National Health Amendment (Passive Immunological Products) Bill 2026; Second Reading

Continued the debate

Ryan supported the bill's objective to broaden the definition of vaccines to include passive immunity products like Beyfortus for RSV protection. Ryan argued that current legislation restricted the National Immunisation Program to active immunisation only, hindering rapid response to emerging health threats. Ryan highlighted that Australia's childhood immunisation rates had fallen to a 10-year low of 89.8 per cent, dropping below the 95 per cent herd immunity threshold. Ryan cited rising cases of measles, influenza, and whooping cough as evidence of the consequences of declining coverage. Ryan also pointed out significant cost barriers and inconsistent state funding for vaccines such as Shingrix, Arexvy, and meningococcal B, calling for national harmonisation.

Government response

White acknowledged the importance of increasing immunisation levels, particularly for vulnerable groups like infants. White shared a personal account of her child's hospitalisation for RSV to illustrate the severity of the disease and the need for accessible prevention. White stated that the government opposed the amendment because it would disrupt the passage of the legislation intended to list emerging therapies on the National Immunisation Program. White confirmed that the government was focused on lifting immunisation rates across the country. White concluded that the bill should proceed without amendment to achieve its primary goal.