Apparently I was one of about five callers for whom time ran out on the talkback to Sen Barnett on 1 August. The following is a (slightly corrected) e-mail I sent to the Senator an hour after the programme, but if he is anything like his colleagues I won't get a reply. Hence I can only ask questions via mediums like this. If the Senator does condescend to reply, either to my personal address or via this forum would be acceptable, though in the latter case I would appreciate his also notifying my own address.

Dear Senator Barnett,
I hope you are familiar with what the 7:30 Report has titled Wooldridge's Scientific Fraud - if not see and other stories on this subject.

While Wooldridge's actions were a decade ago, I believe successive coalition Health Ministers (including one called Abbott) upheld Wooldridge's action, and then in opposition use the Senate for the same purpose. Am I correct in believing the coalition is more interested in "face-saving" and reputation than in people's lives? Am I correct that the Senate's opposition has retarded Minister Roxon's ability to introduce PET scanners, but she has made some progress in bypassing Senate opposition?

My interest in the issue is that this was probably a major contributor in the failure of a close relative to survive a cancer that was initially seen to be one she had a very good chance of beating. I wish to ask coalition party representatives when they are going to cease their opposition to the introduction of PET scanners, because former Prime Minister Howard, former Health Minister Abbott, my local member for Menzies, etc will not answer my enquiries. But it is also notable that none of them question either the accuracy of the facts in the 7:30 Report story, nor even the balance of that story.

I arrived home halfway through your interview with Sheridan Voysey, phoned the Talkback line, and the producer suggested I should write to you - hence this e-mail. I look forward to your expeditious reply. In particular, would you please explain why the coalition parties continued to oppose the introduction of PET scanning equipment, and when this opposition will cease?