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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 5 Hansard (15 May) . . Page.. 1449 ..

MRS CARNELL (continuing):

The Bill also provides that, for routine complaint investigations, authorised officers will be able to enter a residential property only with the consent of the occupier or with a search warrant. In an emergency situation where there is a serious public health risk that needs urgent attention, an officer would not need consent or a warrant.

Mr Berry: When did this start?

MRS CARNELL: In 1994, Mr Berry. In both instances the officer is not entitled to remain on the property if he or she does not show his or her identification when requested to do so. One of the significant implied principles of the Bill is that a person should be given all reasonable opportunity to voluntarily comply with any direction or notice before legal enforcement is used. The Bill contains very strict provisions in relation to the privacy of an individual who has or may have a notifiable condition, such as controls on what information is collected and how that information can then be used.

The Chief Health Officer's approval must be obtained before a medical practitioner or counsellor informs the contacts of a person with a transmissible notifiable condition. In deciding to grant the approval, the Chief Health Officer has a number of factors to consider: The degree of risk of the contacts having contracted or contracting the condition; the possibility of causing undue anxiety to the person with the condition or a contact; and any other relevant matters. The general community is also afforded a degree of protection by this Bill, because there is an obligation for people who engage in activities that may result in the transmission of a notifiable condition to take all reasonable preventative measures. One of the significant new features of the Bill is a provision for authorising the notification of a contact of a person with a notifiable condition in a manner which safeguards both the rights of the individual and the health of the community.

The Bill also provides a framework for controlling activities and procedures which may give rise to significant public health risks, including licensing if necessary. It also contains mechanisms to exempt a person from the licensing requirement if the person is accredited with an approved scheme. Equity is an important principle recognised by the Government. A component of this is that the health of the greatest number is promoted and protected to the greatest capacity. This has particular implications for those who are in the higher risk groups, such as infants, older people and other groups more vulnerable to ill health. It creates an obligation to remove as many barriers to good public health as possible. It is a fine balance to protect an individual's right while also protecting the community at large. I believe the proposed legislation effectively achieves this balance by combining a range of powers with sufficient protection of civil liberties. The community expects government to take all reasonable measures to ensure the safety of food, air and water and to minimise exposure to a range of public health hazards.

Mr Speaker, I commend this Bill to the Assembly as a much-needed reform of public health legislation for the ACT. It will ensure that there is flexible legislation in place to serve the ACT community into the twenty-first century.

Debate (on motion by Mr Moore) adjourned.

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