Brett Whiteley (Braddon, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I am not used to the member for Jagajaga finishing up early, but I thank her for her contribution. I rise this afternoon to speak on the Social Services Legislation Amendment (No Jab, No Pay) Bill 2015. It is a bill which delivers on our undertaking in the budget to enact measures to ensure our nation's children receive necessary immunisation against disease. From 1 January 2016, this bill will ensure children fully meet immunisation requirements before their families can access the childcare benefit, the childcare rebate or the family tax benefit part A supplement. This government believes in rights, but it also believes in responsibilities. This government makes no apologies for enacting a policy that will deliver better outcomes for our children, especially when it comes to ensuring their health.

Australian childhood vaccination rates are over 90 per cent across the ages of one, two and five. This is an excellent rate of vaccination and is part of the reason the health of our children is so good compared to countries across the world. While vaccination rates in Australia have increased since the Childhood Immunisation Register was established back in 1996, vaccine objection rates for children under the age of seven have also steadily increased. There has been a marked increase with the rise of social media and the impact of unfounded claims around vaccination of children. It is estimated that there are 39,000 children under seven years of age—1.7 per cent—who are not vaccinated because their parents are vaccine objectors. It is simply not right that these children are put at risk due to misinformation in this space.

This government are very concerned at the rate of vaccine objection and the risk it poses to the broader community. In the budget earlier this year we made the commitment to take steps to rectify this situation and we are delivering on that commitment today in this bill. The coalition government are strengthening immunisation requirements for children. From 1 January 2016, 'conscientious objection' will be removed as an exemption category for childcare payments—both the childcare benefit and the childcare rebate—and the FTB part A end-of-year supplement. Immunisation requirements for payment of the FTB part A end-of-year supplement will be extended to include children over 12 months old. From next year, no vaccination objections will be accepted in order to receive the FTB part A end-of-year supplement and childcare subsidies.

Exceptions to the policy will apply only for valid medical reasons, such as when a general practitioner has certified that vaccinating a child would be medically contraindicated or that vaccination is unnecessary because a child has natural immunity from having contracted the disease in question. Families with children participating in an approved vaccine study will be taken to have met the immunisation requirements for the duration of the study, and similar rules will apply where a vaccine is temporarily unavailable. The requirements will also be met if a recognised immunisation provider certifies that the child has an equivalent level of immunisation through an overseas vaccination program.

The coalition government takes the health of our children seriously. There are 39,000 Australian children under the age of seven who are not vaccinated at this very moment, because their parents are vaccination objectors. That is twice the population of the city of Burnie in my electorate of Braddon. Twice the population are, at this moment, at risk of contracting a serious disease. This government does not accept this state of affairs and is taking steps to rectify this situation.

The No Jab, No Pay policy that this bill seeks to implement will secure the health of our nation's children. The choice made by families not to immunise their children is not supported by public policy or medical research. It is simply fanciful to suggest that vaccination of our youngest Australians harms them in the way that many say it does. Australian children receive some of the best medical care in the world, and this government treats the health of our children as a priority. This is a public health issue. The government has determined that parents still have the right to be vaccination objectors, but their decision will not be endorsed by the provision of taxpayer funds in the form of child care benefit, child care rebate or the family tax benefit part A end-of-year supplement.

This government makes no apologies for enacting incentives to immunise our children, and that is what it is doing in this bill. I am proud to be part of a government which has the intestinal fortitude to take a hard stance against vaccination objectors who are risking the health and wellbeing of not only their own children but all children. I stand behind the No Jab, No Pay bill and I urge all members to stand with me. I would just like to reiterate that 39,000 Australian children are currently at risk of contracting disease due to vaccination objection. I think this is an absolute shame and I think this is something that this bill is long overdue to address.

Under the current system, eligibility for child care benefit and family tax benefit is linked to immunisation requirements, where children aged under seven must be fully immunised or have a valid exemption. To oppose the No Jab, No Pay policy is to endorse the position of the vaccination objectors, and that is something that the government are unwilling to do. The government will maintain exemptions, which, as I said earlier, include on medical grounds and for approved religions. Through this bill, the coalition government are delivering better health outcomes for our nation's children. We are taking a hard stance and we are strongly resisting the baseless proposition that vaccines are causing harm in our society. The government stand with our doctors and our medical professionals. We stand for a better future for all Australians, and that is why we stand for a No Jab, No Pay policy.

I think it is appropriate to acknowledge the small number of my constituents who made representation to my office in objection to this proposed bill. I say to those people that I respect that they have a different view in relation to this matter and I do respect that they have an entitlement not only to voice that view but to actually live it out, if that is their choice. But as I explained to each of them, the government, on behalf of all Australians, is also responsible for good public policy and good public health policy that, in this case, means that you can, if you are an objector, maintain your objection, but you will no longer be entitled to taxpayer benefits.

I will say though that, as a part of those discussions, one particular suggestion that came to me from a constituent is, I think, very worthy of consideration. It is that it would not be unhelpful for us, as a country, across all our state jurisdictions, to have a national register of children who have a radical reaction to immunisation and to have GPs' or specialist paediatricians' documentation attached to such a register. I do not think that is an unreasonable request for those that still see that this policy as something that they cannot support. They have made the case that there are examples—they would suggest many examples—of children negatively reacting to the immunisation programs of this country. I am not a medical expert, and I am certainly was not in a position to argue the toss one way or another with my constituents, but I did feel that it was a reasonable and sensible suggestion that we, as a country, through our health professionals, should be able to track such negative reactions to any of the immunisation programs.

Once again, I commend this bill to the House and I thank those opposite for the support that they are also providing.

See this speech in context