Page 80 - Week 01 - Tuesday, 14 February 2006

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

---

Mr Stefaniak: But the Greens supported it.

MR QUINLAN: I am shocked about that.

Question put:

That Mr Stefaniak’s amendments be agreed to.

The Assembly voted—

Question so resolved in the negative.

Amendments negatived.

Clause 7 agreed to.

Remainder of bill, by leave, taken as a whole and agreed to.

Bill agreed to.

Adjournment

Motion (by Mr Corbell) proposed:

That the Assembly do now adjourn.

Abortion

DR FOSKEY (Molonglo) (5.31): Today I want to contribute to the debate that is occurring in the federal parliament about whether ministerial discretion or an authoritative committee should decide whether or not a doctor can prescribe mifepristone, or RU486, to women and others in the Australian community. My speech comes from a paper presented by Professor Terence Hull at the launch of a booklet at Parliament House on 8 February. I found his talk very useful and note that it has not made its way into the media, as has a lot of much less informative material.

The establishment in 1963 of the Australian Drug Evaluation Committee occurred in the wake of the thalidomide tragedy. The ADEC was created specifically to make medical and scientific evaluations and remove such judgment calls from politics. The ADEC still exists and it is an expert committee of the TGA, or the Therapeutic Goods Administration. The ADEC’s brief includes, first, assessment of the quality, risk-benefit, effectiveness and access within a reasonable time of any drug referred to it for evaluation; and, second, medical and scientific evaluations of applications for the registration of prescription drugs.

---

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