Dr WEBSTER (Mallee) (17:41): I thank the member for Braddon, my good friend and colleague, for moving this important motion, which we discussed earlier in the year within the coalition. I particularly commend the efforts of Monash University, through DNA Screen—a study funded by the Medical Research Future Fund—led by Professor Paul Lacaze and by Dr Jane Tiller, who is in the gallery.

With some pride, I must add that it was the former coalition government in 2021 that awarded $2.97 million through the MRFF for this study, searching initially for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer and Lynch syndrome. A key takeaway point for me, as the shadow assistant minister for regional health, is responsibility within the Nationals for federal health policy, which, in large part, is about primary and preventive care, as the states generally manage but don't fully fund acute care. This is the profound potential for DNA Screen to promote preventive health care.

As the motion reads, it's very encouraging that so many young people have participated in DNA Screen's trial. The more we encourage all generations, particularly the younger generation, to change the culture around personal health the better. We, in the slightly older generation, might spend more on upkeep of our homes, motor vehicles or other assets than we do on our own health. Even the money some spend on private health cover may be more motivating as to being able to quickly address urgent care situations, than as to engaging with preventive care available under private health policies.

Primary and preventive care is also very important in regional Australia, due to the lack of urgent care locally—that is, the distance you have to travel, which is, in some cases, hours, to actually get urgent care. Screening can help identify health problems well before they become apparent and reduce the need for regional patients to be away from home for weeks or months on end for treatment because disease has been picked up too late.

This pilot program, if funded, would potentially see saliva testing kits sent out to homes. As shadow minister, I hope that regional Australians will be able to send those test kits in and be on the same status as urban Australians. The last thing that we want from a program is an outcome that exacerbates what is already a dire disparity between urban and non-urban Australians' health outcomes.

I acknowledge the advocacy of Dr Tiller for some time on preventing life insurance companies from discriminating against those who have genetic screening. It is pleasing that the government has committed to move on this issue, and we will consider this further in the coming months. Certainly the uptake of screening will improve if people do not fear negative outcomes on life insurance from being screened in the first place.

I have to note that it seems very odd indeed to punish people for taking preventive care steps. Why would you disincentivise discovering risks by making it harder for people to access life insurance? Surely, where there is risk, there is a cost threshold to manage that risk. The fact that insurance companies were looking to not insure people if they had DNA markers is disgraceful, and I am pleased that this will be stopped.

‍