Emma McBride (Dobell, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Mental Health and Suicide Prevention) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak in support of the Health Legislation Amendment (Improving Choice and Transparency for Private Health Consumers) Bill 2026. This bill is fundamentally about fairness. It is about making sure Australians can make informed decisions about their health care—decisions grounded in transparency, clarity and genuine choice. For too long, too many Australians have been left in the dark about the true costs of private medical treatment. This legislation changes that.

Every year, thousands of Australians receive referrals to specialists but never take them up because of cost. In 2024-25 alone, 8.6 per cent of people, more than 800,000 Australians, delayed or missed specialist care due to cost, and these costs are overwhelmingly driven by medical specialist fees. No family should be blindsided by an exorbitant bill. No Australian should have to choose between getting the care they need and paying their bills. Importantly, this legislation delivers on our election commitment to improve transparency in healthcare pricing, helping consumers make informed decisions about their health care and private health insurance.

Since 2022, specialists and insurers have been able to publish their fees on the Medical Costs Finder, but uptake has been low. Only one to two per cent of specialists and 10 per cent of insurers have provided their data. Schedule 1 of the bill fixes this by allowing government to publish fee and out-of-pocket information using existing Medicare hospital and insurer billing data. It will also include information about individual practitioners—their locations and fees and whether they participate in gap-cover arrangements, as well as information about hospitals and insurers and typical out-of-pocket costs under different arrangements. Importantly, patient privacy remains fully protected, with no patient information published.

Schedule 2 of the bill addresses another serious consumer issue: phoenixing in private health insurance. Some insurers have exploited existing rules by closing a product and reopening a nearly identical product at a higher price, avoiding ministerial scrutiny. This bill closes that loophole by requiring ministerial approval for all private health insurance products, including changes to cover key terms. It also strengthens the annual premium round with formalised timelines and a structured process for additional information.

These reforms modernise health transparency and ensure practitioners have a fair internal review process. They're practical, reasonable and necessary. They reflect the government's commitment to ensuring the private health system delivers genuine value for money and places consumers at the centre of decision-making. We don't want Australians to continue to face uncertainty about treatment costs, often during some of the most difficult times for them and their families. I want to thank constituents who have written to me or met with me, like Peter, who said on specialist fees:

The only option to see a specialist is to ring around and see how much they charge.

Peter, this bill is for you and others who, like you, have been forced to do the heavy lifting themselves. This bill strengthens consumer protection, transparency and trust. I commend the bill to the House.

Anne Webster (Mallee, National Party, Shadow Minister for Regional Development, Local Government and Territories) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This bill, the Health Legislation Amendment (Improving Choice and Transparency for Private Health Consumers) Bill 2026, addresses two key concerns: phoenixing products in private health care and transparency on medical fees by medical practitioners.

I am the shadow minister for regional health and, as I said in my maiden speech in 2019, your postcode should not determine your health status. Sadly and, at times, tragically, it still does today. I regularly survey my constituents and my latest survey revealed only 40 per cent of Mallee residents feel they have adequate private health insurance. Of those that actually hold private health insurance, about a quarter believe it is inadequate for their needs. It may well be worse now. The medical fee changes in this bill follow on from the former coalition government's Medical Costs Finder, which was implemented after the Ministerial Advisory Committee on Out-of-Pocket Costs investigation, to help patients make informed decisions before seeing a specialist. We, the coalition, created the Medical Costs Finder to prevent bill shock when seeing a medical specialist. The former coalition government implemented the Medical Costs Finder in 2019 for stakeholders to use on a voluntary basis. This bill makes that program compulsory.

Regrettably, by December 2022, 85 per cent of participants in an Australia's Health Panel survey had not heard of Medical Costs Finder. I note that we are now being asked to make it mandatory, four years into this government's term. You have to wonder how hard this government has promoted the tool to prevent bill shock. The public record that Labor or the department have done much to promote the Medical Costs Finder is very scant. When the Medical Costs Finder was launched, the then chief medical officer, Brendan Murphy, said the website was an important step in improving the transparency of medical costs. I quote him:

We know the vast majority of doctors charge reasonable and proportionate fees and disclose the costs of treatment and charges to their patients. However, some doctors do charge high fees. This website is an important step in improving understanding and transparency of medical costs.

Importantly, the coalition government said we would add more detail and functionality, as recommended by the ministerial advisory committee. As I say, unfortunately, since we lost office, Labor appear to have done very little to promote the Medical Costs Finder project, which explains its low level of uptake.

Let's look at the real figures on private health cover, because Mallee constituents tell me their cover isn't providing them with everything they expected. The ABC reported that due to the cost-of-living crisis, between December 2020 and December 2023, 400,000 Australians downgraded their gold health insurance coverage. Private Healthcare Australia added that, in the first half of 2024, a further 216,000 private health policies were downgraded. PHA said at the time that almost 15 million Australians—55 per cent of the population—had some kind of private health insurance and that it was critical to keep pressure off the public system. In December 2025, a media release in relation to the AMA Private health insurance report card stated:

In further warning signs for the sector, gold-tier policies are in decline as consumers face rising premiums and cost-of-living pressures. Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020, the number of gold-tier policies have dropped by 360,000, despite the overall number of policies growing.

The AMA noted that the number of Australians with gold-tier cover has now fallen to just 743,000 across Australia. That five-year slump represents almost one-third of Australians with gold-tier cover abandoning that cover. I mention this because, as the AMA said in December, gold-tier policies are particularly susceptible to 'phoenixing'. It is understandable that the government wants to take steps to prevent 'phoenixing' to maintain confidence and affordability in gold-tier private health insurance. I note the AMA states it supports Medical Costs Finder and supports transparency, as we all do—or should—though the government likes to claim transparency but is often lacking in that area.

Informed choices are the best choices when it comes to medical care, and, in a cost-of-living crisis, being financially informed before making choices to access private health care is actually essential. The AMA also noted that 68 per cent of private health hospital policies now contain exclusions such as pregnancy, joint replacements or cataracts. The latest quarterly private health insurance membership and benefits data from the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority, or APRA, shows that now only 45.6 per cent of the population have hospital-level private health cover, with the number of policies over that reporting comparison year falling by 150,000 and the number of insured persons falling by 287,000. That's despite the number of hospital treatment episodes rising by about 90,000 cases. Critically, in this cost-of-living crisis, the out-of-pocket costs per hospital treatment episode have risen more significantly than the cost of general treatment, like extras. Hospital treatment out-of-pocket costs on private health rose from $437 to $471, up 7.7 per cent year on year to December 2025, whereas general treatment only rose from $59 to almost $63, still a 5.6 per cent increase but not as dramatic.

Notably, in the last report reporting data, the demographic dropping hospital treatment insurance, if you exclude those over 80 years old, is people aged 20 to 24 years. Why would that be? Over 5,000 Australians dropped their hospital cover in just one quarter. You can picture it, can't you? mum and/or dad say, 'Keep your hospital covered,' but, as a younger person leaves home and tries to pay the rent and make ends meet, they dump the cover—because of course they're invincible, as we all know!—and don't think they need it. Consequently, the Ahpra data shows the biggest dip in cover is for those aged in their 20s. But then, as the 31st birthday looms for lifetime health cover, LHC, the rates pick up again.

I note that, during this cost-of-living crisis, in February the Albanese government approved an average premium increase of 4.41 per cent, effective in a week's time on 1 April, the largest rise in seven years. Of course, at the time it was announced, it was above the rate of inflation, not so anymore. For context, Canstar says that a 4.41 per cent increase equates to annual costs rising by $167, but, for families on an average priced gold hospital policy, premiums will rise by $330. Even families on bronze cover will cop a $120 increase this year under Labor. However, importantly, Canstar noted that the cost of individual gold policies rose by an average of 11.6 per cent between March and April, despite the previous year's approved average being just 3.73 per cent. Canstar predicted last month that it's highly likely more Australians will downgrade their hospital cover on the back of Labor's private health premium increase. Naturally, Canstar recommended Australians shop around for the best deal.

Before the pandemic, the former coalition government approved an average industry premium change of just 2.92 per cent in 2020, which was down about 50 per cent on Labor's last year in office. In government, the coalition supported more than 15 million Australians taking out private health cover at the lowest cost in more than 20 years. By contrast, primary health care is becoming unaffordable under Labor—a bit like fuel—with bulk-billing collapsing 11 per cent, and there have been 40 million fewer bulk-billed GP visits in the past financial year alone.

Let's remember too that 14 private maternity wards have closed under the Albanese Labor government. That is shameful. You have to wonder whether the combined effect of premium increases, policy downgrades and private hospital service closures and the reduction in private health cover is, as the Minister for Home Affairs likes to often say, 'by design' to undermine confidence in private health cover. Remember former minister Plibersek once bragged at a press conference: 'Every promise I made, I paid for. How did I pay for it? I paid for it by targeting private health insurance.' I'll bet she's proud of that.

There's an interdependence between private hospitals and the private health insurance sector. Private hospitals in Australia are under acute financial strain, with operating profits plummeting and 82 closures in the last five years. While utilisation of private hospitals is now above pre-COVID levels, insurer benefits pay-out ratios are stuck at around 84 to 86.3 per cent, which is well below the pre-COVID 90 per cent benchmark and federal Minister for Health and Ageing's target. Rising operational costs, driven by wage increases, the cost of agency staff—of which there are many and a plethora in regional centres, I might point out—medical devices and inflation have not being matched by revenue growth. Private health insurance funds about 50 per cent of private hospital revenue, yet large insurers have significant market power in contract negotiations with hospitals, despite record profits. Private health insurers' failure to pass through adequate premium payouts to cover real costs is the core driver of private hospital distress, threatening the entire private-public balance. When the private system has less capacity, the public system bears the brunt. This circumstance and the failure of the health minister to act on it must be called out as part of the debate on this bill.

The coalition supports ensuring greater transparency in healthcare pricing and the need to help consumers make informed decisions about their health care and obtain better value from private health insurance. To ensure we preserve Australia's private health system, the coalition believes the legislation requires careful scrutiny through a Senate inquiry. Labor's reckless spending and economic mismanagement is pushing up costs across the board, and health care is another victim of that.

The out-of-pocket cost to see a GP skyrocketed to more than $50 under this government—the highest level on record. Out-of-pocket costs for specialist appointments are also spiralling out of control. According to the government's own most recent Medicare data for specialist attendances, the bulk-billing rate was 28.2 per cent, with an average out-of-pocket cost of $123.48. For anaesthetics, the bulk-billing rate was 8.7 per cent, with an average out-of-pocket cost of $244.99.

Australians are making the difficult decision to avoid seeing a doctor because they simply cannot afford it or wait two or three years. In rural, regional and remote Australia, delaying or avoiding treatment is particularly dangerous because we already have higher morbidity and mortality rates than metropolitan people. I have Mallee constituents who tell me they are avoiding treatment for lethal conditions because they cannot afford or bear the long, regular trips to a specialist–and forget paying for the petrol to get there.

One lady, a constituent from Kaniva, told me that under Labor's fuel supply crisis her local petrol station didn't have fuel, so she couldn't make it to her health appointment in Horsham. That's where the rubber hits the road under this government—or doesn't hit the road, you could say—on women's health in regional Australia: inaccessible health care and poorer health outcomes because of Labor's cost-of-living crisis.

Research conducted last year by Redbridge showed around 30 per cent of people referred to a medical specialist over the past three years did not attend, due to concerns about the cost. At the worst possible time, Labor is slugging Australians with higher private health insurance premiums while families are already struggling to pay their bills. Once again, we see the real impact of Labor's lies on Australian families. The Prime Minister waved around his Medicare card many, many times and told Australians it would be free to see a doctor. The truth is that Australians are now facing the highest out-of-pocket costs on record to see a doctor, which are only predicted to keep rising—if you can find a doctor in the regions. The coalition is focused on ensuring that all Australians have timely and affordable access to essential health care. In stark contrast, Labor is only focused on using Medicare as their political plaything.

Lisa Chesters (Bendigo, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I understand that the member for Pearce would like to present a copy of their speech to be incorporated into Hansard, in accordance with the resolution agreed to on 6 November 2025.

Tracey Roberts (Pearce, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The incorporated speech read as follows—

I would like to speak in strong support of the Health Legislation Amendment (Improving Choice and Transparency for Private Health Consumers) Bill 2026.

This bill goes to the heart of what I hear in my electorate of Pearce. People are worried about the cost of seeing a specialist. They are confused about what their private health insurance actually covers. They are unsure who to trust when making big decisions about surgery or treatment, especially when they are already anxious or unwell.

Every week, constituents tell me similar stories. Their premiums keep rising, but the exclusions and gaps quietly expand. They receive referrals from their GP but do not act on them, because they fear a big, unknown bill at the end. Some tell me they sit at the kitchen table and call their insurer, only to be left without a clear answer. When a parent decides not to take a child to a specialist because no-one can give them a straight price, something in our health system is not working as it should.

This bill is about restoring confidence and fairness to that system. It aims to give patients clearer information and a fairer deal when they use private health care. It does that in two main ways: by fixing how specialist fees and out-of-pocket costs are published, and by tightening oversight of private health insurance premiums so insurers cannot dodge scrutiny through 'product phoenixing'.

We know that cost is already a major barrier to care. In 2024-25, 8.6 per cent of people—more than 800,000 Australians—delayed or missed specialist care because of cost. The biggest cause of those out-of-pocket costs is specialist fees, not hospital charges. It is wrong to expect patients to commit to a treatment plan without knowing what it will cost them and their family. People should not have to choose between their health and their household budget.

Under the previous government, about $24 million was spent on the Medical Costs Finder website. It was meant to give people clarity about specialist fees and help them compare costs, but it relied on voluntary disclosure from specialists. The result was embarrassing. Out of around 6,300 eligible specialists, at the end of 2022 only six had displayed their fees—six! Three years later, only about 88 specialists had done so—to clarify: that is 88 doctors, not 88 per cent. That is not transparency; that is failure. It did not deliver for patients or for taxpayers.

Meanwhile, private health insurance premiums are adding to cost-of-living pressures. Insurers must get ministerial approval to raise premiums on existing products, usually through the annual premium round. They can, however, launch new products at any time, at any price, without approval. Some insurers close an existing product and reopen a very similar one at a higher price or with reduced benefits. This practice, known as product phoenixing, leaves new customers paying more, undermines trust and defeats the purpose of ministerial premium scrutiny.

Schedule 1 of this bill fixes the failed Medical Costs Finder model and turns it into a tool patients can actually use. Instead of relying on a handful of specialists to upload their fees, the bill allows government to publish information on typical fees and out-of-pocket costs using Medicare, hospital and insurer billing data that is already collected. The initial focus will be on non-GP specialists, with the capacity to add GPs later. Patients will be able to see what different specialists usually charge for particular services and what that has meant, on average, for the gaps they might face.

This is a commonsense change. We already collect this data, and it is patients who pay the bills. They should be able to see clear ranges of what doctors actually charge, in one place, and compare those charges with other practitioners in their area. That will take some of the guesswork out of healthcare decisions and allow people to weigh cost alongside other factors, such as quality, location and waiting times.

Clinicians and professional bodies see the value of these reforms. The Australian Society of Anaesthetists has welcomed the bill as an important step to improve clarity in a confusing system. They point out that private health insurance premiums are a major cost-of-living pressure and that patients deserve clear, accurate information about what their insurance covers and how to get value from it. Their survey work shows that informed financial consent is already routine in anaesthetic practice, especially for planned admissions.

Many anaesthetists already give patients detailed information about likely fees and potential out-of-pocket costs, yet many patients still do not fully understand what their policy covers. This legislation supports that ethical practice by making consistent fee and coverage information easier to find and understand.

Stakeholders in aged care and hospital administration have also recognised the significance of this reform. Older Australians and their families can be blindsided by unexpected specialist or procedural fees as they move between residential care and hospital. By requiring health cost transparency, this bill helps ensure older people and their carers are not surprised by large out-of-pocket costs at a stressful time.

In the hospital sector, commentators note that publishing billing data on Medical Costs Finder will help patients 'find the best value' when they need specialist advice and treatment, rather than leaving them to navigate an opaque market.

Schedule 2 deals with the other piece of the puzzle—how private health insurance premiums are set and how consumers are protected when insurers change or launch products. At present, insurers must apply to the minister if they wish to change the premium on an existing product, but they do not need approval for premiums on new products. Some have used this loophole to close an old product and relaunch a similar one with higher premiums or fewer benefits, avoiding proper scrutiny.

Product phoenixing does real harm. It hurts new customers, who pay more for less. It hurts existing members, who see the value of their cover erode and lose confidence that ministerial approval means anything. It undermines the 15.3 million Australians with private health insurance, who deserve to know that products on the market are subject to consistent scrutiny and that premiums reflect fair value, not creative rebadging.

The bill amends the Private Health Insurance Act 2007 so that insurers must seek the Minister for Health and Ageing's approval not only when they change premiums on existing products but also when they set premiums for new products. They will also have to seek approval before making certain changes that reduce cover, benefits or other key terms and conditions. In short, if an insurer wants to charge more or deliver less, it must go through a transparent process and justify that decision to government. This gives effect to the wider scrutiny of premiums that the Minister for Health and Ageing has signalled and gives consumers greater confidence in the value of private health insurance.

The Office of Impact Analysis estimates a modest regulatory burden—around $480,000 a year in compliance costs across all 28 insurers—and notes there is no impact on individuals or community organisations. For consumers, the benefit is confidence that premium changes and new products are properly scrutinised and that commitments to address phoenixing are being honoured. For the system, it restores coherence and fairness—similar products, whether new or existing, will face the same oversight and consumer-protection expectations.

Underlying both schedules is a simple principle—patients and consumers must be at the centre of the private health system. For too long, opaque pricing, complex policy wording and practices that make sense on a balance sheet but not at the kitchen table have dominated. This bill shifts the balance back towards transparency, accountability and informed choice. It supports doctors who already practise informed financial consent, insurers who compete on value rather than confusion, and patients who simply want to know what they are signing up for.

The Albanese Labor government made an election commitment to tackle product phoenixing and to fix the broken approach to price transparency, and this bill delivers on that promise. It does so while working with the medical profession and good-faith insurers, including bodies like the Australian Society of Anaesthetists and peak hospital groups, that are ready to partner with government to make the system accurate, meaningful and fair. It also sends a clear message to those who have not done the right thing: the era of gaming the system through nondisclosure or phoenixing is over.

For my constituents—families, older Australians, and young people taking out private health insurance for the first time—these changes mean more than a line in a statute book. They mean being able to go online before a procedure, see what different specialists typically charge, compare those costs and have an honest conversation about fees and gaps. They mean greater confidence that the premium increase letter has been properly scrutinised and that similar products are subject to the same rules. Most importantly, they mean fewer unpleasant financial surprises when people are at their most vulnerable, and more Australians getting the care they need when they need it.

I commend the Health Legislation Amendment (Improving Choice and Transparency for Private Health Consumers) Bill 2026 to the House.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This legislation is about health, and, certainly, I want to acknowledge the member for Pearce and her contributions to the parliament. What she does and how she does it—she's somebody who shows a lot of pluck, and I do absolutely applaud you, Member for Pearce. You are an inspiration; you truly are.

I want to also acknowledge the member for Lyons, the Assistant Minister for Health and Aged Care, for attending a 5 March professionalism framework launch of the Council of Presidents of Medical Colleges. That particular meeting, a very important one, was addressed by Associate Professor Kerin Fielding from Wagga Wagga, who is president of the Council of Presidents of Medical Colleges. She's also an orthopaedic surgeon. She laid bare the difficulties with regional health as opposed to metropolitan services.

The member for Mallee, the shadow minister for regional health, has also just given a fine speech to the House of Representatives about the issues for people in country areas accessing health. The Health Legislation Amendment (Improving Choice and Transparency for Private Health Consumers) Bill 2026 is a bill which makes two key changes to Australia's private health system. First, it brings in transparency by default, with amendments to allow the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing to publish information on the Medical Costs Finder about the medical fees charged by medical practitioners, including specialists and GPs, and the likely out-of-pocket costs patients will incur through their private healthcare experience. That is a good and wise step.

The second change contained in this bill is focused on regulating private health insurance premiums. It requires insurers to seek ministerial approval for premiums for new products and for existing products where certain changes are suggested. I'm not against ministers having more powers. In fact, I've spoken a number of times in recent months about government ministers—Labor ministers—abrogating their responsibilities when it comes to actually doing their jobs. The jobs of ministers should not be fulfilled by the bureaucrats in the Public Service. Whilst we have some outstanding public servants—I acknowledge that—they are not the ones who have the final say and the imprimatur on a piece of legislation coming before the House or the Senate. They are not the ones who make the calls and the decisions. All too often, I believe, this government is outsourcing more and more of the work that should be done by ministers, who have the final say. The buck has to stop with them.

The second change to which I referred broadly aligns with the current process for premium changes for existing products while enlarging ministerial oversight of premium setting of new private health insurance products. The change is attempting to address the risk of product phoenixing, where an existing insurance product can be closed and an identical or similar new product then opened at a higher premium, skirting and getting around the requirement for premium change approval. The coalition is not going to stand in the way of this, because what we want to see is people being able to access help, certainly in regional areas. Particularly at the moment, as the member for Mallee outlined, there are so many people who cannot access their health diagnosis. They cannot get to their doctors' appointments at the practice or the surgery simply because they can't afford to pay for the fuel—that's if they could even fill up their tank, because, at the moment, we've got a crisis.

We've got a national crisis with the availability of fuel. There are more than 600 petrol stations which are out of fuel, and that is causing problems, particularly in regional Australia, and particularly for chronically ill people—and even for those who just need to see their doctor because they may have got an overnight sniffle, or worse—and that's not good. That is not good.

I refer to that 5 March gathering where Associate Professor Fielding talked about the issues and the vast difference between accessing health services in country areas and elsewhere. She said:

Across Australia, too many people are doing the same, travelling long distances or unable to travel, worried about accessing the care they need.

She was referring to questions her 90-year-old mother had raised:

How much will this cost me?

What if I can't afford it?

How long will I have to wait and how far will I have to travel?

Associate Professor Fielding went on to say:

They're getting bills they didn't expect, or they're avoiding a referral altogether because they don't know what it will cost.

The Minister recently told Parliament that over 800,000 Australians delayed specialist care last year because of affordability. That is a serious problem. Australia has one of the best health systems in the world and every Australian should be able to access affordable, high-quality specialist care without risking financial hardship.

I don't think there's anybody in the parliament who would disagree with Associate Professor Fielding's remarks. She said:

But many patients face a different barrier. They can't see a specialist at any price, because there isn't one locally. Rural Australia has 2.7 doctors per thousand people compared to Cities which have 4.3. Potentially preventable hospitalisations are 30 per cent higher in outer regional areas and 70 per cent higher in remote communities.

Thirty per cent of the country's population are too often overlooked, and for too long, our health system has been built around metropolitan centres. The consequences of that are felt every day in regional communities. The communities that grow and provide our food and much more!

And she's right.

Mary Aldred (Monash, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Hear, hear!

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I hear the member for Monash saying, 'Hear, hear!' This was a very good speech. It was a shame that more people weren't there to listen to it. The member for Lyons, the Assistant Minister for Health and Aged Care, was there, and I hope she took on board—I'm sure she would have; she's a person of good intent—the wise words of Associate Professor Fielding, who then added:

Patients need two things from us: high-quality care they can afford and high-quality care they can actually access.

Her husband, Dr Joe McGirr, is well known to many people in Wagga Wagga as the state member but also through his deep and longstanding involvement in local health. Between them, they are a formidable pair; I acknowledge that. They, like me, want the very best for Wagga Wagga and the wider Riverina for health care, for health services.

That's why, as Deputy Prime Minister, I established the Murray-Darling Medical Schools Network—and I know Bendigo is in that, as is Mildura, Shepparton, Dubbo, Orange and Wagga Wagga. That is going to not fill every gap but certainly go a long way towards providing, in most if not all of those campuses, 30 new doctors every year once they start to graduate. Some of those campuses are at different rates in the course than others. The one at Wagga Wagga is three years in; we've recently opened it. Dr Mike Freelander, the member for Macarthur, was there, in his role here, to help me open that; he is well respected in the medical field both here and outside this building.

Getting back to Associate Professor Fielding, she said on 5 March:

I'm pleased to announce that today we are publicly releasing the CPMC Professional Framework on Ethical Billing and Fee Transparency.

It's all to do with this piece of legislation before us; it's about transparency. It's about making sure that carers, parents, patients, doctors and everyone across the board and across the system know what is going to be charged and what they are getting for the fees they are paying.

All 16 medical colleges have endorsed the framework, and that's to be commended because it was very regional focused. I have to say, many of the colleges are very much metropolitan based. As Associate Professor Fielding said:

That unity sends an important message—that Professionalism includes how we communicate and are transparent about cost.

It was an outstanding speech; it truly was. I've heard a lot of good speeches in this place, both here in the House of Representatives and elsewhere, in the committee rooms in this building, but this was one of the best because it got to the nub of what's really important, and that is cost, transparency, accessibility and availability. It's all of the things that we talk about as regional members when we get up to address the difference between health services in regional and peri-urban centres and what is available smack bang in our inner-city electorates. I truly don't think that city based MPs understand the hardships our people, our constituents, have to endure to get proper affordability and accessibility, moreover, to health services. In 2026, it's just not good enough.

Professor Fielding said that she welcomed the government's efforts to strengthen transparency through the Medical Costs Finder, which is part of this legislation, 'as transparency supports trust', but—and this is really interesting—she said: 'But transparency alone will not solve affordability. We need multi-lever reform. We need investment in public outpatient services and Medicare rebates that reflect modern care as well as expanded specialist training.' That's what she said, and I would say that it's simply not good enough for the Prime Minister to keep waving around that green and gold Medicare card of his and say, 'This is all you'll need,' because it's not right. It's just not entirely truthful. Unless that Medicare card comes with his credit card or debit card or some other card, it's going to actually dig into the person's hard-earned—their own money—so the message he is sending is just not correct.

It's all well and good for the Minister for Health and Ageing to talk about all of the Medicare urgent care after-hours clinics and surgeries and what they're doing in that space, but, if you actually look at where those clinics are being established, I'll tell you what, they're not in non-Labor seats, or, if they are, they're seats that Labor wants to add to their big majority. This isn't right because medical help shouldn't discriminate. It shouldn't discriminate against those people in regional seats that just don't happen to have a member with an electorate office adorned with red. It just shouldn't be the case. It's the same with mobile telephone towers. They should be going on a fair and equitable basis to where there is a need. When it comes to medical help, everywhere there is a need. There is a need for better services, more GPs and more specialists. Professor Fielding is certainly working towards that end, as is her husband, as is the shadow minister for regional health—the member for Mallee—who gave an outstanding speech and spelled out the issues at hand here.

I know that everyone on this side is concerned about regional health affordability and accessibility. I know, in my heart of hearts, that those sitting opposite would be too, but they're the government and they have the ability to do something about it. They have the ability to find the solutions and to be fairer when it comes to accessibility to health services, certainly in remote and regional Australia and those outer-city suburban areas, which are not necessarily places where you see crops growing and stock grazing. Regional Australia feeds the country and it's time that we were given our fair share when it comes to health services, health accessibility and the sort of medical support that cities tend to take for granted.

Julie-Ann Campbell (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In 2026, you can compare the prices of flights to London in seconds. You can research the price of second-hand cars within a 50-kilometre radius. You can check what your neighbour sold their house for last week. It is seamless, it is easy and it's at your fingertips. But when you need to see a medical specialist, when the stakes could not be higher, you are expected to make an appointment without knowing what it will cost you, without knowing the impact on your hip pocket and without knowing the price tag for your family. As families in my local community of Moreton face cost-of-living pressures, that information gap is not a minor inconvenience; it's a real financial risk.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I apologise. The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43, and the debate will be resumed at a later hour. The member will have leave to continue speaking when the debate is resumed.