Trish Cook (Bullwinkel, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Today I rise to speak on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025. This bill is a significant piece of legislation. It's about fairness, modernisation and the fundamental health of every Australian. At its core, this bill delivers on a clear commitment to ban the use of adverse genetic testing results in life insurance. We are protecting Australians from being discriminated against simply because they took a proactive step to understand their own health.

I approach this bill not just as a member of parliament but through the lens of my career as a registered nurse and midwife. Throughout my years in clinical practice, I've stood at the bedside of patients facing the most daunting diagnoses imaginable, and I recently submitted my doctoral research focusing on the experiences of patients receiving medical treatments, specifically the impact of chemotherapy and immunotherapy infusions delivered in the home. I have seen firsthand the physical, emotional and financial toll that cancer treatment can take on an individual and their family. When we talk about preventive health, we aren't just using a policy buzzword. We're talking about the difference between a patient undergoing a pre-emptive life-saving procedure and, alternatively, enduring the gruelling, exhausting cycles of chemotherapy and immunotherapy because a condition may have been caught late. I know the cost of the latter, and not just the cost to the Medicare system and the health system but the human cost. Genetic testing is at the frontier of preventive health. It allows us to move from the reactive healthcare model to a proactive one. But, for that to work, patients must feel secure and feel safe to access the technology.

This is why the story of Zoe, a young woman from my home state of Western Australia, is so vital. Zoe's mother was diagnosed with stage 3 breast cancer at only 39 years of age and passed away only 18 months thereafter. Zoe, knowing her family history, did the responsible thing. She sought a DNA test through the public system, but, unfortunately, did not qualify under the rigid criteria. However, she was selected for a DNA screen trial, a groundbreaking initiative led by Monash University. That trial confirmed that she did, indeed, carry the high-risk breast cancer gene. Armed with that knowledge, Zoe underwent a double mastectomy. She took control. She prevented the experience that her mother suffered, and she probably saved her own life.

But here is the tragedy: many Australians in Zoe's position choose not to take that test. It's not because they're afraid of the needle. They're afraid of the insurance company. Their fear is that a positive result will mean that they can never get a mortgage, they'll never be able to protect their children's future or they will be priced out of the peace of mind that life insurance provides. As a nurse, it breaks my heart to think that a patient would decline a life-saving map of their own DNA because of a corporate profit margin.

This bill ends that fear. Schedule 1 ends genetic discrimination. For too long, a shadow has hung over the consultation rooms of genetic counsellors and over the laboratories of our great medical research institutions. That shadow is the fear of not being eligible for life insurance. Under the current framework, vulnerable Australians have been faced with a difficult choice: do I take a genetic test that may save my life by identifying a predisposition to cancer or heart disease or do I protect my family's financial future by ensuring that I can still access affordable life insurance? In a First World nation like Australia, no-one should ever have to make that choice.

Here is the evidence for change. Treasury's analysis on this matter is clinical and it's clear. The status quo is failing. People are holding back from essential testing. They are delaying life-saving screenings, and they are even withdrawing from groundbreaking medical research because they're terrified of being penalised by the insurer for a bad result. When people avoid testing, we lose the chance for early intervention. We lose the chance for prevention. When people avoid research, our scientific progress stalls. This government is stepping in to ensure that the system works for people, not against them.

How does the ban work? Schedule 1 implements the government's decision to ban life insurers from using genetic-testing results to inform the offer or terms of their cover. We are amending the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 and the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 to ensure that our laws keep pace with modern science. This ban is robust and fair. Integrity of underwriting means that insurers can still use signs, symptoms or family medical history to conduct risk-rate policies which are appropriate, but the hidden code of our DNA is protected. Patients can still volunteer results if it helps them—for example, if they do not carry the family mutation. There is also strict enforcement. The bill creates civil and criminal penalties for noncompliance that are regulated by ASIC. We're not just asking the industry to do better; we're requiring it to.

In schedule 2, supporting global investment, we are streamlining our financial markets by introducing licensing exemptions for foreign financial service providers. By reducing red tape for comparable regulators and professional investors, we're encouraging global capital to flow to Australia. For our superannuation and retirement industry, this means better access to international markets and lower costs through increased competition. It's about making Australia a more sophisticated, competitive financial hub.

Schedule 3 is about modernising international finance. It modernises our engagement with the multilateral development banks and the International Monetary Fund. In our region, these institutions are at the forefront of climate resilience and infrastructure. By providing a more flexible legislative framework for transactions, like our support for the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank, we will ensure Australia remains a leader in regional development. We've ensured transparency remains paramount and any new financial obligations must be notified to government.

Schedule 4 reduces the burden for financial advisers. It removes the redundant stage 2 registration of financial advisers. As a researcher, I'm a firm believer in efficient systems. We already have a functioning disciplinary system forcing individual advisers to register annually with ASIC, and this would add another unnecessary administrative burden and cost. We want advisers focused on helping Australians plan for their future, not navigating bureaucratic hurdles that offer no additional consumer protection.

In conclusion, it's people over products. As a nurse, I've always believed that prevention is better than cure. As a PhD candidate, I understand that the data tells us the same thing. And, as the member for Bullwinkel, I know my community expects us to put health ahead of insurance industry loopholes. For 10 years, those opposite ignored the genetic underclass. They allowed this system to persist, where Australians were punished for being proactive about their health. The Labor Albanese government is fixing that. We're telling every Australian: your DNA belongs to you, not your insurer. We are choosing science, we are choosing prevention and we are choosing people. I commend this bill to the House.

See this speech in context