This article examines the evolving patent term extension schemes under the Patents Act 1903 (Cth), the Patents Act 1952 (Cth) and the Patents Act 1990 (Cth). The analysis traces the change from "inadequate remuneration" to a scheme directed specifically at certain pharmaceuticals. An examination of the policy justification shows there are legitimate questions about the desirability of any extension. The article concludes that key information provisions in the Patents Act 1990 (Cth) that might assist a better policy analysis are presently not working and that any justification needs evidence demonstrating that the benefits of patent term extensions to the community as a whole outweigh the costs and that the objectives of extensions can only be achieved by restricting competition.