Lisa Chesters (Bendigo, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties I present Report 230:amendments to the International Health Regulations 2005, incorporating a dissenting report.

Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e).

by leave—I rise today to make a statement on the report of the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties in regard to one major treaty action, the amendments to the International Health Regulations (2005), and to one minor treaty action, the amendment to the International Tropical Timber Agreement, 2006.

The amendments to the International Health Regulations update a treaty that was previously agreed to by all World Health Organization member states, including Australia. These regulations were first adopted in 1969 and have been revised several times, with the current framework being adopted in 2005 and amended in 2014 and again in 2022. The current amendments are designed to address lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic.

The committee found that the amendments to the treaty are aimed at strengthening global preparedness for future pandemics. The amendments will allow the World Health Organization to respond to future pandemics more swiftly and effectively, through a number of mechanisms. One is a new pandemic emergency declaration mechanism which will improve early warnings and elevate global attention to emerging health threats. The amendments also expand the definition and scope of the core capacities required of World Health Organization member states, which will facilitate, for example, measures to combat misinformation and disinformation and improve access to essential health products for developing countries. The amendments also aim to strengthen the global health architecture, which will promote faster, more coordinated international responses and reduce the risk of future pandemics.

The inquiry received over 300 unique submissions. The inquiry also received four campaign submissions organised by advocacy groups which together consisted of over 14,000 submissions. I want to acknowledge the work of the secretariat in processing all of these submissions. A number of submissions to the inquiry raised concerns regarding the amendments' impact on Australian sovereignty, the privacy and security of Australian data, and the potential financial obligations that may be imposed upon Australia.

At the public hearing in October, the committee heard from representatives of the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, who addressed these concerns head-on. The committee considered the views of the representatives from the Australian Medical Professionals' Society and Australians for Science and Freedom and expert advice from pandemic scientists at the Australian Institute for Infectious Disease. The committee heard from all sides.

During the inquiry process, the committee found that the legal framework and operational realities of the amended regulations would not allow the World Health Organization to override Australia's sovereignty and democratic processes. I repeat: what was being proposed would not impact on our sovereign capability or sovereignty in any way. For example, under the amendments, all countries will continue to make their own decisions regarding health policies, and public health and safety measures, such as border closures and the use of masks and vaccines, will still remain the decision of individual member states. This is international law and further enshrined in article 3 of the regulations.

The committee also found that that the amendments will not compromise Australia's data privacy protections. Any data Australia shares with the World Health Organization will be entirely at Australia's discretion and will comply fully with our own data protection regulations. There is no compulsion for member states to provide personal health records or data about individual citizens. Australia will also retain full discretion over how and when it will make any financial contributions to the World Health Organization or developing countries during future pandemics.

Australia already has a strong health system in place. The real benefit of these amendments lies in helping other countries strengthen their capacity to detect and respond to health threats early. This global cooperation ultimately safeguards Australia and Australians and reduces the risk of future pandemics.

The committee would also like to thank the government departments for their role in facilitating the treaty amendments and the organisations that shared their knowledge on pandemic science at the public hearing. We would also like to thank the public for their strong engagement with this inquiry. The inquiry was marked by robust debate—a cornerstone of our democracy, where different perspectives can be heard and tested.

The report also contains one minor treaty action, which is an amendment to the International Tropical Timber Agreement, 2006. The treaty provides a framework for the cooperation between tropical timber production and timber-consuming countries, balancing the economic benefits of timber trade with the urgent need for more sustainable forest management and conservation. The amendments extend the treaty's operation until 2029. The committee recommends the ratification of the major and minor treaty actions examined in this report.

Finally, on behalf of the committee members, I would like to thank the secretariat for their work and efforts in 2025. It has been a big year for the committee. We wish them a safe and happy Christmas. On behalf of the committee, I commend this report to the House.

Henry Pike (Bowman, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I echo the comments of the member for Bendigo thanking the amazing committee secretariat for the work they've done this year. Like the member for Bendigo, I served on the committee across both terms, and they do a fantastic job—not least of which on Report 230: amendments to the International Health Regulations (2005), which saw a phenomenal amount of public interest. I rise to make some additional comments on behalf of coalition members on this report.

Australia has a strong record of constructive engagement in global health cooperation, and coordinated action in genuine emergencies has clear value. While temporary recommendations from the World Health Organization are described as non-binding, we know that any refusal would bring intense international and political pressure. The committee received a significant number of public submissions expressing doubts about the performance, independence and governance culture of the World Health Organization. Coalition members note recent incidents which provide grounds for concern, including the removal of the WHO Regional Director for the Western Pacific in 2023 over serious misconduct, the removal of the WHO Syria representative in 2022 for corruption and fraud and the decision by the current WHO director-general to admit former Zimbabwean dictator Robert Mugabe as a WHO goodwill ambassador. Coalition members recognise the value of multilateral institutions but remain troubled by the lack of clear mechanisms to ensure that WHO leadership, internal politics or external influences do not colour decisions that Australia would be expected to follow.

Financial implications of these amended regulations also remain unclear. While not technically mandating new contributions, the practical expectation would be for Australia to increase funding and expand domestic capabilities. Most alarming is the requirement for countries to address so-called misinformation and disinformation, without clear definitions. This opens the door to potential restrictions on freedom of expression in this country. Australia's pandemic response must be improved, not outsourced. Any future agreement must protect our sovereign decision-making, ensure parliamentary oversight and guarantee full transparency.

We strongly support international cooperation, but it must never come at the cost of sovereignty, accountability, fiscal responsibility or Australia's fundamental and inherent freedoms. We trust the federal government will keep these principles paramount in all treaties we subscribe to.