MEMBER for Mildura Jade Benham has urged the State Government to allow people to opt out of having their health records shared on a proposed centralised electronic health data system.
When debating the Health Legislation Amendment (Information Sharing) Bill 2023 in parliament this week, Ms Benham called for freedom of choice regarding whether a person’s medical information should automatically be accessible to all public health professionals.
“Over the last three years people of this state have been forced into things they didn’t wish to be – it’s a fact,” she said.
“They are sick of it – it’s a fact.
“People in my community who were locked down and mandated by the government are sick of being told what to do and being told they don’t have a choice, which is why we need an opt-out clause.”
The Bill aims to establish secure health information-sharing arrangements across Victoria’s public health system through a single, secure platform.
NSW, Queensland, SA and the ACT all have integrated electronic health systems, allowing public health services to share patient information efficiently.
At present, Victoria’s health services are on wildly different health information systems. Some still use pen and paper.
The Targeting Zero report in 2016 called for all major hospitals in Victoria to have electronic health record systems that can share patient information to reduce avoidable harm in the health system.
Murray Primary Health Network chief executive Matt Jones said two things needed to be ensured through this legislation; that quality of care can improve, and that sensitive health information is protected.
“Fundamentally we need a system where data is available to the clinician at the point of care so that they can improve the patients’ care,” Mr Jones said.
“The issues in relation to privacy are really important for government to support and resource, to protect, and they’re appropriate too.”
Ms Benham has defended the order of her speech, where she spoke of constituents who were sick of government overreach before constituents with sensitive health information or data-security concerns.
“I’ve been specifically contacted via email and phone calls on several occasions just with people frustrated at the fact that there’s no opt-out clause, so that’s why I brought that up,” Ms Benham said.
“It’s highlighted by the times and the threats to cybersecurity, and the understanding that no database is 100 per cent foolproof, so people are nervous, and that’s something we need to take into consideration.”
Concerns about privacy safeguards were consistently raised in parliament this week by Liberal, Nationals, Greens and Liberal Democrat MPs.
Ms Benham said she absolutely supported the concept of the Bill, but it had its flaws.
“We’re not trying to be obstructive here, we’re trying to be productive and work with the government.”
Deputy Nationals leader Emma Kealy attempted to amend the legislation on Thursday, proposing the Bill be withdrawn and redrafted to include an opt-out provision.
Her amendment was defeated 56 votes to 24, and the Bill is now before the Upper House.
When pressed on whether providing an opt-out clause was the solution to the Opposition’s issues with the Bill, Ms Benham said no.
“What the solution would be is for it to go to committee for consideration in detail, and the government won’t allow us to do that.
“With consideration in detail, we’d have a much better piece of legislation than it is right now.”
A petition with 10,790 signatures was submitted in the Upper House this week, forcing a debate about privacy concerns with the proposed legislation.
The debate will likely be held on Wednesday, March 8.
