our response to him will just generate more hostility and aggression by himtowards the AVN.I can give no explanation for the ferocity with which he pursues both myself and the AVN as we are just a small, not-for-profit organisation that seeks toprovide families and individuals with information relating to vaccination andother health issues. However, the threat that he poses and continues to poseto me and my family is very real. For these reasons, I and the AVN requestthat the HCCC use the attached response for the purposes of assessing thecomplaint only, and not be provided to Mr McLeod or any group with which heis associated.I and the AVN understand that the purpose of the HCCC requesting aresponse to the complaint is so that the complaint can be assessed under the
Health Care Complaints Act
1993 (NSW) to determine:1. whether it comes within the commission's jurisdiction, and2. whether the complaint should be referred for investigation, conciliationor whether the complaint should be discontinued.Neither I nor the AVN have the financial resources to engage legal counsel toundertake the legal analysis required to determine with precision whether or not the
Health Care Complaints Act
1993 ("the Act") gives the HCCC jurisdiction to deal with this complaint. Suffice to say we consider the terms of section 7 of the Act, which sets out the circumstances which can be thesubject of a complaint, to restrict complaints to the matters listed in sub-paragraph 1(b) of that section. Because the activities of the AVN do not qualifyas "
affect[ing] the clinical management or care of an individual client"
for thepurposes of s.7(1)(b) no complaint brought against the AVN under the Act canbe lawfully dealt with by the HCCC. Mr McLeod has provided no evidence inhis complaint that any
has had their clinical management or care affected by the information that is made available by the AVN and thushas not met the basic threshold for the bringing of a complaint under the ActThe AVN accepts that the definition of
under section 4 toinclude
"health education services"
may be broad enough to cover theinformation giving activities of the AVN, thereby making the AVN a
for the purposes of the Act. However, it is the AVN'ssubmission that the terms of section 7(1)(b) of the Act limits complaintsbrought against a
Health Service Provider
to complaints relating to "
a healthservice which affects the clinical management or care of an individual client."
Sub-paragraphs (2) and (3) of section 7 cannot be read as doing anythingmore than going on to clarify the primary circumstances which may be thesubject of a complaint to the HCC, not to expand such circumstances. Theeffect of section 7 then is to ensure that it is only complaints about healthservice providers that "
affects the clinical management or care of an individual client"
that the HCCC has jurisdiction to examine, rather than all complaintsmade against
Health Service Providers
that have no clinical management or care impacts on a client of a health practitioner. This complaint by Mr McLeodis one being made about the general information distribution activities of the AVN which has no bearing on the individual treatment and care management