Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee, , 39:05 to 43:46
Debate on balancing the public's right to health information with regulatory restrictions on promoting unapproved or private market therapeutic goods.
Topics: Health, Freedom of information
Speakers: Hon Anne Ruston, Prof Anthony Lawler, Ellie Whiteaker
Um and and and I I would just highlight there is a there is a a point of of uh not blurriness, but a point of uh of of uh of lack of clarity when it goes between one of those things. Gone gone too far in one way, it is suppression of information to the public. If you take it the other way, then there is then I think the unfortunate argument is it doesn't really matter what what a news company says as long as long as it's during the news hour as opposed to during the ads. And I don't think that that's defensible either.
Yeah. Um I suppose you know it it it's interesting in terms of like a media deadline might be today. Yeah. Because I mean, we know what media is like that. I mean, this idea that there's some sort of process where you have to go to the TGA and ask for advice, um, I mean, do Do you think that maybe your laws could be reviewed to make sure that they're still fit for purpose in an environment where we're seeing more and more of the PAC recommendations having significant financial sort of requirements on that that we've many of well we certainly have already seen some of the um the suppliers have gone through the TGA process, got the approval from the TGA but are not prepared to provide their product into the market at the price that the T that the government's prepared to offer. They know there's a demand for their product, it's going to go into the into the private market. You've obviously approved it on the basis that you believe that it's safe, which is obviously your job. I mean, is the change in the market and the environment at the moment about the number of products that are coming into the to Australia safe by your standard but haven't been approved to go on to the PBS, so therefore are not being listed through that mechanism. For there to be a better mechanism by which Australians can understand what is available to them. Is there an opportunity to review? I understand the problem you're trying to solve here, but this seems to me a little bit like a a hammer on a walnut. Um any opportunity to have a review about how we go about providing information to Australians about what is available to them to make decisions about their own health.
So that there's a lot in there, Senator. Uh and uh and uh part of it is the fact that yes, we do approve uh therapeutic goods because they're safe, but that's in the context of balancing risks versus benefit, and we do that in the context of patients having communications with their health care practitioners where appropriate. So we think that that's an important part of the checks and balances there. Uh the the second thing I I would say is that one of the reasons that we issue this guidance is so that news outlets don't have to come to us on every story they're right. It's to give them clarity around what we do consider to be advertising. But the third thing, and and it goes partly through our conversation yesterday evening is is we have some specific examples. Um I I don't I I mean I I'm fully fully conscious of the increase in media interest. We've had an absolute skyrocketing media queries around a whole lot of things, and that's part of our role as a as a as a regulator and as a part of the public service is to communicate through those channels. But we're actually finding that we're developing very positive and productive relationships with the media who are very interested in ensuring that their reporting is is is factual and representative of advances and does not fall into that area. So we've developed this guidance uh and we believe it provides information that helps that and when there are areas kind of on that fringe. But to your question, absolutely we are we are uh we have a uh an advertising code, we uh work with uh stakeholders uh on on reviewing that and on how that's implemented and how that's having a direct effect. And we're always open to um ensuring that our um our legislative instruments as much as they are within our control uh are reflective of of what's happening with respect to society and advances in in therapeutics.
Yeah, I I probably contend that the media is contacting you not because they're worried about making a mistake. I think they're worried that that they're giving information that's incorrect, I think they're worried about you know you coming down to the. Yeah, well, I I hope not because it sort of strikes me is that you we need some real clarity around what you're actually talking about here because I would have thought providing people with information is not advertising and telling somebody about how to get something I wouldn't consider was advertising. So anyway, um we'll continue to have this conversation because I think it's a really important one. Um Chair, I I don't know what the situation does we could just hand on to.
Uh I was going to go to Senator Antic next. Sure.