Dai Le (Fowler, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, I welcome your record Medicare spend, having long called for expanded bulk-billing access. But with mental health the No. 1 reason people visit a GP in Fowler, doctors tell me that cutting items 2712 and 2713 removes the flexibility to provide longer, meaningful consultations for complex mental health cases. Can you guarantee that cutting items 2712 and 2713 won't deter GPs from offering the mental health care that families in Western Sydney depend on?

Mark Butler (Hindmarsh, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Prime Minister, for giving me the opportunity to respond to that. I haven't had a conversation with the member over the last several days, but I'm very pleased to report to the member and to the House that, as far as I can tell, every single general practice clinic in the member's electorate has indicated that, as a result of our investment on Saturday, they will be 100 per cent bulk-billing. That's every single GP clinic in the electorate of Fowler.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The minister was talking about Medicare, but I'll listen to the member for Fowler on a point of order.

Dai Le (Fowler, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Speaker. I was very specific in asking if the minister or the government will guarantee that about cutting items 2712 and 2713. I understand that Medicare spend. I know that that's what the government has been talking about and that you have spent millions—$8.5 billion. But I'm asking specifically about 2712 and 2713.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Solomon is warned.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Speaker, just to the point of order, there's a practice that has developed in points of order on relevance where people consistently quote only a small part of a longer question. You have given ruling after ruling, making clear that the relevance rule applies to any part of the question. If people don't want there to be parts of the question that deal with anything other than their final few words, they should only ask the final few words.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes. It places me in a difficult position when you ask a question about Medicare and you include things—it's okay; resume your seat, Member for Fowler—and then the minister refers to that part. He has two minutes and 29 to go. He may be going to address that part of the question; I don't know. He may be focusing on that part, but you've only got one shot at taking a point of order on relevance, and I would just remind members that it's probably best to keep that point of order till the end, because once that's gone, it's gone. It's very difficult now, because I don't know what the minister is going to refer to in terms of mental health. He may do that. I understand your point: you'd like an answer specifically regarding that end part of the question. But under the standing rules, he's entitled to talk about the question he was asked. Anyway, I'll listen carefully and I'll make sure he is being directly relevant, and I'll make sure he continues to be directly relevant.

Mark Butler (Hindmarsh, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I must say I'm a little surprised at the member's minimisation of the impact of the biggest ever investment in bulk-billing in her electorate, given that, as far as I can tell, no electorate represented in this place has got the sort of result that I just reported has come from Fowler. The relevance of that, if you read the annual report from the college of GPs, is that increasingly they say—about 70 per cent of GPs report this, I think—that the No. 1 issue that GPs are consulted about is mental health. It is their bread-and-butter work, and the affordability of access to GPs is more important for mental health support than probably any other condition we can think of. I'm surprised, frankly, that the member would minimise the impact of the record investment we rolled out on Saturday for the access and affordability of mental health support from GPs. That was one of the overriding priorities when we designed the system we rolled out on Saturday. I can tell the member for Fowler that constituents in her electorate will have more affordable access to mental health support from their GP than any other electorate represented in this chamber.