Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee, , 22:02 to 29:54
Officials confirm the awarding of the Stem Cell Registry contract to Lifeblood and discuss changes to donor recruitment pathways, including cheek swabs.
Topics: Health, Procurement
Speakers: Daniel McCabe, Hon Anne Ruston
Morning. So I'm just interested to know it's um it's health tender E25515102, which I'm sure you already know. I'm just wondering what the status of that tender is.
Good morning, Senator Daniel McKay, First Assistant Secretary of Technology Assessment and Access Division. Uh that tender uh has gone into contract as of Thursday last week. Uh we have signed a contract with Life Blood to take over the Stem Cell uh registry, Senator.
Okay. Um why was the contract not finalised within the time frame required?
So as part of the um uh releasing information about the tender on OS tender, we put in an indicative date about uh when we were seeking to conclude the um evaluation uh and preferred tender. Um it took longer than we were anticipating, uh and so uh we had two uh compliant tenders uh which were evaluated. Uh we uh had to negotiate with the preferred tenderer uh and then um announce the outcome. Um that uh we did not uh signal um a preferred tender of prior to negotiations because we wanted to make sure uh that if negotiations with the preferred tender fell over that we could go back to the alternative tenderer.
Is was there any um difference between the way the two tenderers actually perform this service?
So this service is specifically for uh enrolling uh um donors into the uh registry, international searches and maintaining the registry. We have separate arrangements with states and territories for recruitment of donors, and in fact, Life Blood has had a long-standing arrangement with States and Territories for recruiting donors, Senator.
So am I correct to assume that Life Blood require the donor to go into their centre in order for them to be able to take the necessary tests through to test donor?
So that that is correct, Senator. Life Blood's had a long-term arrangement uh using uh blood tests for uh in uh enrolment, or sorry, for um testing. Uh there was an arrangement, uh one off funding arrangement uh with States and Territories in the Commonwealth with the current uh provider uh stem cell donors Australia where they um tested by cheek swabs, Angela.
So what percentage of um donor registry identification is done through cheek swabs as opposed to um going into lifeblood centers?
Uh so it's changed a bit over the last couple of years. As I said, there was a one-off um investment of a million dollars uh to Stem Cell Donors Australia in 2024. Uh back in 2024, about 90% of uh donors were tested by blood uh swabs. It's with the surge and the work that STEM cell donors did with the cheek swabs, it moved to about 50-50 in terms of the uh donors in the testing senator.
So are you worried that that 50% may not pursue the alternative pathway through lifeblood? I mean, is any has there been any work done to ensure that we are maximising the opportunity for us to be able to get donors because obviously somebody needing a donation is uh it's a it's a pretty important thing as we have seen by some of the media articles of recent times.
Certainly. So I think it's important to understand that um Commonwealth States and Territories took a decision in 2024 to invest additional money to seek um um additional donors. Uh we are in conversations, ongoing conversations with states and territories about whether we want to do additional work on uh seeking donors, and that may be uh via current arrangements that Life Blood uh provides, or there could be alternative arrangements, Senator.
Okay, well if you could keep us updated as that goes, because there has been quite significant concern expressed in the media that um it's probably worth Senator just putting on the record that
there was there has been a lot of angst caused by possibly incorrect information that's been spread in the media. Uh there has been no gap in uh seeking uh um donors and donor recruitment. Um obviously there's some transition arrangements that we need to go through now with the outcome of the tender that I've just talked about, uh, but it has been no gap.
No, but you you've actually removed a pathway for how 50 per cent of people have currently been engaging with this service. And it's through, and my understanding is because stem cell donors were sending out the cheek swap kids, so it was a much easier mechanism by which people could engage with the system. You've now removed that pathway. My understanding is you've now removed that pathway, and now the only pathway through which you can become or can come in and get tested for stem cell is through lifeblood. So I think whilst you know you may say there's been some misinformation out there, the piece of information you've just provided today is a new piece of information because I wasn't aware until this morning you actually awarded that contract. I thought the contract was still um outstanding. So what you've told us this morning is that that mechanism has now been removed from the federal government's um funding for that as a process by which to collect this information.
So can I just clarify Senator we haven't removed that arrangement? We had um through states and territories.
No, you've removed your funding from it, I'm assuming.
No, so the contract that has been awarded was not uh relating to recruitment of donors. There were there are separate arrangements in place, and I mentioned Life Blood has had separate contract arrangements with States and Territories for recruitment. Uh all governments agreed to do a one-off funding campaign in 2024, which is what uh stem cell donors uh was implementing with their cheek swabs. Yep. That mechanism on arrangements is an ongoing conversation we have with states and territories. The tender and the contract that we signed last week is completely separate. It is about operating the registry, uh it's not about the recruitment processes.
So, where was the funding from Stem Cell Australia coming from prior up until now?
So the there's two elements to this Senator. The operation of the registry uh was is funded by all governments, but it's through a contract that the Commonwealth operates. There were separate arrangements that were temporary uh for recruitment of additional donors uh that was funded separately and finished on the 30th of June this year, uh funded by states and territories and the Commonwealth. That is completely separate to the tender that I've just talked about.
No, I understand that, but you previously had been funding this mechanism. That would be between you and the states and territories, that will no longer be the case. So I think that's the piece of information that needs to be communicated because there will be disruption on the back of that. And so that's all I'm saying. I'm not suggesting it's a change intention.
That's fine, but I think it's important on the record to state that the arrangements were one-off arrangement for two years. Um those arrangements finished uh regardless of our registry tender. We are open given the heightened interest in this to have conversations with states and territories about whether we need to do additional things uh to make sure that we uh boost uh recruitment.
Sure, and maybe that's what I'm suggesting you should do. Um can I have the TGA back? Because I'm sure that I'm not the only person who wants to ask questions of the TGA. I think we all do.