Chadwick Steve: Human Tissue (Organ Donation) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Chadwick Steve: Human Tissue (Organ Donation) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:643;Page:12901] 
Hon STEVE CHADWICK (Associate Minister of Health) 
: 
 I too would like to congratulate Jackie Blue on this Human Tissue (Organ Donation) Amendment Bill. I am very aware of the amount of effort that goes into the drafting of a member’s bill and there has been quite a history behind organ donation legislation. 
It is nice to see Sue Kedgley the chairperson of the Health Committee come into the House because we were both on the Health Committee when Andy Tookey brought his petition to us. We made an incredible effort to listen to all submitters around his petition because we too felt like members today who are wanting to increase the numbers of people who are prepared to give up their organs for organ donation—such a lofty cause. We wrote our recommendations to the report and I decided that I knew what I was going to do for a member’s bill too. So off I went. I got halfway through drafting the bill—so I really do appreciate the member’s efforts—and then I went off to Auckland City Hospital to meet the intensivists. That meeting was memorable to me and it is imprinted on my brain because when I came out of that meeting I remember Sir Geoffrey Palmer saying: “Well we’re not going on any further with this are we?” and I thought: “No we’re not.” 
There was a coalition of some courses going on at that time. The Ministry of Health was beginning to draft the Human Tissue Bill which was introduced into Parliament in November 2006. I had been told that the issues I was using as levers in the drafting of my bill would be caught up in the Human Tissue Bill so I was happy to drop it. As chance goes in came Dr Blue with the same feeling that I had. I know that Andy gave up with me and he went to Dr Blue and good on him—he is a lobbyist and he will never stop as the member opposite said. 
I think we need to have so much more discussion about human tissue and organs. As has happened with this bill issues of great cultural sensitivity have been raised through the process of consultation on the Human Tissue Bill. That is something that I had overlooked in my bill but I was very aware of the concerns of iwi and Maori about what happens to body parts and about the spirituality of an individual person being put into somebody else. I worked in the clinical service at Rotorua Hospital where I was the one who had to ask people whether they would consider a young person’s organs for organ donation. We had a great deal of difficulty with iwi unless I had beside me somebody who could change the language that I used to convince Maori that we really needed those organs. That was the way we worked together and we set up the Hunga Manaaki Service. 
I believe that cultural sensitivity about human tissue and human organs is now caught in the Human Tissue Bill but I think those issues were also overlooked in Dr Blue’s bill. I think Andy Tookey can say “Well done. You’ve raised the issue again.” and that is what we asked for as part of the select committee’s recommendations. We said we wanted a media campaign; we wanted a publicity campaign to raise people’s awareness—it is called a social marketing campaign. We got one more step ahead then because the Government in response to the inquiry report set up Organ Donation New Zealand and that was fantastic. That is the next step forward. 
I believe that with the voting down of this bill—and I know how disappointed the member is; we all win some and lose some in this place—the Human Tissue Bill has picked up an enabling mechanism for a register. I too believe that the evidence over time will come out that we need to link up the expressed wishes of individuals when they want to make it very clear on their driver’s licence what is meant around giving their organs as a donor with the involvement of the family practitioner. The New Zealand Medical Association was very supportive of a member’s bill and it had a very different view at that time from that of the intensivists. So there were divergent views even within the medical profession itself. 
I believe that the work on this bill has given a profile to the issue. I have read the stories and they were very similar to what we heard on the Health Committee. We heard that we did not want to follow some of the international examples such as in Spain where the system really is like the harvesting of organs. We do not find that to be culturally appropriate in New Zealand at all. We also heard how we will raise the rate of organ donation in this country. 
I am sorry to say that Jackie Blue’s bill will go down but the Human Tissue Bill will go forward. So the member has contributed to the fabric of Parliament and also to New Zealanders’ belief and hope that we will have more people feeling absolutely comfortable about having those family conversations. My family know my expressed will when I die: if there is anything good left they can take it and give it to somebody else. More people need to feel comfortable about having those discussions in their families. 
That is what Jackie Blue’s bill has generated and I congratulate her on this. We will wait for evidence as it mounts and one day we might be saying “We said so.” but at the moment the evidence is not there. I do believe that everything we do in health must be evidence-based not emotionally driven. This bill is down but the conversation will go on and the Human Tissue Act will be in place. I say “Well done.” I have enjoyed the tenor of debate in the House tonight.