Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. Melbourne is home to the country's only not-for-profit community pharmacy, run by the organisation cohealth, where doctors and pharmacists have worked side by side for decades to give better targeted prescriptions and improve the health of public housing residents and pensioners. Your budget increases funding to private pharmacies but, inexplicably, axes cohealth's pharmacy funding. Why is this budget having a go at some of Melbourne's poorest? And will you review this, given that it will increase the cost to taxpayers of hundreds of thousands of dollars?

Sussan Ley (Farrer, Liberal Party, Minister for Health) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Because we in the coalition care very much about affordability of medicines, particularly for those who struggle to pay, I am going to ignore the political rhetoric in the member for Melbourne's question and I am going to answer in the following way. The member for Melbourne and I have a meeting to discuss a serious matter, which is the cohealth pharmacy in his electorate. Members might like to know that this is the only pharmacy of its type operating in Australia. There are no other pharmacies that operate under this model and, under cohealth, the PBS does not operate but patients pay a subscription depending on their status and whether it is a family or an individual subscription.

If you were to transfer the pharmacy to the PBS, some patients would actually pay less. So it is not a matter of affordability and in designing the transfer—and I asked my department what the effect would be—there will actually be a cost to the Commonwealth, not a saving. The ultimate aim for us is to provide affordable medicines in the best possible way. As I understand it, we have given cohealth six months notice and an undertaking to work with them to transition themto the PBS under which, as members would know, concessional patients pay $6.10 per script, up to 60 scripts, and then they receive their medicines for free.

Ms King interjecting—

The member for Melbourne made a point—Member for Ballarat, you are welcome to ask me a question on notice, but please do not interrupt.

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Ballarat will stay or leave; the choice is hers. The Minister for Health has the call and the member for Ballarat will desist or leave.

Sussan Ley (Farrer, Liberal Party, Minister for Health) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Because I take seriously the pharmacy and its clients and I want to assist it into the future, as I said, I have agreed to meet the member for Melbourne. I do want to make one final point: not all pharmacies operate on a private for-profit principle. In fact, there are many who do not. There are Friendly Society Pharmacies, many in South Australia—that is, the National Pharmacies chain. They have been operating for over 100 years and they reinvest with member benefits. So let us not make this a private versus public argument, Member for Melbourne. Let us think of the patients and let us concentrate on the affordability of medicines. I look forward to your support for the package of legislation that I will soon introduce, aimed at exactly that.