SENATE
2e7N9wg
2e7N9wg
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Thursday, 13 October 2016 <strong>SENATE</strong> 45<br />
to assist in our deliberations. Noting that there is already a second reading amendment by Senator Polley, I<br />
foreshadow that I will be moving the second reading amendment circulated in my name.<br />
Senator XENOPHON (South Australia) (13:05): I want to endorse the remarks of my colleague Senator Griff<br />
that this is an important piece of legislation. We also need to look at the whole issue about the need for screening<br />
and to have a register. I think that we have learned from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint<br />
Replacement Registry that has been headed by Professor Stephen Graves, who has done outstanding work on this<br />
for many years, that having registers and having that level of transparency are absolutely critical in our health<br />
system. It drives better outcomes.<br />
We can learn from the Scandinavians, in particular, Sweden, where, as I understand it, they have a national<br />
cataract register that looks at the outcomes of that eye surgery and other registers that drive greater transparency in<br />
relation to the health system, because it is through those registers that you do get better outcomes—to see who is<br />
performing well, who could be performing better and what the outcome are along longitudinal bases—and that is<br />
absolutely critical. But when it comes to cancer screening, it is about reducing the terrible death toll of cancer in<br />
this country, and about getting that early intervention; the early diagnosis and treatment that can be a matter of life<br />
or death or, at the very least, prolonging someone's life and their quality of life quite significantly.<br />
As my colleague Senator Griff outlined in his contribution, I foreshadow that I will be moving a second reading<br />
amendment aimed at addressing at least some of the concerns around the tender process. The tender process<br />
concerns me deeply. I believe that it could have been handled much better. That is why I will be moving a second<br />
reading amendment that the Senate requests the Auditor-General to conduct, within the next 12 months, a<br />
performance audit under the Auditor-General Act 1997 to assess: (a) whether the Department of Health<br />
appropriately managed the procurement of services relating to the register; and (b) whether the processes adopted<br />
for the procurement of services met the requirements of the Commonwealth Procurement Rules including<br />
consideration and achievement of value for money. These are important issues and I think that that it was<br />
somewhat arrogant and presumptuous—and maybe precipitous as well—on the part of the government to<br />
conclude the tender process without having had the appropriate scrutiny of the parliament. I think it showed a case<br />
of the executive arm of government not being subject to the appropriate scrutiny of the parliament. I<br />
wholeheartedly endorse the remarks of Senator Griff in relation to this.<br />
The second reading amendment will not prevent the passage or implementation of the bill but it will request the<br />
Auditor-General to undertake a review. Of course, the Auditor-General is an independent statutory officer, and the<br />
Auditor-General can take it or leave it, in terms of whether the audit should take place or not. But I would like to<br />
think that if the Senate passes this second reading amendment, it sends a clear signal expressing the concerns of<br />
this chamber that the tender process ought to be looked at very closely. It could be that the Auditor-General will<br />
be looking at this in any event, but I think it is important that we express our alarm and our concerns in relation to<br />
this whole process. I hope there will be some opportunity in the committee stage to look at those issues.<br />
As Senator Griff said, establishing a national register should go to reducing duplication and unnecessary red<br />
tape across jurisdictions. That is very important. I had some concerns with this bill and I agreed to a short inquiry<br />
so that the Senate could review the concerns raised by the opposition. The Scrutiny of Bills Committee noted in its<br />
seventh report that not allowing individuals to elect to have their personal information removed from the proposed<br />
national cancer screening register represented 'a significant impact on the privacy interests of those individuals,'<br />
and welcomed amendments made that addressed other aspects of the scrutiny committee's concerns. I also<br />
welcome these amendments, and I thank the minister for working constructively with my office and with my<br />
colleagues in order to facilitate the passage of this legislation.<br />
I will raise something in the course of the committee stages of this bill that relates to the issue of whether there<br />
should be an opportunity for general practitioners to be more heavily involved in this process, because it seems to<br />
be quite binary at the moment. I also endorse the remarks of my colleague Senator Griff that we need a<br />
commitment from the government that the exposure draft of the bill relating to the mandatory notification of data<br />
privacy breaches ought to be dealt with by this parliament, or at the very least the bill ought to be introduced, this<br />
year, because these are important issues. This is something that affects the lives of millions of Australians. As a<br />
general principle, we need to have those safeguards and guarantees when it comes to issues of privacy, including<br />
mandatory notification. Having said that, I look forward to the committee stages of this bill. I believe that this is a<br />
very useful step forward. But we must also examine not only the tender process but also the efficacy of this piece<br />
of legislation.<br />
Senator NASH (New South Wales—Deputy Leader of The Nationals, Minister for Regional Development,<br />
Minister for Local Government and Territories and Minister for Regional Communications) (13:11): The<br />
National Cancer Screening Register Bill 2016 creates a new legislative framework for the establishment and<br />
ongoing management of cancer screening registers. This bill will establish the national cancer screening register,<br />
CHAMBER