Coronavirus

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN (14:45): Further supplementary: does the minister agree that South Australia needs to broaden the number of people who are being tested for COVID-19?

The Hon. S.G. WADE (Minister for Health and Wellbeing) (14:45): This is one of the claims of the opposition that I find staggering—staggering. Let me refer to the AHPPC advice. The AHPPC talked about COVID-19 testing data, and it looked at Australia and a number of other jurisdictions. The ploy of the opposition is to suggest that we are testing people too narrowly and that somehow we are putting South Australians at risk. I would make two points: we are testing people on clinical advice according to clinical criteria. Up until this last weekend, that was primarily overseas travel, symptoms or contact with a known case.

On the weekend, the Chief Public Health Officer, Associate Professor Nicola Spurrier, decided that, considering the risk of community transmission from other states, it was appropriate to expand that criteria and now people who are returning to South Australia are asked to be tested if they have been interstate in the last seven days and show symptoms. That's the criteria itself. In other words, that's in a case where you choose to go and have a COVID-19 test. You can present at a dedicated clinic, you can present at an emergency department, you can present at a GP.

What SA Pathology did—let me say again that SA Pathology is an amazing, innovative organisation—very early in this pandemic is decide, 'We're not just going to test the cases where somebody has presented and meets the criteria for testing for COVID-19. If their GP or other health professional has asked for a pathology test that's related to a respiratory illness, out of an abundance of caution we will also test it for coronavirus.' Unlike any other jurisdiction in Australia—and I am not aware of any other jurisdiction in the world—we have had for weeks now a pattern of testing which doesn't just respond to criteria, it also leads to a testing for a sample where COVID-19 has not been specifically requested.

So what has that meant for our testing rate? As of 20 March, the United States of America had tested 17 of every 100,000 people. In relation to South Korea, which is often lauded as a strong case, that jurisdiction, as at 19 March, had tested 549 for every 100,000 people. Australia, as at 21 March, had tested 480. So people speak very positively about South Korea. Australia is not that far behind. Let me assure you, South Australia is streets ahead of that.

My latest advice is that we now have more than 1,000 tests per 100,000 population in South Australia, which is not only a great indication of the availability of dedicated COVID-19 testing, but the value of that respiratory panel general testing approach. So rather than nipping, undermining people's confidence in the testing regime in South Australia, the Labor opposition should actually be thanking the South Australia Pathology service for its extraordinary service to the people of South Australia.