Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 1 Hansard (20 February) . . Page.. 193 ..

MRS CARNELL (continuing):

There are some real issues here. Do we mandate, as other places in Australia are talking about? I personally have indicated, from a Government perspective, that I do not think mandating, requiring children to be immunised for enrolment at school or preschool, is the way to go. I think that what we have now, with some good follow-up services and with some good infrastructure to make it easier, potentially will achieve the end. That is my view. I will be very interested to see whether the committee agrees that we should not go down the mandating path. I think there is lots to look at. It is a really big issue for all parents when they make that first decision to have a child immunised or not to.

From my perspective again, the large amount of information that is out there would tend to indicate that immunisation has worked. There is no doubt that it has in a number of areas. In the next few years, we will end up with combination vaccines, which again will make it lots easier for parents, because it will mean that the children will not have to have as many injections and we will be able to combine such things as hepatitis B and others. It will be an interesting inquiry. We totally support it, and I am sure that any information that my department can give will be given very freely.

MR BERRY (11.15): Mr Speaker, Mrs Carnell and I are as one on this issue, principally because she took an immediate stand when it was announced that the Commonwealth was thinking about compulsion in relation to vaccination. That is a draconian way to deal with the issue. It was ill thought through. What the Federal Minister for Health was talking about was compulsory vaccination at the age of five years, as I recall. It is miles too late. In any vaccination program - experts disagree a little bit - it has to be picked up between year two and year three.

In my view, there will always be a very small portion of the community who disagree with these things, because there is a very small risk level with all sorts of vaccination programs. But you have to weigh it up against the common good. According to the figures I have heard mentioned, about 2 per cent of the people out there will never vaccinate their children. For my part, if they choose not to vaccinate their children, I do not want to be party to requiring them to. But what I want to make sure of is that the 97 or 98 per cent, some of whom have forgotten or have not been able to, vaccinate their children. Sixty-seven per cent already do. I want to make sure that we get it up as high we can - to 95 per cent or better.

The way to do that, in the first place, is to remove the disincentives. There are obvious disincentives there now, not the least of which are cost and access. Those are the issues to which I would direct the committee. What we have to be very wary of is that we do not whip up a great deal of hysteria about the possible dangers of vaccination, because, in my view, they are overstated. There is a risk. When I was a child, I recall that I had whooping cough. I do not know at what age it was - four or five. I was dreadfully ill. I do not know that I was near death; but I certainly recall feeling like it, anyway. I now have grandchildren, and I have no hesitation in urging my daughter to ensure that those kids are vaccinated at the right age. Ultimately, it is her decision whether she does or not; but, if she listens to me, she will have them vaccinated. I think they are vaccinated.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .