned beyond this parliament will become available and known to people in the community.

Natasha Stott Despoja (SA, Australian Democrats) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. I do thank the minister for his answer. Concerning his last point, if the debate is to continue, my question to the minister is: when is the debate going to start? When is the federal parliament going to have an opportunity to review not only the substance of the Matthews Pegg Consulting report but also examine the recommendations contained in the Lockhart review? Given the Lockhart review examined independently and in detail last year updated developments in reproductive ART and stem cell research, how do we know that the Matthews Pegg Consulting report is not a duplication of that very research? How does the Senate know that, given that we do not have public access to the Matthews Pegg Consulting report? I ask the minister, if he cannot give us a guarantee, to speak to the Minister for Health and Ageing and ensure that that report is made public. What time line will he give us for that process to be complete?

Santo Santoro (Queensland, Liberal Party, Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I can only reiterate the advice that I provided to Senator Stott Despoja during my substantial answer to her question. It was not the purpose of the report to repeat the work of the Lockhart review or to judge the merits of the recommendations within the Lockhart review report. That is the advice that I have been provided with and that is the advice that I again give to you. I think that it is important to reiterate that under the current legislative arrangements it is possible for issues which are of concern to senators opposite, including Senator Stott Despoja, to be taken up. Australia does remain a strong supporter of health and medical research and we intend to maintain and continue in that very fine tradition.