3 April 2025

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS (15:26): I rise to speak very briefly today on this bill. When the tobacco and e-cigarette reforms were debated in this place last year, the Greens were very supportive of the measures that were aimed at minimising the harm caused by the tobacco industry and, of course, vaping. Those reforms included closure orders that could be put in place to limit the sale of illegal tobacco and e-cigarettes. At the time, the Hon. Ben Hood moved some amendments regarding the rights of the lessor in relation to a closure order. At that time, we indicated we were not in a position to support those amendments because we had not had enough time to consider them.

The bill seeks to address some of the complications with respect to implementing the closure orders now that the legislation has been in place for some months. We are supportive of the general provisions of this bill, which will provide certainty around responsibilities and rights of lessors where closure orders are put in place in their premises. We know that the Hon. Frank Pangallo and the Hon. Connie Bonaros have filed a number of amendments that would introduce additional types of closure orders, namely, a short-term order.

Similar to last time, we have not had a great amount of time to consider the amendments or to consult with stakeholders. Therefore, in terms of considering the amendments, we will be guided by the advice that the government provides during the committee stage. I am certainly open to the amendments, but I am keen to understand how they might work in practise, and obviously the government has access to that level of information via the department so I will watch the debate closely. We are supportive of the substantive bill and certainly are open to the amendments should they be considered workable by the government.

5 March 2025

CANTEST HEALTH AND DRUG CHECKING SERVICE

Adjourned debate on motion of Hon. R.A. Simms:

That this council—

1. Notes that CanTEST Health and Drug Checking Service:

(a) is Australia's first fixed-site health and drug checking service, launched by the Australian Capital Territory government as a six-month pilot on 21 July 2022, and has been extended for another six months;

(b) provides a confidential pill-testing service that analyses contents of drugs to help service users better understand the unknown and potentially dangerous substances in illicit drugs; and

(c) provides appropriate information, counselling and advice to service users based on their specific test result, to encourage choices that reduce overall drug use and the harms associated with taking illicit drugs.

2. Recognises that drug checking is a harm reduction service that leads to most users of the service opting to discard tainted drugs.

3. Calls on the Malinauskas government to establish the fixed-site health and drug checking service in South Australia.

(Continued from 22 February 2023)

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS (18:10): I thank members for their contribution: the Hon. Michelle Lensink and the Hon. Tung Ngo for what was a very brief contribution. He was not kidding when he said it was going to be brief.

The PRESIDENT: Hear, hear!

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS: It was briefer than I had possibly imagined it could be.

The PRESIDENT: A marvellous contribution.

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS: Might I say, I am disappointed to see the two major political parties in this place failing to adopt a position in favour of drug and pill testing. South Australia is at odds with almost every other jurisdiction in our country now. The ACT has pill testing available. New South Wales is trialling pill testing at the moment. Victoria is trialling pill testing. Even the conservative government in Queensland is trialling pill testing. Why not South Australia? Why are we not going down this path? I think it is very disappointing that the two major parties are avoiding taking a position on such an important issue.

The fixed-site drug-checking facility I had the opportunity to visit in the ACT when it first opened up is a really impressive facility and I encourage members of this place to check it out when they are in Canberra and have a look at the incredible service that is being provided. This is not about being soft on drugs; this is about saving lives.

I know from discussions that I have had with many parents who have children who are in their teenage years in particular that this is something they welcome because it gives people information about potentially dangerous substances and encourages them to make safe choices. It is also important to note—and this was confirmed to me when I spoke to the health workers in the ACT—that no drug-testing facility encourages people to take drugs, and all drug-testing facilities make it very clear to the people who use those facilities that taking illicit substances is always dangerous, it is always risky.

The whole purpose of the exercise is to mitigate risk and to save lives. It is certainly clear from what has unfolded, particularly interstate in Victoria, where young people have suffered long-term adverse health consequences, that we should be doing everything we can to provide our young people in particular with the information they need to make smart choices. I encourage the two major political parties in this place to show some leadership on this issue and to listen to the health advice. This is backed by the AMA and a range of other organisations. This is not a radical Greens idea; it is mainstream and it is time for the two major parties to get with the program.

The council divided on the motion:

Ayes 2

Noes 13

Majority 11

AYES

NOES

Motion thus negatived.

4 March 2025

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS (15:08): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before addressing a question without notice to the Minister for Industrial Relations and Public Sector on the topic of assaults in hospitals.

Leave granted.

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS: Last month, the ABC reported that across the state there had been a 6 per cent increase in Code Black incidents at SA Health sites, where there is violence or threats of aggression. In the regions, the figures have almost doubled from 385 in 2023 to 668 incidents in 2024. Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation SA branch executive director Samantha Mead has said, and I quote:

We know that nurses and midwives, and other health workers, have been exposed to violence, attacks and aggressive behaviour. We also believe that in no way, shape or form should that be part of the job.

My question to the Minister for Industrial Relations and Public Sector therefore is:

1. What is the government doing to protect our essential frontline workers and prevent these sorts of safety issues in their workplace, particularly at a time when the government is struggling to recruit people to work in our public health sector?
2. What is the government doing in terms of providing additional support to public sector staff in regional hospitals?

The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, Attorney-General, Minister for Industrial Relations and Public Sector, Special Minister of State) (15:10): I thank the honourable member for his question. As a government, we think we agree with the sentiments that were outlined in the honourable member's question: everybody has the right to go to work in the morning and expect to come home in the same condition as they left; that is, be and feel safe at work.

I know I have had the opportunity as the Minister for Industrial Relations and Public Sector to spend a little bit of time, along with my colleague the Hon. Chris Picton, member for Kaurna and Minister for Health and Wellbeing, with a range of people, including those who provide security services in our public hospitals, who do a remarkable job in what is often a difficult situation. I know that as a government we will continue to look to support those who provide that frontline security, who literally are on the frontline of the frontline in providing these important public sector services and certainly that extends to regional hospitals as well.

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS (15:11): Supplementary: is the government considering providing additional support for regional hospitals in particular?

The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, Attorney-General, Minister for Industrial Relations and Public Sector, Special Minister of State) (15:11): I thank the honourable member for his question. I know it is something that the Minister for Health is acutely aware of. I know the Minister for Health has visited dozens and dozens of hospitals right across South Australia. We were recently, last week, at a country cabinet in the Adelaide Plains area just north of Adelaide where the Minister for Health visited some more of our regional health services, so I know it is something he is keen to make sure that we see: the best health services being provided for South Australians regardless of where they live.

28 November 2024

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS (17:11): I rise to speak in favour of the bill on behalf of the Greens. The Greens know that prevention is better than cure, not to mention being cheaper and more cost effective. We know we must find ways to keep people healthier throughout their lives rather than just treating illnesses once people get sick.

Successive reviews, both internationally and in Australia, have recommended that governments reorient their health systems towards primary and preventative health care. I think that is particularly important in the context of the debate that we are having around ramping in our state. We know that when you prevent people from being ill that also reduces the pressure that our hospital system is under. It is essential to ensure we have a healthy community and to reduce the strain of our emergency departments and hospitals.

The health of South Australians can be turned around with the right care, support and interventions early on. Primary health care is crucial to the provision of a responsive, effective and high-quality health system. Indeed, it is better to build a fence at the top of the cliff than to simply have an ambulance waiting at the bottom. Unfortunately, preventative health care has not always received the attention that it deserves in our state, but we do welcome this move by the government.

I want to acknowledge, as I have often in this place, the leadership of Minister Picton. He is someone who is passionate about preventative health, and I think he has a very strong track record. If you look at the legislation that he has explored during his time as minister, he has a very strong track record of trying to move our state further in the prevention space, and we certainly welcome that.

The Greens hope the Preventative Health SA agency will receive the funding it needs to carry out its essential work. We look forward to reading the strategic plan that Preventative Health SA will release in 2026, and we look forward to seeing the priorities and measures the agency will identify as key to improving the health and wellbeing of South Australians. Indeed, for my part, I will continue to push for action on childhood obesity.

Members will be aware that I have a bill that I plan to introduce into parliament in the new year, which is currently being drafted, that will prevent fast-food restaurants from popping up near schools. I have another bill to prevent junk food being advertised on public assets and within 500 metres of schools, and I intend to continue to advance that in the new year.

For now, it is important to note that the Greens support the passage of this bill. We do hope it leads to a more comprehensive approach to promoting the health of South Australians, and ultimately we hope it leads to a greater focus on primary healthcare services and preventative health because we know that this will benefit everybody in our community.

27 November 2024

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS (17:21): I move:

That this council—

1. Recognises that 1 December is World AIDS Day.

2. Notes that the Australian theme for 2024 is It Starts With Me.

3. Notes that approximately 1,400 people are estimated to be living with HIV in South Australia.

4. Acknowledges the success of South Australia’s public health response to HIV, and that new infections have been declining over the last 10 years with people living with HIV now able to live a long, healthy life as a result of:

(a) antiretroviral therapy medication;

(b) community-led initiatives through grassroots organisations;

(c) peer education by including priority populations in responses;

(d) harm reduction through needle and syringe programs; and

(e) prevention through regular testing and interventions such as PrEP and condom use.

5. Calls on the Malinauskas government to continue the commitment to virtually eliminate HIV transmission by 2030 and reduce the impact of HIV on those living with the virus in the community by committing to the full implementation of the Ninth National HIV Strategy:

(a) empowering communities to educate, raise awareness and combat stigma and discrimination;

(b) allocating sufficient funding for high-quality HIV testing, care and treatment, prevention, advocacy and research; and

(c) expanding access to high-quality support services to affected and at-risk communities.

This motion is recognising that 1 December is World AIDS Day. It notes the Australian theme for 2024 is It Starts With Me, and it notes that there are approximately 1,400 people living with HIV in our state. It also acknowledges the success of South Australia's public health response to HIV and notes that new infections have been declining over the last 10 years, with people living with HIV able to live long and healthy lives.

It also calls on the Malinauskas government to continue its commitment to virtually eliminate HIV transmission by 2030 and reduce the impact of HIV on those living with the virus in the community by committing to the full implementation of the Ninth National HIV Strategy. Some of the elements of the strategy are outlined in the motion.

World AIDS Day is an international day that began in 1988. It is held on 1 December each year to help raise awareness about HIV and AIDS. The human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) is a virus that affects the immune system. It gradually destroys cells called CD4 cells, which usually help the body stay healthy by fighting off disease. While there is no vaccine or cure for HIV infection, there are effective treatments that can prevent the transmission of HIV and the progression to AIDS, and help ensure a near-normal life expectancy for people who are HIV positive. These treatments are known as antiretroviral therapy. They stop the virus from reproducing itself, which can lead to a lower viral load. The treatment involves a combination of drugs being used together.

HIV positive people who take antiretrovirals daily, as prescribed, and achieve and maintain an undetectable viral load are not able to sexually transmit the virus to a partner who is HIV negative. That is one of the really great innovations that we have seen in HIV prevention in this country over the last few years, and it is one of the reasons why it is so important that people who are at risk of acquiring the virus, in particular men who have sex with men, should ensure that they are being tested regularly for HIV. If they are considered to be at high risk of acquiring the virus, in consultation with their doctor they should get access to PrEP, the medication that can be taken daily which reduces the risk of HIV significantly.

Thanks to the improvement in HIV treatments, infection is now a manageable chronic disease for many people in countries like Australia. Globally, there has been a 60 per cent reduction in the number of new HIV infections since the peak of the virus in 1995. According to the Kirby Institute at the University of New South Wales, Australia is tracking well towards the elimination of HIV transmission in our country, with just 555 new diagnoses in 2022. This represents a decline of 48 per cent over the last 10 years. That is really significant.

Australia is also leading the world in HIV reductions in gay and bisexual men, achieving a remarkable 57 per cent reduction in new HIV diagnoses since 2013. This really demonstrates the success of comprehensive approaches to HIV prevention that have been made within the LGBTI community. I think it is worth noting what some of these approaches are. They include:

• community-led health promotion strategies, such as those run in SA by SAMESH;
• regular sexual health testing and treatment through facilities like the O'Brien Street Practice and the Adelaide Sexual Health Centre;
• treatment as a prevention, and by that I mean the finding that an HIV positive partner on effective HIV treatment cannot transmit the virus to a negative partner; and
• the rollout of PrEP.

I have spoken a bit about PrEP. Indeed, I was proud, during my time in federal parliament, to advocate for PrEP to be listed on the PBS, and I certainly welcomed the decision of the Turnbull government to do so. That has been carried on by the successive Labor government. Other effective preventative measures more broadly include increased condom use and harm reduction through a needle and syringe program, such as the Clean Needle Program that is run by SA Health.

In South Australia there are estimated to be 1,400 people who live with the HIV virus. Worldwide, though, there are still estimated to be 39.9 million cases. Whilst we have made huge strides here in our own country, and indeed here in South Australia, in tackling the AIDS virus and preventing transmission, sadly this is still a prevalent virus around the world. There are many people who are continuing to die from AIDS because they do not have access to treatment, particularly in developing countries.

World AIDS Day is also a time to reflect on the huge social effect of HIV and AIDS and the terrible loss of life that has occurred over the last 40 years. Indeed, more than 42.3 million people have died as a result of AIDS-related illnesses throughout the world. Of course, we honour them on World AIDS Day and we grieve for the loss of life.

I think it is worth noting, when talking about World AIDS Day, that such was the stigma associated with HIV at the height of the AIDS virus that many people, particularly gay men, were forced to die in isolation, separated from family and friends at this tragic time in their lives. I think one of the great changes that we have seen in Australia over the last several decades is that the campaign to end stigma around HIV has been very effective, and there is a broader understanding of the HIV virus and, in particular, a broader understanding of how this virus is transmitted and what can be done to reduce the transmission. That understanding has meant that people who are HIV positive are able to live happy and fulfilling lives and are able to be members of the community that can live their lives free from discrimination.

The theme of the 2024 World AIDS Day event in Australia is It Starts With Me, which highlights that the fight against HIV is still far from over and calls on everyone to take the actions they can to raise awareness, challenge stigma and support people living with HIV.

In closing, in the lead-up to World AIDS Day on 1 December, people may be asking what they can do. This is a time for members of the South Australian community to show their support for people living with HIV, to raise awareness about HIV prevention, treatment and care within their communities, to do what they can to eliminate stigma and discrimination around HIV and to remember people who have died of AIDS-related illnesses.

It is also a time for governments to continue the commitment that has been a multiparty commitment in Australia over many years now to reduce the prevalence of HIV in the community. This includes adopting initiatives such as empowering communities to educate, raise awareness and combat stigma and discrimination, and allocating sufficient for high-quality HIV testing. I note the Malinauskas government recently made rapid HIV testing available at some key sites in South Australia. I welcome that, I think it is an excellent innovation. It is excellent that people are able to get their results in a timely manner and are able to access support from healthcare professionals when they deal with those results.

It is vital that we continue care, treatment, prevention, advocacy and research in this area, and we need to expand access to high-quality support services to affected and at-risk communities. I believe that it is possible for us to end the transmission of the HIV virus in Australia. We need to do what we can to combat this virus internationally as well and support people, particularly in developing countries, to access the treatment and support they need. With that, I conclude my remarks.

13 November 2024

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS (16:10): I move:

That this council—

1. Notes that not-for-profit hospitals such as Burnside Hospital, Glenelg Community Hospital, North Eastern Community Hospital and the Stirling Hospital play a pivotal role in providing health care for local communities.

2. Recognises that these hospitals partner with local health networks to deliver critical services, playing an important role in reducing the patient load burden on public hospitals.

3. Notes that the new national standards introduced by the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care, in particular standard AS4187 (now AS5369):

(a) imposes tighter minimum requirements for health service organisations’ compliance with reprocessing of reusable medical devices in health service organisations; and

(b) will necessitate major multimillion-dollar infrastructure upgrades at some health service organisations to remain compliant.

4. Calls on the Malinauskas government to make available no-interest loans to community hospitals to allow them to undertake the necessary infrastructure upgrades to remain operational.

On 14 December 2023, the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care introduced new standards aimed at better protecting patients undergoing surgery. The commission was tasked with reviewing licensing standards around hospitals, day procedure centres and clinics where cosmetic procedures were being performed. This followed a joint investigation between Four Corners and Nine newspapers, which found that doctors without specialist qualifications were operating on patients in privately funded facilities with serious hygiene and safety breaches.

The Greens, of course, welcome the more stringent standards that have been put in place; it is appropriate that that occur. But this does mean that many not-for-profit community hospitals will need to undertake extensive infrastructure upgrades in order to meet these standards, and that is going to put a significant cost burden on those hospitals.

The Glenelg Community Hospital, for instance, I understand requires $8 million to upgrade their sterilisation department to meet these new requirements. I understand that the Stirling Hospital would require in excess of $50 million to undertake major infrastructure upgrades, including resizing operating theatres and replacing the building's water filtration system. Their most pressing challenge is upgrading the ventilation system in their theatre and procedure rooms, which is estimated to cost half a million dollars.

As not-for-profit community hospitals, any surpluses made by these hospitals are automatically reinvested back into the hospital infrastructure, the equipment and staff, so these major infrastructure upgrades are beyond their normal annual expenditure, and they do not have the capital reserves required to provide for these infrastructure upgrades.

The private health sector in South Australia is facing increased pressure. It is not my role to advocate for the private health system, but what we are talking about here is a community hospital that provides a very important community service. The closure of local hospitals at a community level has put increased strain on the public system. Indeed, over the last decade rising costs for consumables, wages and services have compounded the challenges that these small hospitals face. Furthermore, revenue from health insurance has not kept pace with the true cost of care delivery.

Despite these challenges not-for-profit community hospitals play an important role in not only providing health care delivery to their respective communities but also in reducing the patient loan burden. I understand, for instance, that the Stirling Hospital partners with the Southern Adelaide Local Health Network to deliver critical services such as ear, nose and throat care, and this is a really important partnership.

I also note that in the last financial year, ending June 2024, the Stirling Hospital had a total of 4,212 patient admissions, including 3,315 day surgeries and 595 overnight stays. The Glenelg Community Hospital in the same period treated over 7,000 patients and works with SA Health on waiting list initiatives and care for special needs children for dental surgery.

These are hospitals that provide a vital community service, particularly, might I say, the hospital in Stirling. It operates in an area where there are not local hospitals. It is a critical service for that community, and its future hangs in the balance as a result of this new regulatory regime. The Greens are calling on the Malinauskas Labor government to make interest-free loans available to these not-for-profit hospitals so that they can undertake the necessary upgrades so that they can do the work that is required so that they can remain operational.

We are not saying 'give private hospitals a blank cheque'; we are talking about only three small community hospitals. This is a bespoke solution for those community not-for-profit hospitals so that they can remain operational. It would be easy for the government to make an interest-free loan available and to work with those hospitals to develop a repayment plan down the track, and so I do urge the government to consider this as an option.

29 October 2024

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS (17:26): I rise to indicate support of this legislation on behalf of the Greens. The Greens have always supported a health approach to substance use. We believe that harm minimisation is the most appropriate way to reduce the adverse health, social and economic consequences of alcohol and the use of other drugs. We want to see a reduction in high-risk uses of nicotine and tobacco, as we acknowledge that they are substances that can cause significant harm. Of course, one of the risks around vaping and access to e-cigarettes is that if young people and children get access to these drugs from a very young age, they are going to be using them potentially throughout the life cycle.

It is important for us that there are supports in place to help young people under the age of 15 to move away from nicotine. This is an argument that the Greens have consistently made in the federal parliament and, indeed, in July when the federal government moved to ban the importation, manufacture, sale, supply and commercial possession of vapes in Australia, the Greens made that point.

In the vaping reforms passed by the federal parliament in June, the Greens negotiated with the Albanese government in Canberra to secure some positive measures to support a health approach in relation to e-cigarettes and vapes. Under this new agreement, GPs can continue to prescribe therapeutic vapes. Possession of quantities for personal use will not be subject to criminal charge. There will be a review of the legislation after three years and additional funding will be provided to support young people quitting vaping. I note that this will be of benefit to young people in South Australia as well.

We know that this proposed bill will bring South Australia into line with changes made at the federal level. Some of the changes include increasing penalties for the sale to children, of selling tobacco without a licence, advertising tobacco or cigarette products, or smoking in a smoke-free area. We also welcome the establishment of a five-metre smoke-free and vape-free buffer at public transport stops to support the health of people who are waiting for public transport.

I might take this opportunity to recognise the leadership of Minister Picton. I think he has been a real national leader in this space. Indeed, I recognise his work as a political staffer when he worked for the Hon. Nicola Roxon when she was federal health minister on world-leading legislation to ban tobacco advertising, in effect, on tobacco packets and to implement plain cigarette packaging.

That was a world-leading piece of legislation and I know that before he was a minister Chris Picton worked on that. Here in this parliament the minister has taken up the fight against the big tobacco companies, so I commend him for that. I also echo the statements made by the Hon. Frank Pangallo that the next step here is surely to phase out the use of cigarettes over time, and the Greens are certainly supportive of the Hon. Frank Pangallo's bill.

I also thank the minister for the collegial way in which he has worked with the Greens in approaching this bill. When the legislation came forward, one of the issues we were concerned about was the potential for young people to be involved in controlled purchase operations or, in effect, sting operations. Our concern was that you could see very young people being involved in these operations, potentially being put at risk, and that appropriate safeguards were not in place. I understand that issue was also of concern to the opposition.

We did not want to go down the path of entirely banning this practice, because we have had advice from the government that the involvement of young people in these operations is of benefit to the broader scheme, because it acts as a potential deterrent. My amendment strikes an appropriate balance between protecting the young people involved and ensuring their safety, whilst also protecting the integrity of the government's scheme. To save time I will talk the chamber through those amendments now during the second reading stage, so that I do not have to do so in committee.

The Greens are proposing that a designated person—that is, a person who can participate in a controlled purchase operation—means a child who is or above the age of 16 years, so in effect it restricts the participation in these activities to 16 and 17 year olds. It makes clear that the minister cannot authorise a designated person to be a controlled purchase officer unless the parent or legal guardian of the person has consented in writing.

The third very important element, which I think points to the issue the Hon. Frank Pangallo raised, is that the authorised officer responsible for supervising any controlled purchase operation involving a designated person—that is, someone who is 16 or 17—will be required to undertake an assessment of the operation and must ensure that appropriate measures are in place to ensure the safety of the designated person during that operation.

I think that should allay some of the concerns honourable members have. It certainly allays the concerns the Greens had when we heard about the involvement of young people in these potential sting operations. I am encouraged by the comments made at the second reading stage that indicate there is broad support in this chamber for that approach.

16 October 2024

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS (20:26): I rise to speak against this bill. As noted by my colleague, the Hon. Tammy Franks, this is not simply a matter of conscience for the Greens, it is actually a matter of party policy for us. Our party has a very clear policy position in favour of recognising abortion as fundamental to health care.

I do want to say that it is always been a frustration for me that the two old parties approach issues of women's reproductive rights as conscience votes. It creates the impression that these issues are opt-in luxury items and it seems that whenever we are dealing with issues of gay rights or women's rights these become conscience votes of the old parties. I do find that a very frustrating state of affairs, particularly when they bind on so many other policy issues in this place that have a significant moral dimension.

I want to take a moment to reflect some of the Greens' policy and read that into Hansard. Our policy that we took to the last federal election was very clear:

The Greens will continue to support giving people choices over their bodies by ensuring access to safe and affordable sexual and reproductive healthcare.

We are committed to making access to abortion safe, accessible, legal and affordable across Australia.

As the Hon. Tammy Franks has stated, no matter who represents our party in the parliament, there is a clear commitment that we will defend women's reproductive rights in this place. It is very clear to me that this is going to be an important issue at the next state election, as it is over in Queensland, given the broad support for the radical proposition that the Hon. Mr Hood has put before the parliament from the Liberal side of politics, and so the Greens will be doing everything we can to resist this assault on women's reproductive rights in the days and months ahead.

I also want to acknowledge the leadership of my colleague, the Hon. Tammy Franks, over many years in this space. The Hon. Ms Franks has been a strong and tireless voice for the rights of women, in particular defending women's reproductive rights, and I really want to acknowledge her leadership. I know that it is valued by many, many people in the community and, indeed, it is an issue that has been raised with me many, many times when people reflect on the great work that the honourable member has done in this place. She has been a really staunch advocate, so I want to recognise her for her work on that.

I am opposed to this bill not only because it is Greens policy to stand for women's reproductive rights but also because I consider this bill to be morally reprehensible. There are already significant safeguards in place when it comes to women accessing late-term abortions. One of the things that has really upset me about this debate is the highly emotive and I think disrespectful language that has been used in relation to those women who have had to make that incredibly difficult decision, a decision that they are making in consultation with healthcare professionals, not politicians. These decisions should be made by women in consultation with healthcare professionals, not by members of parliament who seek to regulate what people do in their personal lives.

I want to reference some points made here by Professor Warren Jones. Professor Jones has had more than 45 years' experience working in the women's health field. This is a letter that he wrote to The Advertiser when this issue came on the agenda just a few weeks ago. He said:

It is clear that some have no knowledge of the emotional or physical trauma experienced by women with unplanned and unwanted pregnancies…

In Sydney in the early 1960s, I worked in a 24-bed hospital ward dedicated to the acute care of women who were recovering or dying from infection and haemorrhage after illegal abortions.

I then had similar experiences in England and campaigned for abortion law reform leading up to the passage of the enlightened UK Abortion Act in 1967.

Legalised and safe termination of pregnancy is now well established in SA. It is not in the purvey of community bias. It is solely a matter of a woman's rights and her choice.

The currently proposed, and politically motivated, private member's Bill is dangerous to women.

Severe mental illness and critical medical disorders usually do not manifest until pregnancy is well advanced when a late but life-saving decision for termination must be taken by the woman and two doctors.

To make this decision conditional on the baby being adopted out is unethical and medically reprehensible.

I agree with Professor Warren Jones and, indeed, this appears to be the view of the overwhelming majority of healthcare professionals who work in this space and provide advice and support to women in these circumstances.

I also want to reference one of the other elements of this debate that I found really disturbing, and that is this kind of flippant way in which adoption has been talked about as a solution: 'Oh, well, these women should be forced to have the baby and then just put the baby up for adoption.' Again, I think the Liberal speakers who are offering that, and those in this debate outside who have put that solution forward, are being blind to history.

Back in 2012, there was a comprehensive Senate inquiry into forced adoption practices here in our country, looking at the significant effect that this practice had for women. It led to a national apology, recognising the long-term trauma that those practices did to those women. This parliament, here in South Australia, also provided an apology to those women. So, to simply dismiss their experience, and to sort of suggest that this is some kind of easy solution and easy pathway, again, I find demonstrates that the Liberals just do not get it.

This brings me to my next point, and that is what I see as being the far right's takeover of the South Australian Liberal Party, something that I see to be very disturbing here in this parliament. I think it is worth reflecting that this is the second private members' Wednesday, or second week in a row, when we have dealt with these thorny issues where we have seen Liberal speakers presenting world views that I think are wildly out of step with the broader South Australian community.

What we are seeing, I think, is an importation of the far-right politics of Donald Trump in the United States, and it is being brought into a South Australian context. That is really concerning, I think, in terms of what that means for this kind of debate here in South Australia. I know some people might find that shocking, but it is very clear that these tactics are being adopted and deployed here in South Australia, and I urge the Liberal Party not to go down this path because I see it as being very divisive and it is very dangerous.

If you look at what has unfolded over in the United States, where there has been a gradual erosion of women's rights, and in particular their right to access abortion, that is resulting in very dangerous health outcomes for women, and I do not want to see that kind of environment being created here in South Australia.

This is a matter of health care. It should not be a matter for politicians and, indeed, this was resolved some time ago. It is now being reopened in the context of a Liberal Party preselection that is coming down the line, and I think that is really regrettable. I hope that we are not going to see this sort of culture war politics being played out in the months and years ahead by the South Australian Liberal Party. In closing, I oppose this bill, and I urge all members to vote it down and to stand firm in standing up for women's reproductive rights.

15 October 2024

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS (15:48): I rise to speak in favour of the Automated External Defibrillators (Public Access) (Miscellaneous) Amendment Bill 2024 on behalf of the Greens. The Greens supported the automated external defibrillators public access bill twice: firstly in 2020 when the Hon. Frank Pangallo first introduced a private member's bill, which was opposed by the former Marshall government, and again when this bill came into law in 2022 with the support of the Malinauskas Labor government.

Again, we support this bill. We consider that it will aid in the implementation and rollout of defibrillators across the state in line with the intent of the original bill that was brought forward by the Hon. Frank Pangallo. I do want to acknowledge the work of the Hon. Frank Pangallo in this regard. The honourable member has been a long-term advocate in this space and I think really led the way on this. It is an exciting thing to see South Australia become the first state in the country to actually take action on this, so I commend the Hon. Mr Frank Pangallo for his leadership and of course I acknowledge the work of the minister, the Hon. Chris Picton, as well.

We know that defibrillators save lives when they are accessible. They are simple, they are easy to use and they are highly effective. The implementation of defibrillators in public access spaces is the result of advocacy from the Heart Foundation and the Ambulance Employees Association and a range of others as well. Indeed, I remember having a look at this debate years ago when I was on the Adelaide City Council when my then colleague Councillor Philip Martin moved for the city council to install some defibrillators, and I know that that has been a success at a council level.

The changes in this bill are sensible to ensure that these devices are publicly accessible without creating unnecessary burdens. They draw a distinction between the owner and the tenant of the building and this ensures that there will be greater clarity around the responsibility for maintaining these devices. There are also changes being made to the floor area definitions that will make it easier for organisations to provide access to defibrillators.

The bill also removes the annual testing requirement. I think that is an important change because we understand that annual testing has been found to diminish the life cycle of the product, which obviously was not what was intended. I note that the opposition have indicated that they will be moving amendments to this bill in response to the concerns that have been raised by the local government sector. I had the opportunity to meet with the Local Government Association yesterday to discuss their request for a new statutory immunity to protect councils from civil lawsuits that may arise where a defibrillator might have been stolen or vandalised and then a person has a heart attack and sues for damages.

In my second reading speech in relation to the Hon. Frank Pangallo's bill back in 2022, I highlighted the problem potentially being faced by councils with respect to batteries being stolen from these devices, particularly in rural areas. While I understand the intent of the opposition's amendments, and I do respect the advocacy work of the local government sector, I am concerned that these amendments could be seen as a watering down of the honourable member's bill and could potentially move us away from building owners taking responsibility for defibrillators, which I understand could rob the bill of its veracity, and that is of concern for me.

I also note that carve-outs are not being given to smaller organisations, such as sporting clubs or not-for-profit organisations, that will also have responsibility for the installation and maintenance of these devices. I also understand from some advice that has been provided to my office from the government that some of the legal concerns that have been flagged are potentially already addressed. I think the government will no doubt talk to that when they reflect on the opposition's amendments. I will listen closely to the debate but at this stage it is not the Greens' intention to support the Liberal amendments.

25 September 2024

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS (21:22): I rise to indicate that the Greens will be supporting the bill. The Hon. Mr Pangallo and I have disagreed on a few issues over the last few days but we do agree on this issue. I certainly support his efforts to tackle cigarette use, particularly among young people. I think this is a bold step in terms of taking a phased approach to stopping the sale of tobacco products to young people, initially, but of course what this bill does is phase out cigarette use among a whole new generation coming through. I think that is a worthy public policy initiative.

The bill prohibits the sale of tobacco products to anyone born after 1 January 2009, or people who are currently 15 years or younger. I do note that there is an amendment filed by the Hon. Frank Pangallo that changes that date to the year 2007, which would impact anyone who is 17 years or younger. I am happy to entertain that amendment should it be required to secure the passage of the bill through this place.

The Greens have always supported a health approach to substance use. We believe that harm minimisation is the most appropriate way to reduce the adverse health, social and economic consequences of alcohol and other drug use. We want a reduction in high-risk uses of nicotine and tobacco, as we acknowledge that they are substances that cause serious harm.

It is important for us to note that there are supports put in place to help young people under the age of 15 move away from nicotine; however, we note that this is a private member's bill, and those services would need to be provided by the government. I look forward to hearing from the government down the track around what they might do in that regard should this bill become law.

This is an argument that the Greens have made at a federal level. During the time when vaping reforms were passed by the federal parliament in June, the Greens argued that the increase in nicotine dependence is a significant public health problem. We want to keep tobacco and nicotine products out of the hands of kids, but we also want to ensure that people can access support to address their addiction when they need it.

We are pleased that this bill does not take a punitive approach to the possession of tobacco products but instead prohibits the sale of such products to young people. New Zealand was the first jurisdiction to ban smoking for future generations. It was accompanied by other measures to make smoking less affordable and accessible and included dramatically reducing the legal amount of nicotine in tobacco products. At the same time, they increased funding for health services and rolled out additional quitting services.

This was a comprehensive package of reforms and supports that was due to see health benefits at a significant level for people in New Zealand. Unfortunately, the new right-wing government in New Zealand has scrapped these reforms before they were due to be implemented in July this year. I think that is very disappointing. I also notice that the Tory government announced a plan to move down this path but never achieved that. I do hope, though, that governments in other jurisdictions take action on this.

The Greens will therefore be supporting the bill by the Hon. Frank Pangallo as we consider it to be consistent with promoting better health outcomes for people born after the year 2009, but I do want to use this opportunity to call on the government to provide additional services to support people using tobacco products.

In considering this bill, I would urge elected members to consider whether, if we had our time again, we would choose to make tobacco a product available to young people and adults here in our state. The reality is there are significant health risks that flow from tobacco use. We know that it has been linked with cancer. We also know that cigarette butts are terrible for our environment, and I will talk a little bit about that later. Really, if we had our time again, would we go down this path? What this bill does is take a staged approach to phasing out cigarettes and tobacco products in our state, and I commend it.