Jacqui Lambie (Tasmania, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question without notice is to Senator Nash, the Minister representing the Minister for Health. I refer the National Party assistant health minister to the government's proposed $650 million cuts to Medicare bulk-billing rates.

I note that respected Tasmanian health professionals like scientist Richard Hanlon have warned that the effect on patients will be quite significant because it will discourage patients from going to their doctors, patients may pay up to a $30 co-payment and it has the potential to stop patients from testing for chronic diseases like diabetes and undertaking pap smears for women's cancers. It will remove a 10-year focus on primary health care so that hospitals in the future will become inundated, and cancers and diabetes will not be seen until it is too late.

Can the assistant minister produce studies or modelling which prove Tasmanian medical scientist Richard Hanlon is wrong?

Fiona Nash (NSW, National Party, Deputy Leader of the Nationals in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am not aware of the comments that the senator referred to at the end of her question, so I cannot respond directly to those. I am assuming that the senator is referring to changes to the bulk-billing incentive payment for pathology and diagnostic imagining. I think it is very important for the Senate to note that since 2009 half a billion dollars, around $500 million, has been spent on this particular program; indeed, $99 million in the last year. The purpose of the payment was to increase bulk-billing rates—that was the purpose of the payment for those who were not aware. What we have seen, as I said, is $99 million just in the last year and roughly the same amount each and every year since 2009, and the bulk-billing rate has gone from 86.3 per cent to 87.6 per cent over that period of time. It has increased by 1.3 per cent. So the purpose of the funding through this program, to increase the rate, simply has not had the desired effect that was the intention of the funding to be paid in the first instance. Let me also be very clear: rebates have not changed for people undertaking these items. The incentives were being paid directly to the pathologists, to the diagnostic imagers—

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Pause the clock. Senator Lambie.

Jacqui Lambie (Tasmania, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order. I simply asked whether any future modelling had been done to see whether women's cancer checks will be at risk, and how much it is going to cost the country in the long run. I want to know whether modelling has been done and produced. If it has, may I have a copy of that modelling, please.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Lambie. You did have a little bit more to your question in relation to the comments which the minister addressed up-front, saying that she was not aware of those comments or that particular research. Minister, I will draw your attention to the comments just made by Senator Lambie. You have 14 seconds in which to answer.

Fiona Nash (NSW, National Party, Deputy Leader of the Nationals in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr President. I am happy to take that on notice and seek advice from the health minister. I have been trying to assist the chamber with some facts around this, given there has been a lot scaremongering on this issue.

Jacqui Lambie (Tasmania, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. I again refer to the Liberal-Nationals cuts to women's cancer tests. I note that the report from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare indicates that people in rural disadvantaged areas are almost twice as likely to be diagnosed with cervical cancer than those in metropolitan areas. Will the National Party assistant minister explain why she has betrayed Australian country women by supporting this cruel Liberal policy?

Fiona Nash (NSW, National Party, Deputy Leader of the Nationals in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Firstly, I will correct two things from the senator: one, I have not betrayed anybody, least of all rural and regional Australia. I also correct the senator: there have been no cuts referred to the payments, as the senator said. The changes have been to the payments that are made directly to the providers. We need to be very, very clear that there have been no cuts to the rebate. Again, I draw the attention of those opposite to the fact that this was a program designed to increase the rates of bulk-billing in this sector and it has increased only 1.3 per cent since 2009.

Jacqui Lambie (Tasmania, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. I again refer to the Liberal-Nationals $650 million cuts to women's cancer tests. I note that the same midyear economic report released in December showed Australia had set aside nearly $650 million to resettle Syrian refugees over the next four years. Can the minister explain whether the cuts to Medicare and women's cancer tests were agreed to so that Australia could afford to resettle Syrian refugees?

Fiona Nash (NSW, National Party, Deputy Leader of the Nationals in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I indicate to the senator that portfolio decisions around funding are taken within portfolios. I would have no indication whatsoever of the assertion that the senator has put forward about trading across portfolios for a funding issue. This is an issue that has been espoused very strongly by those on the other side of the chamber and, quite frankly, there has been a significant degree of scaremongering. On this side of the chamber, we make no apologies for making sensible, balanced decisions about budgetary measures that require an outcome. We will continue to do that for the benefit of all Australians.