Scott Ludlam (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

asked the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills, Science and Research, upon notice, on 7 June 2012:

(1) Did the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO) cease fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) production through the National Medical Cyclotron in 2003 and reinstitute supply only in 2010 by Positron Emission Tomography (PET) in conjunction with PETNET Solutions.

(2) Did this withdrawal of ANSTO from the market coincide with the increased clinical demand for FDG under the PET data collection program of the Department of Health and Aging.

(3) Did private companies supply the FDG market in the absence of ANSTO production.

(4) Did patients miss out on best management of their illness due to limited supplies of FDG.

(5) Did ANSTO seek advice from the Department of Health and Aging on the roll out of Medical Benefits Scheme funding for PET.

(6) Was Professor Andrew Scott on the ANSTO Board when approval for PET was given.

(7) Was Professor Scott closely involved with the Department of Health and Aging with respect to PET funding and data collection initiatives.

(8) Has the failure of ANSTO to understand the FDG market size:

(a) led to overinvestment in the capacity of the PETNET Solutions facility, including the investment of $17.5 million in public funds, despite little prospect of commercial return; and (b) unfairly undermined the business of commercial operators who receive no government funding.

(10) What was the reason for ANSTO increasing its cost base to take on the PETNET Solutions branding.

(11) Given that the PETNET Solutions facility was designed to supply more than FDG, what else has it supplied to date.