Jordon Steele-John (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

Just briefly, in relation to Senator Hanson's question, the amendment as drafted does not address the question of the patient's funding to travel to the specialist; you're right. The intent of the amendment is particularly around the device that had malfunctioned being inserted or provided to the patient, in some way, by a specialist. The device has malfunctioned and they have presented to their general practitioner. The general practitioner may be of the view that what the patient is experiencing, and its harm to the patient, is beyond their scope of practice. The GP would be freed of their mandatory reporting obligation if they take the step of referring the patient to the specialist that implanted the device. That's an example. I hope that's useful.