Yvette D'Ath (Petrie, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I welcome the comments of the member for Pearce and her concerns for the health sector because I also rise to speak in my grievance on the impediments to future health reform in this country. I wonder where the concern was of many of those on the other side in 2007 and the decade that preceded that. If there are concerns about what the Rudd government has achieved in its first two years, I ask that those on the other side closely examine their own actions in this parliament in our trying to achieve those reforms.

My concerns are not just my own but those of my local community. It is true to say that Australia’s health system has many strengths. For each of those people raising concerns about the health system in my local area, there are individuals who will praise the system. They have commented on the uniqueness and the privilege that Australians have in having access to free public health services. I have had numerous people telling me their very personal stories where they have found themselves in hospital and not only have informed me that they could not fault the service they were provided but were full of praise for the doctors, nurses and allied health professionals that looked after them. I believe that we owe a great deal of gratitude to those people: the doctors, the nurses, the allied health professionals and all those who dedicate their working life to assist those most in need and when they are most vulnerable in our health service.

Does this mean that we do not have challenges in looking to the future of our health and hospital system in Australia? Of course not. The National Health and Hospitals Reform Commission report, released on 27 July 2009, highlighted some of the many challenges that we face: the fact that less than two per cent of the health expenditure is spent on preventative health; one out of every three Australians who present to public hospital emergency departments are not seen within a clinically recommended time; and one out of every six Australians on a waiting list for elective surgery are not seen within a clinically recommended time. It is estimated that there are some 650,000 Australians on public dental waiting lists, with an average waiting period of two years for essential dental treatments. About two-thirds of people who need mental health care go untreated. And, of course, the health costs are rising rapidly. These problems have not occurred overnight and they certainly have not arisen only in the last two years.

This report shows us that we have a significant challenge. The Rudd government has certainly not been sitting back and ignoring this challenge or, worse, exacerbating this problem by taking money out of the health system, as the previous government did. Much work has already been done by the Rudd government to ensure that health reform has stayed at the forefront of the government’s agenda in its budget considerations and negotiations with the states and territories through COAG. For example, the Rudd government has already committed to investing $64 billion in the hospital and health system across the country over the next five years—a 50 per cent increase on the previous agreement by the Liberals. We have invested $600 million in our elective surgery program. We have invested $750 million in taking pressure off emergency departments. The Rudd government has also invested in new health infrastructure and in our health workforce on preventative health measures. The government has committed to a total of $650 million for two dental programs and will invest $1.6 billion in improving Indigenous health. And additional funding has gone into aged care.

For the future the government has embarked upon a path to build a health and hospital system in Australia that meets the needs of the 21st century. The government has committed to an overhaul of the health system to ensure that it can cope with future challenges, including an ageing population and rising healthcare costs. We cannot afford to rush this. We do have to get it right. We cannot undo 12 years of Liberal neglect in just 18 months.

The government released the final report of the National Health and Hospitals Reform Commission on 27 July 2009. This is the most comprehensive root-and- branch review of the health system since the establishment of Medicare. Immediately upon the release of this report the federal government engaged in a national conversation with the Australian people, and with our health professionals and providers to offer advice on future reforms. The Prime Minister, the Minister for Health and Ageing and other members of the government have been engaged in consultation with health professionals around this country on the National Health and Hospital Reform Commission report recommendations. Following this national conversation, the government will convene a special meeting of COAG at the end of 2009 to present the results of the feedback and consider the commission’s report. In early 2010 the government will present the Commonwealth’s plan for comprehensive reform to the states and territories.

Now let us look at what those on the opposite side of this House have to contribute to this very important discussion and the health reform that has come before this parliament. The National Health Amendment (Pharmaceutical and Other Benefits—Cost Recovery) Bill 2009 sought to amend the National Health Act 1953 to provide authority for the cost recovery of services provided by the Commonwealth in relation to the exercise of powers for listing medicines, vaccines and other products or services on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, and designation of vaccines for the National Immunisation Program. In implementing a cost recovery fee for Commonwealth services it is important to note that patients’ co-payments would not have been affected. In fact, cost recovery is not a new policy; cost recovery arrangements have been applied with success by many departments and agencies at state and federal level including, for example, the Therapeutic Goods Administration, the Civil Aviation Safety Authority and the Australian Prudential Regulatory Authority. The pharmaceutical industry is familiar with cost recovery. The industry has been paying for the pre-market evaluation of products by the TGA since 1991.

What did the Liberal Party do with this bill? As it was the Liberal Party’s policy when they were in government you would think they would support it. In fact they opposed it. Thankfully they eventually saw commonsense and passed the bill, but not before delaying the passage of this bill and causing a loss of expected government revenue of at least $9.4 million in 2008-09.

Let us look at another example of the opposition’s action on health reform. We all remember the Excise Tariff Amendment (2009 Measures No. 1) Bill 2009 and the Customs Tariff Amendment (2009 Measures No. 1) Bill 2009, better known as the alcopops bills. These bills were first rejected by the opposition and then one year later the Liberals supported them. However, there were still some Liberals who could not bring themselves to support the bills in the Senate the second time around. On the more recent legislation—Health Legislation Amendment (Midwives and Nurse Practitioners) Bill 2009, Midwife Professional Indemnity (Commonwealth Contribution) Scheme Bill 2009, Midwife Professional Indemnity (Run-off Cover Support Payment) Bill 2009—Liberal members of this House chose to have a bet each way: while backbenchers said they supported it, the shadow minister could not bring himself to say anything positive about these new initiatives. The shadow minister, the member for Dickson, simply banged on about home birth and the fight he had with the government.

More recently we had the Australian National Preventive Health Agency Bill 2009. You would think this bill which is to establish a national body to coordinate education, to collate research and data, to assist in the development of initiatives and to work with other state and territory agencies on preventative health initiatives would be supported. In the Senate questions were asked by the opposition prior to delaying this bill on whether this bill would lead to increases in tobacco and alcohol consumption. The Liberals are stalling on this bill, arguing they will not support it until the government releases its response to the National Preventative Health Taskforce.

Last week the Rudd government took the step of reintroducing the Fairer Private Health Insurance Incentives Bill 2009 after the Liberal Party in the Senate rejected this bill earlier this year. This bill seeks to implement a number of changes to ensure fairness and the long-term viability of the private health system and to introduce a means test on the private health rebate. I am yet to encounter someone in my electorate of Petrie who believes that couples earning more than $240,000 should be subsidised for their private healthcare. However, the Liberal parties do. Even if you are earning $400,000 per year as an individual the Liberal party believe that you should get the 30 per cent private healthcare rebate.

Of course the Liberal party will cry foul and say that these changes will drive people back to the public health system. This is the same argument they ran when the Rudd government sought to increase the Medicare levy threshold to ensure that low-income households would not be penalised for not entering into private health. How disappointed they must have been when the Minister for Health and Ageing, the Hon Nicola Roxon, announced on 16 November this year that private health insurance membership has increased despite the Rudd government’s policies. In fact for the September 2009 quarter a total of 44.7 per cent of all Australians were covered by private health hospital insurance, the highest proportion of people with hospital insurance since December 2001.

I have taken much of my time in highlighting the position taken by the opposition in this parliament since the Rudd government came into office. I did this because it is important that the Australian public know what or who is standing in this government’s way in achieving much of our health reform agenda. With the Prime Minister and ministers for health and other members of this government engaging in a national conversation about reforms which will see more reforms into the future, some of which may come before this parliament, it is time for the opposition to stop taking populist positions on health, just as they do with CPRS, education, refugees, infrastructure and many other issues, and support this government in its agenda to work for a better health system for all now and into the future. We need to ensure that this country has a fair and sustainable health system. It is time that the opposition woke up to this fact.