HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1)
2022-11-29 Daily Xml
Contents
Xml

Bills

Automated External Defibrillators (Public Access) Bill

Second Reading

The Hon. C.J. PICTON (Kaurna—Minister for Health and Wellbeing) (11:02):

I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

This bill was introduced by the Hon. Frank Pangallo in the other place and passed last sitting week. I am pleased to be the lead speaker for the government on this legislation. This bill will require the installation and registration of automated external defibrillators, known as AEDs, in certain buildings, facilities and vehicles.

This is an important measure to protect our community, ensuring access to potentially life-saving equipment when it is needed most. There is substantial evidence that widespread access to AEDs can help prevent deaths by cardiac arrest. They are increasingly user-friendly, guiding users every step of the way to administer to someone in a life-threatening situation. It is true that an AED cannot actually do harm to someone who is unconscious, I am advised, as an electric shock is only distributed if it is required.

According to the Heart Foundation, time is everything in a cardiac arrest. Every minute without defibrillation to restart the heart reduces the chance of survival by 10 per cent, and if bystanders have not been trained in CPR that simply means that time is wasted. Public access to AEDs will help to reduce this risk. Previously, in opposition Labor supported this legislation, which was introduced by Mr Pangallo in the other place. Unfortunately, the former government did not prioritise it in this house and we saw the bill lapse in the previous term. I am very pleased that it has now been reintroduced by the Hon. Frank Pangallo in the other place.

We are pleased to bring this legislation to the floor now to prioritise it before the end of this year, recognising its importance in supporting good and potentially life-saving health outcomes for our community and also ensuring the maximum amount of time to be available for implementation of this. Indeed, we continue to hear positive stories of the way that publicly accessible AEDs have helped to save lives.

It is pleasing to hear that in recent years organisations such as supermarket chain Coles have rolled out AEDs to all their stores, providing access for customers and team members having a sudden cardiac arrest. I acknowledge the advocacy of the Heart Foundation and Mr Greg Page on this important issue that we have seen. Since this time, there have been positive developments in regard to the technology used, with new single-use AEDs available to the market, which have helped to reduce the implementation costs. The coverage of AEDs across designated buildings and facilities will ensure that South Australians have access to these easy-to-use devices most of the time. If there is not an AED in the building where it is needed, there will hopefully be one close by.

We believe the bill's proactive clause requiring commercial buildings of a certain size, particularly for newly constructed buildings, is a reasonable step that achieves a good outcome for communities and is not unnecessarily onerous on small businesses and property owners. The government has already taken positive steps to install AEDs in a number of places that the bill mandates, including SAAS, MFS and SES vehicles. I note that, following consultation with SA Police following the introduction of the bill in the other place, it became clear that there were concerns and that has now been removed from the bill. However, the inclusion of publicly accessible AEDs in other vehicles will ensure good coverage across the community.

In addition, SA Ambulance is currently developing a register and software, the GoodSAM program, that will allow members of the public to locate AEDs in their vicinity. This will meet the requirements outlined in the legislation. I would add that SA Ambulance are very supportive of this legislation and the need for it in terms of providing access to these important life-saving devices.

There is a great benefit in reasonable lead-in time frames for implementing such a significant reform, allowing time for both government and non-government organisations to adequately prepare for the commencement of these measures. The implementation for 1 January 2026 across non-government sites provides these owners with a reasonable lead-in time to ensure they can appropriately plan and prepare for the installation of AEDs. We have also made a shorter implementation time available for government facilities.

In supporting this bill, the government is reaffirming its commitment to the community and ensuring better health outcomes for those in an emergency situation. In conclusion, I would like to thank the Hon. Frank Pangallo for his passionate advocacy of this important cause—not just now but over a number of years. I think that because of his advocacy, because of his determination to see this through the parliament, and with hopefully the support of this house, we will see lives being saved in South Australia by greater availability of these life-saving devices in more places across the community.

The SPEAKER: Before I call the member for Schubert, I acknowledge the presence in the gallery of advocates and supporters of this legislation and also of the Hon. Frank Pangallo MLC from the other place. I pay tribute to Nick Brockhoff, an advocate in my own community, for this legislation.

Mrs HURN (Schubert) (11:08): The delivery of health care is and remains front of mind for all South Australians, as South Australians want to know that every single action is being taken and that every single action is being considered to keep them and their families safe. We know that the community has a very clear expectation that this Labor government will deliver on a number of promises that it made in health, particularly the promise it made very clearly to fix ramping in South Australia, given it was such a clear and essential element of the recent state election campaign.

However, to date the government have so far failed to deliver on this promise to fix ramping. In fact, under their watch it is the worst that it has ever been, which means that ambulances are stuck outside on our hospital ramps more than at any other time in South Australia's history. It is with this in mind that it is vital that the opposition, and indeed this parliament, positively considers all proposals put forward to provide South Australians with a greater assurance that there are measures in place to protect their health. It is very much through this lens that the opposition has landed on its position to ultimately provide support for this bill, albeit with some amendments in relation to penalties.

This bill requires the installation and registration of automated external defibrillators (AEDs) in certain buildings, facilities and vehicles and for other purposes. Currently, we know that there are thousands of defibrillators deployed on private premises and in public places and, indeed, the minister has outlined them for the benefit of the house. However, there is no legal requirement for any site, including on high-risk sites, to have an AED. The SafeWork SA Code of Practice fact sheet advises that an AED is advised. Safe Work Australia's national First Aid in the Workplace Code of Practice states that providing one can reduce the risk of fatality from cardiac arrest.

The opposition understands that the cost of AEDs has fallen significantly in recent years. In fact, an AED can vary from as much as $2,600 for the larger types, which are typically deployed in our larger public areas, through to the smaller devices that have been approved by the Therapeutic Goods Administration, and they cost around $360 for a single use. We all remember those images of the Hon. Frank Pangallo in the other place showing us how they work.

We know that the South Australian Ambulance Service (SAAS) states very clearly that, for more people to survive cardiac arrest, South Australia needs more AEDs available in communities, workplaces, schools and clubs in the event of an emergency. For every minute that defibrillation is delayed, the chances of a person surviving a cardiac arrest decrease by 10 per cent. So, in that light, it is safe to say that time is of the essence and that there is no time to waste in the face of an emergency.

The opposition did conduct some additional consultation in addition to what the Hon. Frank Pangallo in the other place had done, and we know that the AMA and other industry bodies, including SAAS, whose presence I acknowledge in the public gallery today, support this legislation. However, we note that the LGA has raised some concerns, as well as Business SA. Business SA raised concerns with the fines stipulated in this bill, as well as the up-front costs that the bill will impose on South Australian businesses, particularly in the current challenging economic circumstances. It is with that feedback in mind that we have what I would call some really sensible and reasonable amendments when it comes to the penalties.

If this bill does pass, South Australia will become the first jurisdiction in the nation to mandate the installation of AEDs. While in principle we acknowledge that there are very clear benefits of having AEDs widely available, there are several practical issues that we believe arise. As I have already foreshadowed, we do have a number of amendments and they are in light of the penalties. If this bill is successful, failing to have an AED installed can attract a maximum penalty of $20,000. We believe that is at the upper echelon of what South Australians would expect.

Of course, we acknowledge that we need to get the balance right because we want there to be an incentive to put them in, but not such an arduous penalty that it actually becomes a little bit imposing for businesses. What we propose is common sense: it is for a maximum penalty of $2,000 and for there to be an opportunity of an expiation notice of $500. Not only is that $500 threshold more than the minimum cost of an AED but we also believe that it will help free up the court system, if it is progressed through that, and assist with compliance.

We do urge those opposite to consider the amendments we are putting forward. In saying that, it is hoped that the current government will follow the former government's lead in ensuring some grants are made available to sporting clubs in particular to support them in complying with this legislation. Whilst we acknowledge that the smallest amount or the lowest cost for an AED is currently $360, having discussed this with the Hon. Frank Pangallo in the other place, we want some sporting clubs to think about getting the more expensive ones. We believe that having some grants available would potentially aid them in making sure they have the most up-to-date and most comprehensive AED available to them.

As South Australia continues to endure the worst ramping in the state's history, the opposition recognises the importance of such devices as the AEDs in keeping South Australians safe, and it is with that in mind that we support this legislation with some amendments.

I would like to acknowledge the presence of the Hon. Frank Pangallo, who is in the gallery today, and thank him as well for all the work he has done in bringing this forward to the South Australian parliament to consider. This is going to be nation leading. It appears that the bill will pass this chamber, and that will be a historic day for South Australia, so thank you, the Hon. Frank Pangallo, for all the work that you have done.

We are hopeful that our amendments will gain some commonsense consideration. Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak on this bill.

Mrs PEARCE (King) (11:15): I, too, rise to speak on the Automated External Defibrillators (Public Access) Bill. This bill will require the installation and registration of automated external defibrillators (AEDs) in certain buildings, facilities and vehicles. AEDs are portable, life-saving devices designed to treat people experiencing sudden cardiac arrest, a medical condition in which the heart stops beating suddenly and unexpectedly.

We know that the combination of CPR and early defibrillation is effective in saving lives when used in the first few minutes following a collapse from sudden cardiac arrest, and that every minute without defibrillation to restart the heart reduces the chance of surviving by 10 per cent. Mr Speaker, you may already be aware, but these devices are incredibly user-friendly, so much so that they even help to guide users each step of the way to be able to help someone in a life-threatening situation. Interestingly enough, an AED cannot actually do any harm to someone who is unconscious. An electric shock is only distributed if it is required.

Currently when it comes to AEDs in the workplace, the SafeWork SA Codes of Practice fact sheet states that an automated defibrillator is advised 'where there is a risk of electrocution or large numbers of members of the public are regularly in or around the workplace', and Safe Work Australia's national First Aid in the Workplace Code of Practice states:

Providing an automated external defibrillator (AED) can reduce the risk of fatality from cardiac arrest.

It is a useful addition for workplaces. When it comes to my community, there is a strong growing desire to see these devices more accessible. In fact, earlier this year I discussed this matter with the local progress association at One Tree Hill. The institute in the township there is home to many: the local playgroup, which I had the pleasure of sharing story time with recently; and the local seniors group, who spends time there every week. It is hired for birthday celebrations, engagements and wedding receptions and even hosts an ANZAC ceremony every year. On the first Saturday of the month, you can spend time there for the amazing country market they host.

As you can imagine, there are many different groups of people who use this space, and the availability of an AED would go a long way to aiding someone's chances of recovery in a dire situation. I understand that this bill seeks to ensure that we have an AED in designated public buildings and places such as sporting facilities, schools, retirement villages and aged-care facilities. Furthermore, an AED would be required in any building used for commercial purposes that exceeds 600 square metres, all emergency services vehicles, including the CFS, MFS and SES, and also on public transport, like trains, trams and buses.

There will be penalties for noncompliance and for any person who is caught stealing or damaging an AED. It is just another way that we can improve health outcomes in communities across our state, by improving accessibility to this potentially life-saving equipment when it is needed most. We know that there will be a need, as about 30,000 Australians suffer cardiac arrest every year. I am fortunate and proud that my community has already been taking proactive steps in this space to help make AEDs more accessible.

Take the City of Salisbury, for example—not only were they one of the first local councils to set the standard of having AEDs in all their buildings but they also provide a one-off grant of $2,000 for a defibrillator for local community groups, voluntary associations, health, and religious organisations. The City of Tea Tree Gully are also doing great work in this space and run a grant program to support one-off funding for AEDs. I commend both councils for being proactive in this space and appreciate that the passing of this bill today will assist in having accessibility consistency across the board within communities in our state.

Furthermore, I am pleased to share that the Malinauskas Labor government is already taking active steps in this space. We are already in the process of installing AEDs in some of the places that this bill mandates, including all South Australian Ambulance Service, MFS and SES vehicles. In addition, SA Ambulance is currently developing a register and software, known as the GoodSAM program, which will allow members of the public to locate AEDs within their vicinity. I understand that this will meet the requirements outlined in the legislation pertaining to the registration of AEDs, along with the provision of a smartphone app to make all relevant information accessible.

As a very important aside, those who do have an AED can now register it online via the SA Ambulance website. I had a look at it myself, and I can vouch that registration is very easy, with only a few quick questions to answer. I understand that a training scheme must also be established for AEDs for people who complete first-aid training under the Education and Care Services National Law (SA) or the Work Health and Safety Act 2012, or for any other person prescribed in the regulations. This step will understandably increase the number of people in our community who will have life-saving CPR skills.

I must say that I am glad that this bill is being considered in this place again. I was sad to learn that it was not prioritised in the last term of government. I say that because I am confident that this bill will help deliver better social, health and economic benefits to local communities. By having an implementation that provides non-government sites with a reasonable lead-in time to ensure that they can appropriately plan and prepare for the installation of AEDs, we will be able to achieve outstanding results together.

I understand that this bill is supported by healthcare stakeholders such as the AMA, the Heart Foundation of Australia and the Ambulance Employees' Association. In supporting this bill, we, the Malinauskas Labor government, are reaffirming our commitment to communities such as mine to help deliver better health outcomes by having these life-saving devices publicly and readily available to save lives in our community. It makes sense, it will likely save lives and it will absolutely lead to better health outcomes. With that, I commend the bill to the house.

Mr TELFER (Flinders) (11:22): I rise to speak on this important bill. Can I also echo the recognition of those who have worked hard get us to the point of consideration of this legislation, in particular the Hon. Frank Pangallo from the other place. I recognise his presence in the gallery, along with the presence of my favourite Wiggle of all time, Mr Greg Page.

Can I say that I, like many South Australians and Australians, have had family members who have had challenges with cardiac arrest. I was in the unfortunate position of losing my grandma to cardiac arrest many years ago, and I recognise that having technology like this can absolutely save lives in communities.

I, for one, with a history in leadership within local government, have been proactive in my small community in Tumby Bay on Eyre Peninsula, in particular during my time as mayor some three or four years ago. I proactively looked at what we could do as a community, in conjunction with community groups and councils, to prepare our community for the technology as it was coming along.

I was very proud that, in collaboration with community groups such as the local Lions, we installed some dozen or so AEDs in public areas around Tumby Bay and districts, in recognition that every minute matters when it comes to cardiac arrest. If there is an opportunity for this technology to be more readily accessible, closer to where an event is happening, then there is a higher likelihood that that person is going to have a positive outcome.

In recognition of that, we also made sure that there was a public awareness campaign within our council area—a very small council area, as far as population goes, but geographically it is certainly one that has a bit more of an extensive footprint, perhaps, than some of my metropolitan cousins.

That piece of work we did as a council really was at the leading edge of AED installation at the time and, as has already been mentioned, it was not a cheap exercise. The technology at that point was a lot more expensive than it is now, but there was great collaboration between council, community and the Red Cross in particular. I am someone who has firsthand experience, both with family members who have suffered from cardiac arrest and being in a community which has put in proactively a number of AEDs.

As my colleague the member for Schubert has mentioned, this is obviously legislation that is groundbreaking; it is nation leading. With that obviously come complications. I will speak in favour when the time comes of the amendments which the member for Schubert is moving to try to strike a balance between the carrot and the stick when it comes to fines in this piece of legislation.

We do need to make sure that it is something that we bring the community across South Australia along with, not just in education, getting them to realise the opportunities and the advantages that having a close AED for someone having a cardiac arrest actually does deliver, but in making sure that they are part of that journey of awareness and community support. That is, as I said, why I will be voting in favour of the adjustments to the fine schedule in particular, to make sure the balance is right when it comes to the incentives versus the disincentives.

As has been detailed throughout this legislation, there are parameters which are spelt out in black and white, with the stipulation that there is going to be more definition created within the regulation. There are certainly some concerns and uncertainties that come from this legislation, which have been reflected to me, as the shadow local government minister, by local governments around the state and the Local Government Association of South Australia as well.

As someone who has had a history in local government, I know how many public buildings and facilities there are around our council areas. Although there is not certainty in the legislation, I do hope—and conversation has been had with the honourable member—that there is some commonsense balance put in through the regulations. We note that a public building or facility includes a swimming pool, a library, a local government office, a town hall and a building or facility prescribed by the regulations, but does not include one excluded from the ambit of this definition by the regulations.

This is where the local government sector uncertainty does come in. In my area in particular—and I am sure it is reflected all around the state—we have a sporting precinct, which is a central part of a community. There will be a football oval, there will be football clubrooms, there will be change rooms, there will be opposition change rooms, there will be a toilet block, there will be a netball facility; there will be a number of different public buildings.

This is where I think the real key is to get the balance right and also make sure that, as has been stipulated in this legislation, the signage is appropriate so that people know and can recognise—as has already been done in communities which have had this installed—when they see that little AED sign, that little triangular sign sitting on the building, or when they see the external box, that if they have to deal with someone who is potentially going into cardiac arrest that is the go-to place and that there is a process they can be stepped through even if they have no medical training.

This is the aspect of the legislation I am going to be taking particular notice of. The drawing up of the regulations is going to be crucial because we need to get the balance right between the locations of these and the cost there would inherently be if there was a legislative obligation on local government overburdening them as far as cost and process go.

I am happy to stand here and speak in favour of this, as I said, because I am someone who has been at the leading edge as a community leader for putting AEDs in place and have seen the passion the advocates for this have, they themselves having had their lives saved because of the quick reaction time of those around them and the availability of an AED defibrillator there ready to go. That is why we on this side will be supportive of this, albeit to try to strike the balance when it comes to the fine system that is in place.

S.E. ANDREWS (Gibson) (11:30): I rise to speak in support of the Automated External Defibrillators (Public Access) Bill 2022. As we know, a heart attack can occur at any time, and quick action is crucial to give people the best chance of survival. Approximately 30,000 Australians suffer a cardiac arrest every year. The chances of surviving an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest are significantly higher when a person receives early life support in the form of CPR and the use of an AED. That is why it is important for an automated external defibrillator (AED) to be available.

The Heart Foundation advise that time is everything in a cardiac arrest; every minute without defibrillation to restart the heart reduces the chance of surviving by 10 per cent. If bystanders have not been trained in CPR, it simply means time is being wasted. Public access to AEDs will reduce this risk. AEDs are fairly easy to use and everyone can be trained to use them from a young age. Once it is turned on, they step you through the process, so you can set out the AED while another person is performing CPR.

I thank the Hon. Frank Pangallo for introducing this bill in the other place and am pleased that our Labor government is supporting its passage through this house, unlike the former government, which failed to prioritise this life-saving bill. They were a government that did not prioritise health, unlike this government, which is delivering more ambulances, more paramedics, significant investment in hospitals, including a new Women's and Children's Hospital, and significant investment in Country Health.

I was pleased to join the Minister for Health last week and speak with some of the 32 new paramedics hitting the roads of the southern and western suburbs, servicing the state's busiest areas of Adelaide and adding 23,000 hours of annual crewing to care for South Australians. The new crews, supported by an additional four ambulance vehicles for Marion and Edwardstown, form part of the Malinauskas Labor government's $124 million investment for 350 more ambos.

The paramedics are split evenly across the two locations—16 for Marion and 16 for Edwardstown—but the Edwardstown crew will initially join crews at the Marion station before a brand-new Edwardstown station is built, with land searches currently underway: a government delivering on its election promises, a government that cares about South Australians.

This bill will require the installation and registration of AEDs in certain buildings, facilities and vehicles. This is an important measure to protect our community, ensuring access to potentially life-saving equipment when it is needed most. Importantly, an AED cannot do any harm to someone who is unconscious. An electric shock is only distributed if it is required. It is very safe technology, and we often see cases where an AED has been the difference between a person living, to enjoy more time with their family and friends, or passing away.

The coverage of AEDs across the designated buildings and facilities will ensure that South Australians have access to these easy-to-use devices most of the time. If there is not an AED in the building where it is needed, there will be one close by. This is important; as I said earlier, seconds are critical during a cardiac arrest. I encourage all local community clubs and public buildings across my electorate, if they do not already have one, to make the small investment of the less than $3,000 to purchase an AED.

I also remind everyone to ensure they check the pads and batteries in their AED regularly. It is important that the state government also makes AEDs available, so I am pleased that this bill will mandate an AED in SA Ambulance vehicles, Metropolitan Fire Service trucks and SES vehicles. I commend this bill to the house.

Ms WORTLEY (Torrens) (11:34): I rise to speak to the Automated External Defibrillators (Public Access) Bill 2022. This bill will require the installation and registration of automated external defibrillators (AEDs), and it is a very important measure to protect our community, ensuring access to what can be life-saving equipment in many situations that can be used when it is most needed.

There is substantial evidence that the widespread access to AEDs can help prevent deaths by cardiac arrest. When people have access to this equipment, it is important they actually understand that it is very simple to use. I know that under the previous Labor government there were a number of programs. In particular, the Oakden Ambulance Station in my electorate delivered informal training on AEDs. That took place in one of my local football clubs, the Gaza Sports and Community Club, and people were very interested.

One of the most important things they found was that, following the instructions, they could not do any damage. They were particularly pleased to know that it would put the person who had suffered the heart attack, the cardiac arrest, in a much better position to be able to recover. We know that time is crucial during a cardiac arrest and that every minute without defibrillation to restart the heart reduces the chance of surviving by 10 per cent. If we have bystanders who have been trained in PCR, and how to use an AED, that will mean we will have better outcomes.

Recent years have seen significant improvements in the technology, and we know that single-use AEDs are available on the market and that the cost has been significantly reduced. We believe that this bill's proactive clause requiring commercial buildings of particular sizes to include an AED is a reasonable step and will achieve better outcomes for our community.

It is worth noting that our government has already taken positive steps to install AEDs, including in SAAS, MFS and SES vehicles. We have heard from the minister that SA Ambulance is currently developing a register and software, the GoodSAM program, to assist members of the public to be able to locate AEDs should the need arise. The lead time from now until 1 January 2026 across non-government sites provides owners of these buildings and organisations with a reasonable lead time to ensure that they can appropriately plan and prepare for the installation of AEDs.

We know that the bill has wide support in our community, and I have spoken to many of my community groups with regard to this. In fact, we have been approached on numerous occasions about ensuring that people have access to that, and the implementation of an informal program where members of the Oakden Ambulance Station visited sporting organisations was well received in our community. I welcome the opportunity to speak to this bill, to support this bill, and I commend it to the house.

Ms THOMPSON (Davenport) (11:38): I, too, rise to offer my support for the Automated External Defibrillators (Public Access) Bill presently before the house. Each year, more than 30,000 Australians suffer a sudden cardiac arrest. If it happens outside a hospital, their chances of surviving are less than one in 10. When sudden cardiac arrest happens, the heart simply stops beating, and the worst part is that it can happen to anyone at any age and it cannot be predicted.

An automated external defibrillator (AED) can make the difference between life and death. This bill will require the installation and registration of AEDs in certain buildings, facilities and vehicles. It is an important measure to protect our community, ensuring access to potentially life-saving equipment when it is needed most. If not treated in minutes, a sudden cardiac arrest usually causes death.

The data will tell you that out of the 30,000 out-of-hospital cardiac arrests that happen each year, 85 percent of victims will die. With statistics like that, defibrillators should be treated as being as essential as fire extinguishers. Sudden cardiac arrest does not discriminate. It is not your age, it is not your fitness level and it is not your background. It can happen to anyone and it happens without warning.

But the good news is that sudden cardiac arrest can be arrested and the best chance of survival following an arrest is with the urgent use of a defibrillator. There is substantial evidence that shows widespread access to AEDs will prevent deaths. These life-saving devices are designed to analyse the heart rhythm using electrodes. They will automatically analyse the heart rhythm and give a visual or audio display. The device will then examine the heartbeat and deliver a shock when needed.

The devices are very user-friendly, guiding users every step of the way. So if a cardiac arrest happens in a park, at a school, in a supermarket or at a local sports game, an AED is our best chance of survival. That is why it is so important to have AEDs in public places, and why we should be making them as easily accessible as we can. The Heart Foundation tells us that time is everything in a cardiac arrest. Every minute without defibrillation to restart the heart reduces the chance of surviving by 10 per cent, and if bystanders have not been trained in CPR it simply means that time is wasted. Public access to AEDs will reduce this risk

Immediate access to a defibrillator is the only way to survive a sudden cardiac arrest. This bill will make the installation, maintenance, signage and registration of AEDs mandatory in all public buildings, including schools, universities, libraries, sporting facilities, local council offices and swimming centres. Privately owned buildings, including shopping centres, aged-care and retirement villages, some commercial properties and certain residential apartments will also be required to install the devices.

It is reasonable to offer lead-in time frames for implementing such significant reform, allowing time for both government and non-government organisations to adequately prepare for the commencement of these measures, and ensuring it is not an unnecessary onus on existing small businesses and property owners. The implementation date of 1 January 2026 across non-government sites will provide this lead time to ensure owners can appropriately plan.

A dedicated grant program will be established to assist sporting clubs and other community organisations to meet the cost of purchasing this equipment and meeting the requirements of the legislation. This is particularly exciting for those local sporting clubs and other groups in my electorate of Davenport, as well as right across the state, who have already prioritised the implementation of these life-saving devices but have not yet accommodated it in their budgets.

I would like to thank the Hon. Frank Pangallo for bringing this legislation to parliament and also the Heart Foundation and Mr Greg Page AM, the original Yellow Wiggle, for their advocacy on this important issue. In supporting this bill, the government is reaffirming its commitment to the community by ensuring better health outcomes for those in an emergency situation. This bill will save lives, and I commend it to the house.

Ms HUTCHESSON (Waite) (11:42): I also rise in support of this bill, and I would like to acknowledge the presence of the Hon. Frank Pangallo from the other place, and thank him for introducing it into the house last week. I would also like to acknowledge the presence of Greg Page AM, the original Yellow Wiggle, a great advocate and supporter of access to defibrillators in the workplace. As a parent of a 19 year old, I would like to thank you for the hours of peace and rest I got whilst my son sat and enjoyed your and your team's entertainment with the Wiggles. I really cannot thank you enough.

Being a trained senior first aider through my duties as a volunteer CFS member, I really understand how important these devices are and can be in saving lives. Having access to an automated external defibrillator when needed can be the difference between life and death, especially for people having a cardiac arrest.

These devices are really easy to use; anyone can work them—literally anyone. The device tells you where to put the pads. If you are a passenger in a car, your seatbelt goes like that, one goes on your shoulder and one goes just under your breastbone. They also can tell you when to stand clear and when to resume compressions. They continue to analyse the patient's heart rhythm as you continue to provide CPR.

Whilst the song changes from time to time in regard to compressions, originally Staying Alive was the song of choice but I believe Baby Shark also fits the bill. I understand that Greg Page may have also written a song. I encourage everyone to learn not only CPR but also first aid and get yourself trained. Earlier this year I learnt about the importance of these when I also updated my St John's first-aid certificate. From that, and from advice from the Heart Foundation, I learnt timing is everything: every minute somebody goes without this device can decrease their chance of surviving by 10 per cent.

These things are incredibly important when it comes to just helping people on the street, and that is why this bill is so important. When we were in opposition Labor supported this legislation, which was introduced at the time by the Hon. Frank Pangallo in the other place. Unfortunately the former government did not prioritise it, which saw the bill lapse in the previous term.

I am glad we have been able to support a vote on this legislation before the end of the year so that we can get moving on rolling out the requirement for all commercial buildings and government buildings of a certain size to have an AED. This coverage of AEDs across the designated buildings and facilities will ensure that South Australians have access to these easy-to-use devices most of the time.

If there is not an AED in the building where it is needed, there will be one close by. The government has already taken positive steps to install AEDs in some places this bill mandates, including SAAS, MFS and SES vehicles—in fact, my own CFS brigade has one in each truck and one in the station.

The use of apps that can locate AEDs is very useful. SA Ambulance is currently developing its own register and software, the GoodSAM program, that will allow bystanders to locate AEDs in their vicinity quickly. This meets the requirements outlined in the legislation.

Encouraging and supporting businesses to meet the requirements of this legislation will take time and, as such, the implementation date of 1 January 2026 across non-government sites is appropriate. However, I will take this opportunity to encourage businesses to begin consideration of this as soon as they can so that there are better health outcomes for those in need when they need it.

There are many stories about how AEDs have helped save lives and, as such, this is an important move by our government as we continue to put the health needs of our communities at the forefront of our mind. My community knows the importance of these devices. Back in 2019, the Blackwood Lions Club generously provided an AED to our Blackwood Football Club. Cardiac arrest does not happen just to those who are aged or who have a weak heart: it can happen at any time to anyone, so having an AED available to sporting clubs is really important.

I hope this bill passes the house. It is incredibly important that we have access to AEDs when we need them. They will result in better health outcomes for people who do go through cardiac arrest. I commend the bill to the house.

The Hon. A. MICHAELS (Enfield—Minister for Small and Family Business, Minister for Consumer and Business Affairs, Minister for Arts) (11:47): I also rise today to support the Automated External Defibrillators (Public Access) Bill. As you are aware, Mr Speaker, this piece of legislation is an Australian first, and we will be one of a few jurisdictions the world to mandate the installation of automated external defibrillator machines.

The bill proposes the installation and registration of AEDs in prescribed buildings, facilities and vehicles. This is an important measure to protect our community, ensuring access to life-saving equipment when it is most needed.

So what is a defibrillator? I have done some research on this: a defibrillator is a device that uses an electric shock to restart a heart or shock it back into its correct rhythm. It is used when someone has a sudden cardiac arrest. An AED analyses the heart rhythm and determines whether an electric shock is needed to either correct the rhythm of the heart or restart it.

Every year, more than 30,000 Australians suffer from a cardiac arrest. If a cardiac arrest happens outside a hospital, the chances of survival are significantly diminished. An AED may be used wherever CPR is necessary. In the event of a cardiac arrest time is crucial. If someone is found unresponsive and not breathing, 000 needs to be called first and then CPR started, with the use of an AED as soon as possible. Ultimately, this underlines the importance for people to regularly undertake first-aid training. Giving an unresponsive person immediate CPR and using an AED early can greatly increase their chance of survival. The most important thing is to use an AED quickly.

There are several different types of defibrillators and they work in different ways. AEDs are commonly found in public places—and will be found in public places after the passing of this bill—and they can be used by anybody in an emergency. They guide the operator through each step of the process. They do not give the person an electric shock unless it is necessary, so you cannot harm someone by using an AED. I am told they are actually very easy to use. Some models ask you to press a button to deliver the shock. Other models deliver the shock automatically.

There are also manual defibrillators that are used by health professionals, for example, in an ambulance or emergency department. There are also implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs), which are defibrillators surgically implanted inside the body. They are designed for people who are at high risk of a life-threatening heart rhythm problem, such as those who have suffered a recent heart attack or have certain medical conditions.

This bill will result in AEDs becoming a common sight in public places. I commend the City of Adelaide, which rolled out AEDs in public places and the city squares some time ago. These are easily identified by the 'hearts of hope' signage indicating the location of the public AEDs. As I said, they are simple to use, so much so that anyone can use an AED properly simply by following fairly easy instructions. The AEDs will literally tell you how to use them. The device steps you through each stage of what to do, but it must also be remembered that AEDs need to be used in conjunction with CPR.

The area around an unresponsive person should be clear, with no-one touching them while the AED is in use, as this can interfere with how it reads the person's heart. If necessary, the AED will tell the operator where to put electrodes or pads on the person's body. The device may deliver one or more shocks to re-establish the rhythm of the heart. The AED may instruct the operator to continue CPR after a shock has been administered and to continue CPR until the ambulance arrives and a paramedic takes over.

It is important to note that this bill proposes the use and installation of automated external defibrillators. It will require the installation and registration of AEDs in certain buildings, facilities and vehicles. It is an important measure to protect our community, ensuring access to potentially life-saving equipment when it is most needed. As mentioned already, there is substantial evidence that widespread access to AEDs can help prevent the deaths of people by cardiac arrest. They are user-friendly and help guide users every step of the way to administer to someone in a life-threatening situation.

An AED cannot do any harm to anyone who is unconscious. An electric shock is only distributed if it is required. According to the Heart Foundation, timing is everything. Every minute without defibrillation to restart the heart reduces the chance of surviving by 10 per cent. If bystanders in the general vicinity have not been trained in CPR, that simply means that there is time wasted. Public access to AEDs will reduce that risk.

When in opposition, we supported this legislation introduced by the Hon. Frank Pangallo in the other place. We saw it as an important piece of legislation that would ultimately save people's lives. We are pleased now as the Malinauskas government to see it reintroduced in this term of government and to support a vote in the first sitting year of the Malinauskas government. Recognising this bill's importance in supporting good and potentially life-saving health outcomes for our community is a very good thing.

Since the bill was introduced in the last term of government, there have been positive developments regarding the technology used. New single-use AEDs are now available in the market, which has helped reduce implementation costs. The bill provides a significant lead time for the implementation of this much-needed and important reform, allowing time for both government and non-government agencies to adequately prepare for the commencement of these measures.

The implementation date of 1 January 2026 across non-government sites provides these owners with a reasonable lead-in time to ensure that they can appropriately plan and prepare for the installation of AEDs. In supporting this bill, the Malinauskas Labor government is reaffirming its commitment to the community in ensuring better health outcomes for all South Australians. We went to the state election with a strong commitment to our public health system, and this legislation is important in delivering on those promises.

The coverage of AEDs across designated buildings and facilities will ensure South Australians have access to these easy-to-use devices most of the time. If there is not one in the building where it is needed, there will be one close by. This government has already taken positive steps in installing AEDs in some places that this bill mandates, including South Australian Ambulance Service, MFS and SES vehicles. In addition, SA Ambulance is currently developing a register and software, the GoodSAM program, which allows members of the public to locate AEDs in their vicinity, and this will meet the requirements outlined in the legislation.

I also want to touch on a particular issue: as a female, I take comfort in the fact that my own medical peace of mind is supported by this bill making AEDs more accessible. Forty per cent of heart attacks in women are fatal and many occur without any warning. Sadly, the majority of women do not realise it is one of the leading causes of death in females. Heart disease is less recognisable in women. We tend to develop symptoms of heart disease later than men and our symptoms are often vaguer or non-specific. Some diagnostic tests of heart disease are less accurate in women than men and we are less likely to seek help quickly.

Hypertension is two to three times more common in women than in men and it becomes much more common as we get older. Hypertension is a silent killer. Hypertension, or high blood pressure, is the most important risk factor for both stroke and heart failure. An early 2000s study showed that more than half of Australian women aged over 55 had hypertension. It is a disturbing fact because many are unaware that they have this condition. It is called the silent killer because it does not cause any symptoms. Once diagnosed, hypertension can usually be well controlled with appropriate medication, and if it is controlled the risk of developing heart failure or stroke is greatly reduced.

The AEDs and this bill will greatly support women, in particular, who have a greater risk of heart attacks. Having AEDs more readily accessible and available will help save the lives of many and if it helps save the life of one mother, father, sister or brother, it is a small price to pay, and for that reason I commend this bill to the house.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON (Ramsay—Minister for Tourism, Minister for Multicultural Affairs) (11:56): Today, I rise in support of the Automated External Defibrillators (Public Access) Bill. I thank the member in the other place for introducing this bill, an Australian first, which seeks to mandate the installation of AED machines in public places. The bill proposes the installation of these life-saving machines in certain buildings and some vehicles. Easy access to these machines will allow untrained laypeople to assist in the event of a cardiac arrest.

Most significantly, we know that access to AEDs has proven, even when utilised by untrained bystanders, to save the lives of people who suddenly experience a cardiac arrest. Lives have been saved since the 1960s in public areas of hospital settings, shopping malls, airports and on aircraft. This clever piece of machinery can be used by anyone. This is the important part: the defibrillator analyses the heart rhythm and decides whether an electric shock is needed.

In the event of a cardiac arrest, access to an AED or someone trained or prepared to provide CPR is essential—every moment counts. Giving the person immediate CPR and using an AED early on can greatly increase their chances of survival. The most important thing is that the AED needs to be used as quickly as possible. Of course, the closer an AED is to the patient, the faster they can receive this life-saving intervention.

It is interesting to look at examples of easily accessible AEDs already in use and the evidence of their impact. When speaking on this bill, I thought I would refer to my own portfolio of tourism and have a look at where AEDs have been situated. As an example, 25 years ago, in 1997, an American airline was the first to equip its fleet of aircraft with AEDs. In this case, the airline also trained its flight attendants on how to correctly use the device.

As we know, these devices have been designed to be used with no training at all, and there are examples where passengers have been able to use the devices. Between June 1997 and July 1999, these AEDs were used in 200 cases—191 on aircraft and nine in the airport terminal. The rate of survival of patients requiring defibrillation increased significantly, and no complications arose from the use of this automated defibrillator.

Closer to home, just last year in Sydney Airport, where an average of 10 passengers suffer a cardiac arrest every year, the Heart of the Nation organisation, headed up by the original Yellow Wiggle, Greg Page, recently launched the new easy-to-spot AED stations, which have been increased by nearly 20 per cent and given a colourful, easy-to-spot, yellow facelift. If they are close by and they are easy to spot, no matter where passengers, customers, staff, family or friends are, help is close at hand when time is of the essence.

One more story that caught my eye was the story of a hotel chain in the United Kingdom. This hotel chain decided just two years ago that they would install these devices in the lobbies of all 800 of their hotels. It is the only major hotel chain in the UK to have installed defibrillators in every property. Within three days of installation, it was used in the lobby of one of their hotels and saved the life of not only one of the guests but also a person at the pub next door, when a hotel staff member on their break at the pub dashed next door and brought the equipment back to the pub where the patient was experiencing a cardiac arrest. Location and accessibility are the most important things here.

For every minute that passes without CPR and defibrillation, a victim's likelihood of survival decreases by up to 10 per cent. Having an AED on hand can be the difference between life and death. This bill goes to the heart of that because it increases the prevalence of AEDs, brings life-saving equipment closer to where it might be needed and makes it accessible when it is. AEDs are simple to use with clear, step-by-step instructions that guide users, even with no medical knowledge, through providing help to someone experiencing cardiac arrest. You cannot go wrong using an AED. An electric shock is only given if it is measured to be required by the device.

In my other portfolio of multicultural affairs, I meet many new arrivals and communities who speak languages other than English. It is of great comfort to know that AEDs are also universal and that they use pictogram guides for people with different levels of literacy or English proficiency.

This life-saving legislation has been introduced by the Hon. Frank Pangallo in the other place. The last time it was introduced, it was supported by our party from opposition. I would like to thank the member for reintroducing this bill and add to the voices of my colleagues in sharing the disappointment and disbelief that this bill was not made a priority by those opposite before the end of their term.

We have heard that, in the event of cardiac arrest, timing is everything. 'Timing is everything' seems to be the message, but that was not heard by the previous government. We are very pleased to be seen as a government that gets things done through leadership, making those tough decisions. This is one of those decisions.

Since the bill was last in parliament, the Hon. Frank Pangallo has filed additional amendments to the bill regarding implementation of this legislation. The Malinauskas government supports the legislation and welcomes and supports the additional amendments. The increase of AEDs in designated buildings and other locations will safeguard South Australians in the event of an emergency. Just like the example of the UK hotel, it is not just about the immediate location of these devices but also about access as close to an incident as can be.

Already in South Australia there are AEDs installed in places that this bill mandates, including all South Australian Ambulance Service stations and all MFS and SES vehicles. Already public areas like airports, shopping malls and some hotel chains in Australia have these devices installed. We know that around the CBD the Adelaide City Council has installed publicly available AEDs in Victoria Square, Elder Park, Rundle Mall and other areas where festivals and events are held so that devices are nearby when they are needed.

This legislation will increase the availability of devices, which will save lives. I would just like to comment on the speech of the member for Enfield. While it is really important that we have access to AEDs, and I congratulate the Hon. Frank Pangallo on this, it is timely for us to consider how we can prevent cardiac arrest. We know that we have greater access to food than ever before, whether it be takeaway or Uber Eats or the five McDonald's in my constituency that are very nearby.

As much as we talk about this bill and we are here to endorse this bill, it is timely for us to all consider how we can prevent chronic conditions, as we know that we have increasing chronic conditions here in South Australia and Australia. I congratulate the Hon. Frank Pangallo on bringing the bill forward and I commend it to the house.

The Hon. C.J. PICTON (Kaurna—Minister for Health and Wellbeing) (12:05): I thank all members for their contribution in relation to this important legislation. I appreciate particularly the support of many members on my side who spoke in favour and also the opposition, who indicated that they will be supporting it as well, albeit they would like some amendments.

This is an important piece of legislation that will ultimately help to save lives across South Australia. We know that every minute and every second count in relation to a cardiac arrest, and having more defibrillators located particularly in public areas will help not only in terms of people who need defibrillation but also in terms of the assistance that defibrillators provide for people to undertake CPR. Both those elements together are critically important in helping to save people's lives.

Again, I thank the Hon. Frank Pangallo for his passionate advocacy and his introduction of this legislation. It certainly sounds from the support from the house as though we will be making very significant legislative history in terms of Australia today with the passage of this legislation. We will, I think, be the first of many states, hopefully, to pass this law to make sure that defibrillators are where they need to be.

Bill read a second time.

Committee Stage

In committee.

Clause 1 passed.

Clause 2.

Mrs HURN: I have a quick question in relation to the commencement but particularly in relation to the estimated cost for the state government. I am just wondering whether the minister can outline what the estimated cost is for the state government.

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: There has been an estimate in terms of some of the additional costs that will be implemented and particularly they relate to some of the transport and infrastructure expenses, particularly buses, trains and trams and also CFS facilities and vehicles, etc. The current estimate that we are looking at is $7.2 million over four years.

Mrs HURN: Thank you very much for that answer, minister. I am wondering whether the Crown has been engaged in relation to any indemnity issues arising from the use of AEDs under this legislation.

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: Clearly, we would not mention legal advice in any case, but that has not been a concern that has been raised or that particular advice has been sought on.

Mrs HURN: What does the minister understand to be the interplay between this proposed legislation and the existing health and safety requirements that are also under the obligations of workplaces?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: Obviously, there are a broad range of workplace health and safety requirements that businesses have in place, but these are very specific rules around public locations. I guess the benefit of this is that it not only applies to employees of a particular workplace but, going through the legislation as it has been drafted by the Hon. Frank Pangallo, the focus is really on public places—places where there will be significant numbers of people, rather than other particular workplaces that would not be public facing.

Mrs HURN: With your guidance, Chair, I have a supplementary because I think it is worthwhile. In specific relation to, for instance, sporting clubs, where sporting clubs may or may not be publicly owned, they may or may not come under the supervision of the local council. For instance, in my own electorate there are a number of sporting facilities that are privately owned, so, from an indemnity perspective, could you elaborate on what that will mean for them?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: My understanding is that there are provisions not specifically in relation to this act but in other pieces of legislation that are commonly—and I believe in some of the federal legislation as well—referred to as good Samaritan provisions, that, essentially, if people are seeking to provide assistance in an emergency, they are legally covered. I would not seek to proffer legal advice about that.

I think the increased availability of AEDs does not differ from the fact that there are AEDs available in the community at the moment and that clearly there are legal provisions that help in relation to people who are acting in good faith as good Samaritans in those situations, so I do not see that this fundamentally differs from the legal relationship that would be in place. You mentioned sporting clubs. There are a lot of sporting clubs that already have AEDs in place, so this is not something that has never happened before. We are seeking to increase the availability of those and they would be operating in the same legal framework, in terms of other interactions with laws, as they currently do.

Mr TELFER: Obviously, as has already been spoken about, this is a national first and it is imperative on us as legislators to understand the impacts it is going to have on groups, whether they are local government, business or community groups. Can the minister give me some detail and tell the house about the consultation process in relation to the bill? Can the minister assure the house that impacted groups will be consulted before sections of the bill commence in 2025?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: This is a private member's bill and I understand that extensive consultation has taken place by the Hon. Frank Pangallo. I believe that it is something he outlined in the other place, so I would certainly refer to the evidence he provided. From the government's perspective, it is something we have been consulting our agencies about.

Following the hopeful passage of this legislation, there will be, as is now in the bill, a significant lead time in terms of the implementation of this—particularly for non-government operators—between now and 1 January 2026. It is certainly something where we will conduct further consultation, especially in relation to, as you say, the commencement but also the regulations, whether there will be any particular regulations that sit underneath the legislation as well. This has obviously been a private member's bill, so a private member has been leading the work on that consultation.

Mr TELFER: As part of that consultation to do with the commencement of the bill, can the minister inform the house if there is any insight into what the overall cost would be for that implementation incurred by the persons or organisations affected?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: There is not one particular estimate in terms of what the private implementation costs will be. There are a number of factors that lead into that, one of which is the price of the AEDs themselves. One of the very positive developments since the parliament last considered this legislation is that we have seen some new products come onto the market, which has significantly lowered the price and increased the possibility of other people taking up AEDs.

One of those is the new ability for single-use AED devices. These can be offered for in the order of, say, $350 as opposed to several thousand dollars for the other devices. Clearly, there would be some people who would look to implement the single-use AEDs; there would be other people who would look for the more substantial AEDs. That is hard to quantify.

The other area where it is hard to quantify is how many people would have AEDs installed already in particular sporting clubs or other public facilities and how many would be in the process of obtaining them already between now and 2026, when this provision will come into place. Another thing that is hard to estimate is that we do not know what the future technology will look like over the next couple of years, so that may have some bearing in terms of what the impact of that is going to be.

However, we are clear that there is going to be a cost for people. We are currently working through the process of considering some assistance that can be provided through grants programs through the government that could help people, particularly not-for-profit organisations, in this regard. We will be considering the details of that further. I think it is important that, as part of the drafting of the legislation and the amendments that were introduced, it does give that lead time between the passage of legislation and the final implementation date to enable everybody to have lots of notice. I think it is good that, hopefully, we will be passing it this week, to give that maximum amount of notice and also consideration of grants programs and consideration of regulations between now and then.

Mr TELFER: Minister, you spoke before about the good Samaritan provisions. Is it your understanding, is it true, that an employee of a sporting club or council would not have access to those good Samaritan provisions?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: I think we are now delving into the questions of legal advice that would not necessarily pertain specifically to this legislation but to the situation that would be in place more broadly currently. There are a lot of councils and sporting clubs that have AEDs in place already, and I have not been notified of any particular legal issues that have taken place in relation to those. It is something I would be happy to look into further if the member wants to raise it with me, but I do not currently have any concerns in front of me in that regard, nor am I going to provide tort law legal advice in this regard. I am sure my law lecturers from Flinders University 20 years ago in tort law would be horrified if I started providing tort law legal advice to members.

This does not change the situation in regard to tort law; this is about increasing the availability. The current legal situation that would apply to an AED would be the same. It is not something I am aware there are any particular concerns about, but if the member is happy to provide further details, it is certainly something I would be happy to look into further.

Mr TEAGUE: We will come to it perhaps more particularly when we come to clauses 7 and 8, as those are the operative provisions. In the context of a 2025 commencement regime, to what extent has there been consideration in relation to the amendment that we have seen from initially this being a bill that is going to come into force fairly promptly after it has passed to having this now relatively lengthy period of time prior to its commencement?

Has there been any particular consideration, or does the government have a view about what one might expect over the course of the next three years in terms of the voluntary taking up of the devices and the general raising of awareness in the community? Has any particular thought been given to the consequences of extending the commencement to 2025 and what happens in the meantime?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: I think I will clarify in terms of the commencement. We really have to consider the interaction with the other provision of the bill, which is in relation to the schedule 1 transitional provision. For people who are not involved in the government, essentially their commencement date will be 1 January 2026. However, the bill will commence in 2025 and that will apply to government facilities. I think it is fair and appropriate that the government should be moving faster on this matter.

Between now and both 2025 and when it privately comes into operation in 2026, you are right: there will be a lot of consideration that we will need to do in terms of awareness raising. I have already mentioned consideration in relation to grant programs, in relation to regulations that will be in place and also the communications that will need to happen with businesses or other organisations that will be affected.

Mr TEAGUE: Thank you, minister, for that answer and, yes, for the record, we are here talking about clause 2, which on its face provides for a commencement in 2025 and we go to the very end, to the schedule that then says that for all facilities other than those owned by the Crown it is actually 2026. That might have been better expressed in clause 2. Anyway, it is spread out in the bill that we have a 2025 commencement for those Crown facilities and 2026 for the rest. Obviously, that is in the context of the original form of the bill providing for commencement pretty much pronto within the next 12 months.

We have a situation in which we are legislating for the introduction of AEDs. There is a significant period of time, whether it is to 2025 or to 2026, as the case may be, and then, as it were, the hammer falls, and we have some debate to be had about penalties, enforcement and all that sort of thing in due course. I guess the point is that we go from a structure in which we have the application of a mandatory environment fairly quickly to one in which the legislation builds in this relatively long period of time, after which there will be penalties imposed for those who do not have their act together.

Does the government provide some indication of provision for funding, support and otherwise, including the rollout of grants and so on, to those who might benefit from such assistance over the course of the interim, if you like, or is that all going to be held up pending commencement either in 2025 or 2026? What does the government have in mind in terms of supporting the non-mandatory period following the passing of this legislation?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: The whole idea behind having a decent period of time before the introduction, or commencement rather, of the legislation is to give people time to consider, to make sure that they have implemented this, and also to make sure that, as you say, we have supports available for some of those not-for-profit organisations that may wish to apply for support. It would be a lead-in time, and I would hope lots of communication would be happening in terms of people's obligations to give them time to get ready.

Mr TEAGUE: Just to draw a line under that for the moment, we could have had legislation in which a bill is passed and there is then a period before which you would have these—we will get to them in a minute—what are on the face of it really significant monetary penalties applied. The legislation could have been structured that way, so that we all know there is this legislation that is in force and there is a built-in legislated period during which there will not be applied these great big penalties.

But what we have is—the minister calls it a transition period or an introductory period, but that is really only because the act is not applying at all. You would be forgiven if you were one of the organisations caught by all this if you were not aware, you had not done anything about your AED obligation and then all of a sudden it comes into force.

So, if this is going to be used as a period for awareness raising—and perhaps I am going over the ground again—what steps does the government have in mind to provide satisfaction for all the community, if not itself, whether it comes in at the beginning of 2025 or 2026 and starts imposing penalties, that it is not going to be doing so against a background other than one in which the unfortunate recipient of such a penalty is not going to be turning around and saying, 'Well, I have only just heard about this and I have only just got my wheels in motion because it's only just commenced'? What sort of across-the-community confidence and awareness can be expected in circumstances where this bill is providing for the immediate application of those penalties?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: I am not sure I agree with the statement being put essentially, that people will not know because of the way the drafting of this has been done. I think it will be very clear to everybody that, as of 1 January 2026, this will apply to the people who fall under the provisions of this legislation. As I have already stated, it will be something the government considers further in terms of how this is best communicated, but I think in all those communications we will be very clear that this will apply to people from 1 January 2026, as the legislation says.

Clause passed.

Clause 3.

Mrs HURN: Minister, we know that South Australia Police are often some of the first responders to incidents where people are requiring emergency assistance and support. We know that a gentleman down south fell off his skateboard a couple of months ago and SA Police were the first on the scene. Of course we know that, in that incident, this man did not need an AED, but could you just elaborate on the justification as to why SAPOL is deliberately excluded from this scheme, particularly in the face of the fact that SAPOL was initially included in the Hon. Frank Pangallo's first drafting in the other place?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: I will not speak on behalf of the Hon. Frank Pangallo, but I would refer the member to read his answer to this in the other place. I think he was clear that he was following consultations that he had with the Police Association in South Australia, and it was determined not to include South Australia Police within this legislation.

A number of concerns were raised by the police in that regard, and the Police Association more particularly, I think, with the Hon. Frank Pangallo. I do not have a disagreement with that point of view. I think that clearly some concerns have been raised. Obviously, it is up to the member if she seeks to make a change in that regard, however the government is not seeking to.

Mrs HURN: I am hoping that the minister can provide further clarification. Perhaps he could take on notice how many SAPOL officers tend to be first on the scene in the case of emergencies. I think that would be a further justification as to why it is they have been deliberately excluded, particularly in light of the fact that almost every other emergency service provider in the state falls under the remit of this legislation except South Australia Police.

As I have said, I note that the minister and the government obviously agree that SAPOL is not necessarily the first on the scene and does not necessarily need to have an AED. However, that is probably something that we are struggling to understand, specifically in light of the example I have just outlined, where it was very public that a man had fallen off his skateboard down south, that SAPOL was the first on the scene and that, in fact, he had to wait another 48 minutes, or so, for an ambulance.

It is just in this entire sphere that I am struggling to understand why it is that SAPOL is deliberately excluded. Secondary to that, can the minister confirm that the CFS, the SES and the MFS were all comfortable and very much supportive of having these AEDs in their vehicles?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: I am advised that certainly those agencies were supportive. In relation to the CFS, some of those vehicles are already covered. There are some that are not, and certainly part of the implementation of this would be that we would have to make sure that all those vehicles have it in place.

In relation to the questions of statistics, etc. the member was asking about, I dare say that it might be impossible to get an accurate answer to that question. I will look into it. If there is something that can be provided I will do so, but I suspect that it might be too difficult to answer that question.

Mrs HURN: Given that the minister has outlined that there are indeed some CFS and MFS vehicles that do already have AEDs in place, can the minister take on notice—or potentially he has the information with him at the moment—how many of those vehicles have AEDs currently and how many will be required to implement them?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: I do have these statistics, which is great. For the MFS, 103 vehicles are fitted with AEDs, which are all the vehicles in the fleet, I am advised. For the CFS, there are approximately 300 vehicles that are fitted with AEDs and approximately 600 vehicles that are not, so they will have to be installed. For the SES, I am advised that 228 vehicles are already fitted with AEDs. For the South Australian Ambulance Service, I am advised that, at the moment, the ambulances and the quick-response vehicles do have them but the other corporate vehicles do not necessarily have them, so there may be some corporate vehicles that have to be considered in relation to that.

Ms PRATT: Minister, in relation to public buildings or facilities—and I can come up with a few examples from my own electorate—if a council oval is surrounded by a grandstand, a mens' change room and a women's change room, I imagine a toilet block, two permanent coaching benches and a shed for the rolling machine, will a separate AED be required in each of these buildings?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: Thank you, member, for the question. I think that there is a degree of reasonableness—or I do not think it is the intention of the Hon. Frank Pangallo, the government, the opposition or anybody in the parliament that every single element that she has just described would need to have a separate AED installed. This would obviously be something that we would have to consider in terms of its implementation, and we have some time in relation to that. We will also need to consider it in relation to the setting of regulations as well, which will help to address some of those issues.

I know this is an area where we have been in discussions with the Local Government Association, who obviously have a number of facilities of this type where they are seeking to make sure that they are in compliance with what the law will be and also making sure that they are providing the appropriate support for their community in relation to a cardiac arrest. Obviously, we do not want to be in a position where we have to go completely overboard in relation to the types of different demarcations of different buildings in a sporting facility, as you have described. It is something we will continue to work on with the Local Government Association, should this legislation proceed. It is something that, if there are issues in terms of clarity, we would seek to address in terms of regulations.

Ms PRATT: Minister, in a similar vein you speak of reasonableness, but if that same council park contains playground equipment, skateboard ramps, basketball backboards, soccer goals, outdoor equipment, barbecue shelters—you get the picture—what guarantee can the minister give to that same relevant council, in using the word 'reasonableness', that they will not be required to install individual AEDs on all those pieces of equipment?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: I think I have just answered that question.

Ms PRATT: Minister, does the bill apply to disused buildings that the public might have access to, such as historical buildings or ruins on council land?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: I would not have thought that the provisions would apply to ruins, but if there is concern in relation to ruins then presumably it would largely be the Local Government Association, potentially, who might be impacted and we will consider that if there need to be particular regulations in place. I think, with a number of these matters, some common sense would apply in terms of their implementation, and I would have thought ruins would be in that category.

Mr TEAGUE: Going to the definition of 'automated external defibrillator' because it is defined at clause 3, it is defined to mean a portable device, and the balance of the bill is oriented towards the installation of such devices. The question really goes to paragraph (b) of the definition because we see primarily it is a device that is contemplated as being included on the Australian Register of Therapeutic Goods or, in the event that there is not one included, approved by the minister.

Is that a belts and braces provision that has fallen away because there is a device or devices on the register? The question, bearing in mind the introduction, is: is there any such device on the register that is by its nature portable and not amenable to installation, whether on or about a building, because it is specifically manufactured for the purposes of its remaining portable?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: The advice I have is that there certainly are TGA approved devices available at the moment. I presume that this has been drafted in this manner, should there be some sort of change to that register, to give us the fail safe that there still could be devices that could be approved by the minister. However, we are not expecting that to be a particular issue.

Mr TEAGUE: The balance of the question was about portability and the definition. I might perhaps put that in a context more particularly of a concern in this regard raised by the Local Government Association, as I understand it, because clause 3(2) makes it clear that installation for these purposes, installation in a building, includes installation on an external area of a building. That might capture fairly comprehensively what installation contemplates.

My previous question included a question about whether or not there are any approved AED devices that are constructed for particular application and may be, of their nature, not amenable to installation in any form. They are designed for a particular other purpose, but a community organisation is going to have to consult the list of those that are on the register, hence the question. I remain interested in an answer to that question.

To put it in a context of a concern raised by the LGA, when contemplating the definition of relevant building, it is defined as a place to which the public has access. Does that include a place where the public has access to the outside of the building, and is that a particular example of where clause 3(2) has work to do, or are they just coincidental and is there an answer to the question anyway?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: In relation to the first question, I am doing the best I can to try to interpret the question in relation to the portability of the devices. Rather than the CEO of SA Ambulance Service, who is here, my experience is at a lower level, as a barely scrapeable pass member of the Moana Surf Life Saving Club in my first-aid training. As I understand it, all defibrillators have a level of portability to them, otherwise it would be difficult to utilise them. Even with those in a box on the wall, you have to take them out of the box and use them. You cannot take the person up and stick them on the wall to use the defibrillator. I am not anticipating particular concerns in relation to the definition of portability there.

In relation to a public building or facility where the public has access, I think there is a commonsense interpretation of that, again. It goes back to the question of the member for Frome in relation to whether that includes ruins, and I do not believe that would be an issue. However, I think the important element of this is that, if issues are identified where there are particular areas in a significant period of further consultation and implementation before the commencement that we will have, we will be able to make very clear under the regulations—and the definition does make clear that we can exclude particular elements if an issue was identified.

Mr TEAGUE: Just to be really clear, the definition includes reference to its being a portable device—that is really straightforward—right? An AED is a portable device. The point is that the minister has given an answer that says that there are such devices included on the TGA register, so someone thinking about complying with this legislation will choose one from the list on the register, as opposed to what the minister decides will be suitable for the act; the minister has told us that so far.

So the question is, and it is not a trick question: are there any such AEDs that we know about, because they are on the register, that are not amenable to installation for the purposes of this act and, if so, can you tell us, or are they all amenable to installation for the purposes contemplated by this act? I do not know if I can be any clearer than that.

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: I thank the member for Heysen for his question. I am advised that there are some defibrillator devices that would only be available for purchase by surgeons or other appropriate medical practitioners that could be inserted in your body for particular medical purposes. However, they would not be available for purchase, but they would be something that would be on the register of therapeutic goods.

However, we are not anticipating any issues where, for instance, a local council would purchase a defibrillator device that was intended for insertion inside a person's body and put them up in the sporting club, for instance, both because of a level of common sense but also because those devices are not generally available for purchase by the public. The advice I have received from SA Ambulance is that the devices available for purchase by the public would be in compliance with these provisions.

Mr TELFER: Recognising, minister, that when we legislate it is for the whole of South Australia, as someone from a regional area with distance between and facilities that are not necessarily used all the time I have a particular interest in expanding a little on the member for Heysen's question. In determining when the public have access to a building under this legislation, does it mean 24 hours a day or during business hours? I am contemplating a 'public facility' that may be used once, twice, four, five or six times a year, knowing that a small regional hall may only be used a couple of times a year. Will that fall under the prescription that is designated within this section?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: I go back to my previous answer. In addition to that, a town hall is specifically mentioned in relation to this section. Obviously there is also the ability, if there was to be consideration of something, if it was to be put in the regulations, that it would not be appropriate to fall under that provision.

I would make the point—and I think this is an important one—that there may be a hall that might not be used every day, but when those halls are used they often have a significant number of people inside them. It is important for local governments, if they have halls available to the public for hire, etc., that we do make sure that AEDs are installed within them. There would be a number of local councils that already have these provisions in place.

If you have significant numbers of people, then clearly there is concern in terms of the impact if somebody was to have a cardiac arrest. That is clearly the rationale behind the drafting of this by the Hon. Frank Pangallo. There is that provision that makes it clear that regulations could be made if there were issues identified, but in relation to town halls, etc. I would not anticipate issues.

Mr TELFER: In this section is the definition of the 'relevant authority': the CFS, the MFS and the SES. Can the minister confirm that these organisations were consulted through this process about their new obligations pursuant to this bill and, if they were, what was the nature of their feedback?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: Yes they were and they were supportive.

Clause passed.

Clause 4.

Mrs HURN: Minister, can you please update the house on the process that was undertaken when it came to determining which of the designated buildings or facilities were captured from (a) to (j)? Obviously, we note that those are quite prescriptive and, in fact, that is what clause 4 says: 'Meaning of designated building or facility'.

What was the process that was undertaken, what was the consultation and what was the feedback, for instance, from sporting groups across the state and from public and private schools across the state? What was the feedback from Corrections? What was the feedback when it came to all the aged-care providers who no doubt were also consulted? What was the feedback from tourism operators, as well, when it came to caravan parks and residential parks? Could you give us a sense of what that consultation period looked like and how this list was determined?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: I refer back to my previous answer to a very similar question in relation to the consultation undertaken by the Hon. Frank Pangallo. Obviously there has been consideration not only in the term of this parliament but also in the term of the previous parliament in relation to a very similar piece of legislation. I do not want to speak on behalf of the Hon. Frank Pangallo, but I understand that there was consultation undertaken.

I feel confident in saying that the Hon. Frank Pangallo has done as much as he possibly can to promote this legislation to the public and in the media. Certainly, the particular buildings and facilities designated within clause 4—again, I do not want to speak on his behalf on his original drafting of these provisions—clearly were areas identified by him, in the conduct of his consideration and consultation, that were of high risk and high consideration for the installation of an AED within them. Those areas certainly speak to me as being ones in which there would be a significant number of people and therefore an appropriate consideration for an AED to be installed.

Mrs HURN: I refer the minister to clause 4(l), which states: 'a building or facility, or class of building or facility, prescribed by the regulations'. Naturally we have seen from the initial drafting from the honourable member that paragraph (k) was withdrawn, and that was obviously in relation to some of the smaller businesses in South Australia, which I think was a really valuable exclusion in the end, because I am imagining my own community with a main street, for instance, where you potentially have 15 or so very small businesses, door to door, having a requirement to have an AED.

I thank the member for removing that from the original drafting but note that via clause 4(l) there still is an opportunity, I suppose, for the government to put in small businesses again via the regulations, and I am just hopeful that the minister can rule out that small businesses will not be put back on the drawing board as a result of the regulations.

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: We might get the member an updated copy because I think what the member is referring to as (l) is now (k) because of the removal of (k). Certainly in relation to paragraph (k) as it is in this house, there is no consideration by the government at this stage of additional buildings, etc., that would be included within that. As the other member said, we certainly supported the removal of the previous paragraph (k) in the other place.

Mrs HURN: Can the minister outline and update the house on what discussions the government is having to provide support for all of those prescribed or designated facilities to really assist them in purchasing an AED? Obviously, we have been through this in the second reading. We note that, according to the TGA, you can now get AEDs as cheaply as $360, but the upper level—which I think is really what we are shooting for people to be able to consider—is around the $2,600 mark. What support packages or grants is the government considering to help some of these designated facilities purchase an AED?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: I again reiterate my previous answer in relation to what the government will be considering in relation to grant programs, but I will make clear that consideration is largely focused in relation to not-for-profit organisations, sporting organisations or other organisations of that ilk that may require assistance. We may be putting out the call for people in organisations like the Casino, etc. to install an AED, but perhaps they already have them. I think that is another factor to consider in relation to this clause, as well. There are a lot of organisations within this list that will already have installed AEDs in their facilities and so there will be no impact upon them.

Progress reported; committee to sit again.

Sitting suspended from 12:58 to 14:00.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT