Armed with the largest cancer petition in NZ history, oncologist calls for national cancer agency

An oncologist is backing Blair Vining's calls for a national cancer agency in New Zealand so that all Kiwis have the same access to high quality care.

The largest cancer petition in New Zealand's history will be presented to Parliament, with over 140,000 signatures calling for better cancer health care.

Mr Vining, a Southland farmer, was diagnosed with stage four terminal bowel cancer in October last year.  He is trying to tick off his last bucket list item, which is to create a national cancer agency in New Zealand.

Oncologist Chris Jackson told TVNZ1's Breakfast today the reason why the petition has gained so much support is that everyone is affected by cancer in some way.

"Cancer is the leading cause of death in New Zealand with over 23,000 people affected every year, and it's just going up," he said. 

The Ministry of Health predicts the number of people affected by cancer is going to double by 2040, he explained.

A national cancer agency would be the best way to cater to the increase in demand, Dr Jackson argued.

"Planning for that kind of increase in demand needs strong central leadership, it needs strong planning and it needs independence from the Government, so it needs to be politically neutral, and that's why we think we need a national cancer agency.

"An agency would set national standards. We need to make sure that everyone has access to the same high-quality care no matter who they are or where they live, and currently that is just not happening," Dr Jackson said.

"People want to know that when they go to their local hospital that they're going to get world-class cancer care delivered close to their home."

He said it is great the Government is investing $8 billion into the health sector over the next two years but that authorities need to be strategic with it.

"We need to see that money being invested in a wise way, and what a national cancer agency could do is prioritise where that best investment in cancer would be, and currently none of that $8 billion has been clearly earmarked for cancer.

"We can do better with what we've got, but we could do a whole lot more if we had more money, too."