Annette Ellis (Canberra, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Labor supports the National Health Amendment (Immunisation) Bill 2006 because it provides a minor amendment that preserves the current funding arrangements between the Commonwealth and state and territory governments. It will allow continuation of vital activities such as vaccine storage and distribution for the National Immunisation Program. The only reason this amendment is necessary is because there was a drafting error in the National Health Amendment (Immunisation Program) Act 2005, which now unintentionally takes away the power of the minister to continue the current arrangements with states and territories in relation to vaccine provision.

Whilst I support this bill, I would like to take the opportunity to highlight concerns I have about the Howard government’s vaccine policy, particularly on pneumococcal disease. The deadly pneumococcal bacteria causes a whole range of serious illnesses just like meningococcal, including pneumonia, meningitis and septicaemia. The vaccine protects even very young babies, those most at risk, against pneumococcal. The best age to give babies the vaccine dose is at two, four and six months. Every year around 1,800 cases of pneumococcal disease in children are reported and some 50 children die. If a child survives pneumococcal infection, unfortunately there can be serious side-effects. A significant number of children who survive are left with brain problems—cerebral palsy and epilepsy—blindness, deafness, spinal problems such as scoliosis and other side effects. This is clearly a serious public health issue that should not be ignored by any government.

Mr Deputy Speaker, you and I and other members in this place know how difficult it can be for families dealing with children who have a disability or an acquired brain injury through one form of misfortune or another. It could be because of any number of reasons. Not only is it hard on the child—let me say that straight up—but the whole situation is extremely difficult for the family concerned. The cost of living with someone with those sorts of conditions can be very high socially, emotionally and financially, so we should be encouraged wherever possible to do everything we can to avoid such things occurring.

In September 2002, the Howard government’s own technical advisory group recommended that the government fully fund the pneumococcal, chickenpox and injectable polio vaccines. To the amazement of public health officials, the government ignored the recommendation. In September 2003, the National Health and Medical Research Council made the same recommendation. This is a body whose role it is to provide expert advice on important health issues, on the allocation of government funding for health and medical research and on ethical issues in health and research involving humans. The Howard government considered this recommendation in the lead-up to the 2004-05 budget and then, unbelievably, decided to ignore it. This is what Labor’s shadow minister for health said on 16 January 2004:

This deadly disease—

pneumococcal—

kills and seriously disables more Australians than meningococcal C disease, for which there is a government funded vaccine.

…            …            …

Parents face a heart-breaking choice: do they pay the $450-500 out of their own pockets to fully immunise their child or, if they cannot afford this bill, take the risk that their child will not contract pneumococcal disease? Doctors will tell parents that all the vaccines on the Australian Standard Vaccination Schedule are needed, but only some will be funded under the National Immunisation Program. Now even if parents are able to afford the vaccine, it may not be available.

Two days after the May 2004 budget, Labor announced its commitment to fully fund the recommended childhood vaccines, including pneumococcal, chickenpox and injected polio. As a result of Labor shaming the Howard government, the minister for health then announced that the government would provide funding for the pneumococcal vaccine. Unfortunately, funding was announced for only two years. The Howard government still refused to fund the chickenpox and injectable polio vaccines. Labor continued to campaign for full funding for the vaccines, but the government continued to ignore the issue for almost one year.

In March 2005, the government finally matched Labor’s plan to fund these vaccines. In doing so, the minister for health conceded that chickenpox had killed—unnecessarily—at least 19 Australians and hospitalised some 3,300 people in the last two-year period alone. In another demonstration of the government’s arrogance, it gagged the technical advisory group—which had maintained that the pneumococcal vaccine should be funded by the government. This is how we see the government treating its independent advisory groups.

Vaccine manufacturers have supported additional funding of the vaccines but they are concerned that, if a second vaccine is listed, it might trigger a 12.5 per cent price cut and this would be inconsistent with the principle of encouraging security of supply. The manufacturers have asked the minister for health to clarify whether the price cut will apply, but I believe that the minister has not yet responded.

There is also a major concern that there will be unnecessary delays in the introduction of the new vaccines to the National Immunisation Program. Many public health experts are worried that the new vaccines against cervical cancer and rotovirus, which are currently under consideration by the PBAC, might not be considered for the National Immunisation Program. My Labor colleagues and I are watching this new process carefully to ensure that new vaccines become available as soon as possible and that they are funded through the National Immunisation Program when they are considered to be appropriate by medical experts.

As a result of the concerns that I have highlighted, I fully support the second reading amendment moved by the shadow minister for health. It reads as follows:

... the House expresses its concern that the Government has:

(1)

consistently ignored the expert advice of the Australian Therapeutic Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI) with respect to the inclusion of pneumococcal, oral polio and chicken pox vaccines on the National Immunisation Program;

(2)

failed to provide the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC) with the needed expertise in immunisation as required;

(3)

failed to provide adequate ongoing funding for essential vaccines over the forward estimates of the 2006-07 Budget, leaving the Government’s long-term commitment to the National Immunisation Program in doubt.

In conclusion, of course we support this technical bill—a bill which is to in fact correct an error—but, in doing so, we must put on record our views and concerns about the ongoing questions about an appropriate immunisation program in Australia.

See this speech in context