The article argues that a narrow federal legal issue is making voluntary assisted dying (VAD) harder to access for people in regional and remote Queensland, and it highlights criticism that the Commonwealth has failed to fix it despite an apparently simple legislative pathway. The central problem is a technicality in the Commonwealth Criminal Code, which makes it illegal to use a phone or the internet to counsel or instruct someone on suicide. In practice, this has created uncertainty around whether doctors can use telehealth for VAD consultations and whether prescriptions can be sent electronically, creating extra barriers for terminally ill patients outside major centres.
The Clem Jones Group has strongly criticised the federal government’s refusal to amend the law. Chairman David Muir said ministers were wrongly describing the matter as complex, arguing that the remedy could be made through a straightforward legislative change. He pointed specifically to Independent MP Kate Chaney, noting that in February 2024 she proposed a one-line bill designed to clarify that the Commonwealth’s anti-suicide provisions did not apply to state and territory VAD laws.
Kate Chaney’s role is presented as especially significant because she offered a direct, targeted solution to the legal ambiguity. According to Muir, her bill would have removed uncertainty for doctors and improved access for people in regional communities, yet the Albanese government did not progress it and allowed it to lapse without debate. The criticism is sharpened by comparison with the government’s willingness to allow debate on Barnaby Joyce’s private member’s bill to scrap net-zero emissions targets, which Muir said revealed misplaced priorities.
The article suggests the consequences of inaction are particularly serious in Queensland. Because of legal advice received by Queensland Health, doctors in the state must post VAD prescriptions to a central pharmacy rather than upload them electronically, even though other states reportedly send prescriptions electronically without legal repercussions. This makes Queensland an outlier and may further disadvantage patients in a geographically decentralised state where many people rely on remote healthcare access.
Attorney-General Michelle Rowland’s office defended the Commonwealth position, saying the interaction between federal law and state and territory VAD schemes raises complex issues. A spokeswoman said the Attorney-General and federal health minister would consider the matter in consultation with the states and territories. Even so, the article frames this response as inadequate, with critics saying the government has repeatedly delayed action without clearly explaining why the change has not been made.
Queensland Premier David Crisafulli also shifted responsibility to Canberra, saying these were national issues that needed a national solution. While acknowledging the challenges of delivering healthcare across regional Queensland, he did not explain why Queensland had taken a more cautious legal approach than other states. The article closes by noting the political history around VAD in Queensland: ten Liberal National MPs, including current Health Minister Tim Nicholls, voted to legalise it in 2021, while Crisafulli voted against the laws. Overall, the piece presents Kate Chaney’s lapsed bill as a missed opportunity to remove a practical barrier affecting end-of-life care for regional Queenslanders.