Page 1310 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 11 April 2018
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
The ACT government provided just over $112,000 in funding to support the trial locally. This was part of a broader measure in the 2016-17 budget, allocating $1.3 million in funding over four years to expand access to sexual health and bloodborne virus vaccination, testing and treatment for vulnerable and priority populations in the ACT.
Prevention and reducing the transmission rates of HIV and other bloodborne viruses and sexually transmissible infections is a priority for the government. In 2016 ACT Health developed a statement of priorities that has helped to guide an evidence-based approach to the prevention and treatment of bloodborne viruses and sexually transmitted infections in the ACT.
Committing to the trial of PrEP in the ACT was a key part of this statement of priorities. Although it is too early to assess any impact of PrEP in the ACT, in New South Wales, where implementation started in early 2016, there is convincing early evidence of effectiveness. This includes a 24 per cent reduction in HIV diagnoses in gay and bisexual men when compared to the average for the same period in the past six years.
With medical advances such as the PrEP, as the motion further notes, through the Council of Australian Government’s health council meetings last year the ACT government joined the Victorian government in raising the issue of mandatory deferral periods for gay blood donors. As a result, last year the health council called on the blood service to bring forward its review plan for 2018. As we have heard, the blood service has now re-established an independent expert review committee to again look into deferral policies relating to sexual activity of blood donors, with an original review conducted in 2012. As part of this review it is understood that the committee will revisit the appropriate length and structure of deferrals for male-to-male sex and other sexual-activity-based risks and review international practice and research on this issue.
In addition, the ACT government acknowledges and agrees to the calls in Mr Steel’s motion to write to advocate for a reduction or elimination of the mandatory deferral period. As the minister responsible, I am glad to be able to advocate for this important change against this outdated requirement.
I note Mrs Dunne’s amendment to refer this matter to the committee. I certainly note the good work of the committee. The motion calls for the ACT government to write on behalf of the Assembly to the TGA and the federal health minister to consider the elimination of all deferral periods, consider a greater role for individual risk-based assessments and, importantly adopt the recommendations of the expert panel undertaking this work. Even with all the good intent in the world I do not believe the Assembly should replicate the work of the expert panel that has been established nationally, and the Assembly would do well today to encourage the federal minister to implement the recommendations of the expert panel when it reports by the end of this year.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video