Mr. David Seymour:

I can see that the Senator is grappling with many of the kinds of questions I remember thinking about deeply throughout the period this was debated in New Zealand. With respect to self-administration versus administration by a medical practitioner, there is certainly an argument that the person should self-administer, because that somehow shows their level of conviction and will. If someone else administers, that might show they were not really choosing. I accept that as a position many people hold. The way we thought about it was presaged by a comment the Senator made. It also creates discrimination, not only about ability but also timing. We successfully argued that people should be able to either self-administer, which is often known as assisted suicide, or have administration by a medical practitioner, which is, sometimes at least, known as voluntary euthanasia. The argument was that people who choose assisted dying but have a declining physical capacity may choose to end their lives earlier - while they are still confident they are physically capable - than they would if they knew they had the option of administration by a medical practitioner.

It is interesting how those numbers have played out in the early stages of the first full year for which we have data. Some 328 people had an assisted death and according to the latest report Dr. Good is responsible for as registrar - she should feel free to jump in and correct me at any time - 22 people chose self-administration and 306 people chose administration by a medical practitioner. Clearly, most people who choose assisted dying, given the choice, will choose administration by a medical practitioner. I suspect if that option was not available, many more people would have chosen self-administration and at least some of them may have chosen it earlier than their preference because they were nervous about losing their physical capacity. That is the argument as it played out in New Zealand. I heard Dr. Donnelly say there is not enough evidence. We actually have significant evidence about how our law is working.

The Senator's second question was about the experience of different medical practitioners. Did I understand it correctly?