Shayne Neumann (Blair, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I am happy to do so, Mr Deputy Speaker. I will just respond on one issue, and that is the GP superclinics. I say to the member for Dickson that the GP superclinic in Ipswich, which I am proud to have supported and sought the funding for at $2.5 million, was a wonderful institution for the Ipswich community at the time of the floods, being situated next to the main evacuation centre in Ipswich at the showground. If the member for Dickson wants to go and have a look at the Ipswich GP superclinic he is most welcome to at some stage. It is operating now under the great leadership of Dr Simon Barnett.

I want to speak about what the coalition government failed to do with respect to midwifery and what we are doing in this legislation and what we have done since we were elected. The role of midwives and the issue of health funding and also insurance became very obvious back in about 2002 and also prior to that with the collapse of the insurance market after 9/11. There was a landmark obstetrics birth injury case which resulted in a payout of about $11 million and that initiated a crisis of confidence in the industry and also with respect to midwives across the country. With about 200 privately practising midwives paying about $800 a year for insurance, there simply was not a big enough pool of funds to contemplate a payout of that magnitude, and obviously insurance for midwives was a big issue.

The coalition was in power in 2001-06 and most of 2007, so it had over six years to resolve this issue. Surprisingly, it did not. It was too hard for those opposite—inaction and inactivity on the issue was their motto. They were simply spending too much time attacking workers and not enough time noticing what was happening in the midwife sector. Since we got into power we took steps to find out about the issues facing midwives across the nation. In 2008 we directed the Commonwealth Chief Nurse and Midwifery Officer, Rosemary Bryant, to conduct a review of midwifery services in Australia. In addition a number of my colleagues and I lobbied very hard on this issue. I met with midwives in Queensland and I spoke at fora put on by the Maternity Coalition in the state. I spoke to a number of people in the industry, including a very prominent midwife in the Ipswich area, Teresa Walsh. I wish her and the other midwives well in their venture in relation to maternity services and midwifery services in Ipswich, Toowoomba and the western corridor and the business they are currently conducting. I had the privilege of serving on the local health community council with Cas McCullough, a real mover and shaker in the Maternity Coalition in Queensland and someone who has argued strongly for reform for midwives. Cas has taken a very strong view that we need to make changes to support midwives and has certainly put into practice her commitment to caring for young children and for women who choose homebirths, as well as for women who choose to give birth in other ways. Cas's work is very well known in the West Moreton area, and I commend her for the work she is doing.

It was Labor that brought three bills before this House in 2009 to support Australia's midwives. Despite the great work done there, anomalies emerged from that legislation. The purpose of the Midwife Professional Indemnity (Commonwealth Contribution) Scheme Act 2010 and the associated Midwife Professional Indemnity (Run-off Cover Support Payment) Act 2010 was to support the new MBS and PBS arrangements by enabling the establishment of a government supported professional indemnity scheme for eligible midwives from 1 July 2010. An unintended consequence emerged from the enactment of the contribution scheme legislation whereby midwives who were self-employed and had formed companies through which to operate their services were not eligible for a Commonwealth contribution. That particular provision was set up to deal with private hospitals and large private obstetric practices as employers and was not intended to impact on companies established by a single midwife or a couple of midwives who were directors, shareholders and employees of that private company.

Within large companies such as private hospitals and large obstetric practices, claims to a Commonwealth contribution scheme could be made by the employer. But if the midwife, who may be the sole director and sole shareholder, was also an employee, this made them ineligible to make a contribution claim, and that was never the federal Labor government's intention. The Midwife Professional Indemnity Legislation Amendment Bill 2011 has the very important task of tidying up the Midwife Professional Indemnity Scheme created under the 2010 legislation. The bill before the chamber allows for a rule-making power to be established under section 11(3)(g), and thus tidies up the placement of the unintended words to a more appropriate part of the legislation. It also allows for future rules to be made as and when new and innovative midwife self-employment arrangements occur, without the need to seek a separate amendment to the legislation.

Of course, any new rules are subject to the scrutiny of the parliament to make sure the intention is consistent with the scheme legislation. As the member for Dickson pointed out, the bill does fix an error in the Midwife Professional Indemnity (Run-off Cover Support Payment) Bill 2010, which became legislation, which would, if left unchanged, impose a higher than intended tax on insurers of eligible midwives.

This bill ensures that self-employed midwives can access the Commonwealth contribution scheme and amends the professional indemnity legislation of 2010 to ensure that the tax on insurers of eligible midwives is correctly calculated. These changes are important because self-employed midwives such as Teresa Walsh, whom I mentioned before, need to make sure that they can get access to that scheme and not fall foul of the previous provisions. We do not want them excluded from the operation of the provision.

Today we see the federal Labor government putting the health and wellbeing of Australians at the forefront of legislation in fixing up this problem. We saw health, education, infrastructure and many aspects of the Australian economy front and centre in the Treasurer's speech last night with respect to employment and participation. We need to make sure that midwives participate not just in the economy but in the lives of women who choose to use midwives in the birthing of their children. This is an important difference in terms of legislation. It fixes up some problems and puts the scheme in a better state. It makes sure that midwives have security and certainty and have access to the contribution, and it helps midwives such as Teresa Walsh in my electorate, and others, to access the scheme in the way that we always intended. For that reason, I commend the legislation to the House.

See this speech in context