Trish Cook (Bullwinkel, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak on a bill that is fundamentally about fairness, transparency and the restoration of trust in our healthcare system: the Health Legislation Amendment (Improving Choice and Transparency for Private Health Consumers) Bill 2026. For too many Australians, a visit to the specialist is preceded by a calculation of fear, not just for their health but of the fees that they cannot predict. This bill delivers on the Albanese Labor government's rock-solid commitment to strengthening Medicare.

To summarise briefly, this bill fixes two things. It increases transparency in our healthcare system and outlaws product phoenixing, which is a deceptive practice where an insurer closes an existing product only to open another one immediately which is identical except for a higher premium. This is done by insurers specifically to bypass ministerial scrutiny. We are ensuring that when Australians need medical advice they have the power to find the best value and when they pay their private health premiums they have the confidence that they are not being played for fools by corporate loopholes.

This contrasts with the rhetoric that we've heard from the shadow treasurer, the member for Goldstein. While we are here trying to lower out-of-pocket costs, he's been in this chamber describing our health investments as debt petrol on an inflation fire. He claims to care about cost of living, yet he stands with a party that presided over a decade of Medicare neglect. He calls our targeted cost-saving measures 'wasteful spending' but ignores the waste created by a system that leaves patients in the dark. The Australian Bureau of Statistics confirms that medical and hospital services are the primary drivers of inflation for consumers. We see fees for the very same procedure vary wildly and sometimes by thousands of dollars, and that's between specialists within the same cities. This is called the cost lottery.

This bill fixes the failed attempts of the past. The previous government spent a whopping $24 million on the Medical Costs Finder website. That was a ghost town. It relied on doctors voluntarily uploading their fees. Out of 11,000 specialists, how many signed up? Seven. Seven individual doctors. This failure isn't a surprise when you look at the ideology of the man who now holds the coalition's purse strings. The shadow treasurer has previously advocated for the transfer of health financing from government to individuals. He suggested that every Australian should have an individual health account to pay for their own care. That's not a healthcare system; that's an invoice system. It's an American-style version where your health is determined by your bank balance. It's no wonder they couldn't get a transparency tool to work. They don't want you to see the bill until it's too late to pay it.

Our amendments on this bill will allow the Medical Costs Finder to publish data drawn directly from Medicare, hospitals and insurance billing data. We are shining a light into the black box of medical pricing because informed patients make for a healthier Australia. I speak on this not just as the member for Bullwinkel but as a nurse who has spent decades on the front line. I have stood in clinics from the Perth foothills and the Perth Hills to the Kimberley and the Pilbara, and I have seen and experienced the referral barrier first-hand. As nurses, our role is to advocate for the patient, but it is heartbreakingly difficult to advocate for a patient's health when they are terrified of the cost.

I have seen patients walk out of a specialist referral holding a piece of paper that looks like they've received a debt notice rather than a lifeline. When a patient doctor-shops or delays a procedure because they can't get a straight answer on out-of-pocket costs, their condition can worsen. As a nurse, I know that delayed care is denied care. By automating the Medical Costs Finder system, we are removing the financial triage that patients are currently forced to perform. We are ensuring that the clinical pathway isn't blocked by a lack of data. This bill allows the healthcare team, the GPs, the nurses and the patients to focus on the recovery and not the invoice.

But transparency about fees is only half the battle. We must also address the transparency of the insurers. There is this deceptive practice that I mentioned earlier known as product phoenixing. This occurs when an insurer closes an existing product only to immediately open an identical one at a higher premium rate specifically to bypass ministerial scrutiny. Currently, insurers may seek approval to raise premiums on existing products, but, by killing off the old product and birthing a new one, they avoid this law. This bill slams that loophole shut. We are requiring approval for any proposed new product and any change that reduces value.

Just last month, the shadow treasurer was out there decrying the 4.41 per cent premium increase, an increase that was necessary partly because his party had left the private hospital system on the brink of collapse. He talked about inflation clangers, but where was his voice when insurance were using phoenixing to hike prices without any oversight? He wants deregulation; this bill offers protection. He wants the market to rip; we want the family budget to rest. Some on the opposition side might call ministerial oversight 'red tape', but, as a nurse, I call it patient safety. In a hospital, we have protocols to ensure transparency and accountability. Why should the insurance market be any different?

Let's be clear about how the bait and switch of product phoenixing works. An insurer would see a product that was perhaps too good for the consumer. Maybe it had low gaps or high coverage. To raise the price, they would have to justify that to the minister and, to avoid that, they would simply sunset the product. They'd send a letter to my constituents in High Wycombe or Mundaring and say: 'Your plan is retiring. Here are your new options.' And, like a phoenix rises from the ashes, a new plan, extremely similar to the previous one, appears. It looks the same and it smells the same, but it costs 10 per cent more. Because it's new, it bypasses the minister's desk. That's unfair. This bill ensures that the Minister for Health and Ageing, not a corporate board in an offshore office, is the final gatekeeper for the value of Australians' policies. We are bringing the same level of clinical accountability we expect in our hospital wards to the boardrooms of insurers.

The member for Goldstein recently claimed in this House that he doesn't want to privatise Medicare, but his records and his writings tell a different story. He has spent his career arguing against a 'nanny state', which in his vocabulary seems to include the basic safety net that keeps Australians alive and healthy. When the shadow treasurer talks about ambition, he means the ambition for individuals to shoulder the burden for a failing system. When we talk about ambition, we mean the ambition of a government that uses its power to protect its citizens from predatory pricing. The coalition's view on Medicare is out of step with Australian values. They see Medicare as a line to be cut in the budget, and we see it as promises to be kept. They want to protect the flexibility of insurers to hike prices; we want to protect the flexibility of families to pay their rent.

In conclusion, this bill is a clear-eyed response to the cost-of-living pressures that are facing Australians. It empowers patients with data on specialist fees, protects consumers from corporate trickery and reinforces our longstanding commitment to a Medicare system that is strong and fair. I commend the bill to the House.

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal National Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

To hear those members opposite in 2026 constantly bang on about 'Mediscare' campaigns is really getting just a little bit beyond the pale. They tried it in all of the last few elections. I don't know how many times I have to say this—in the words of the Prime Minister: 'How many times do I have to say this? Fifty times?'—this coalition is committed to Medicare. I am committed to Medicare. The last thing I want to see, as someone who has had two very, very dangerously life-threatening illnesses befall two of my four kids, is a US-style health system in this country. The coalition is absolutely committed to ensuring that it doesn't matter where you live, what your postcode is or what your income is—if you are an Australian citizen or permanent resident, you should be able to get access to Medicare and be treated for whatever illness or injury you have by world-leading doctors and hospitals. I don't know how many times I have to say that, because those Labor members opposite just seem to think, 'We'll rattle out this old Medicare trope.' It's BS, and it should be treated as such and called out for what it is. Anyway, I digress.

Let me be clear on this bill, the Health Legislation Amendment (Improving Choice and Transparency for Private Health Consumers) Bill 2026. The coalition supports the intent behind the bill. We support greater transparency in healthcare pricing. We support protecting consumers from unfair premium increases. We support giving Australians the information they need to make informed decisions about their health care. Nobody on this side of the chamber disputes those objectives. But supporting an objective and waving through legislation that is not ready to deliver that objective are two very different things, and this bill, despite being announced more than a year ago, is still not ready.

Approximately 15 million Australians hold private health cover. The private health system does not operate in isolation from our public hospitals, particularly in rural and regional Australia; it works alongside them. When the private system is strong, it relieves pressure on public hospitals. When Australians drop or downgrade their cover, they shift onto public waiting lists already under severe strain. We're already seeing record levels of ambulance ramping and increasing waiting times at hospitals across this country. Any reform in this space carries real consequences, and those consequences must be weighed very carefully.

As a result of what this government did in the budget, more than 8,000 Australians have signed my petition opposing Labor's decision to strip private health insurance rebates from older Australians, and each and every one of these people deserves to be taken seriously. You're probably too young to remember this, Madam Deputy Speaker Garland. When I was a young lad, I remember sitting across the kitchen table from my wife. John Howard was talking about how you needed to sign up to private health insurance before you turned 30. If you didn't, then, if you wanted to come into the private health insurance system later, you were going to pay a premium. But if you signed up before you turned 30, you'd get concessional rates for the rest of your life, provided you kept doing it.

This government is now ripping that away from people aged 65 and over. That is exactly true. At a cost of $1,600 for a couple on the gold rate, that is absolutely true. You can try to pull the wool over people's eyes, as this government tries to do all the time. The misinformation, the mistruths, the dishonesty coming from that side of the House on everything in relation to this budget just beggars belief.

Australians will need private health insurance the most when they are aged over 65. That's when they need medical assistance the most. Now this government has changed the rules on them. They've ripped that rug from underneath them, and they are angry. My electorate is an older electorate. They still call me 'the young fella', so it must be an older electorate. They are angry. They feel like they have been misled. This commitment that was provided to Australians was provided by multiple governments of all varying colours, but this government is the first to breach that trust, and I've got to tell you that those pitchforks are being sharpened by the 65-and-overs. They cannot wait for the opportunity for this election to come around.

But I digress. This is exactly why the coalition supported referring this bill to the Senate Standing Committee on Community Affairs for greater scrutiny. The inquiry confirmed what we suspected: key operational details remain unresolved and the department was either unable to answer some of the bill's most fundamental questions or had not yet considered their responses. That matters because changes to the way private health insurance products are approved and changes to how specialist fees are published affect the decisions of real people and how they go about making their healthcare decisions every single day. When legislation is poorly designed, real people bear the consequences.

Schedule 1 of this bill deals with transparency by default. The bill would allow the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing to publish individual specialist fee data on the Medical Costs Finder website, drawing on Medicare hospital insurance billing data already held by government. The coalition established the Medical Costs Finder website. We believe transparency in medical pricing is worthwhile and necessary. Australians deserve to know what they are likely to pay before they walk into a specialist's room.

But the volume of data involved here is significant and the risk of errors is a real concern. Speaking of doctors, a clinician's fees, published incorrectly on a government website, can cause immediate and potentially lasting reputational damage. Despite the government announcing these changes more than a year ago, the Senate committee received no satisfactory answers to several fundamental questions: How dated will the information on the website be at the time of publication? How regularly will it be updated? Will clinicians be able to upload and amend their own fee information to ensure accuracy? What will the error correction process look like in practice, and will this have a quick turnaround or will it be a typically glacial response at the expense of the clinician—someone just like you, Mr Deputy Speaker Freelander?

What makes this more troubling is a provision buried in this legislation that grants the department immunity from civil liability for loss, damage or injury arising from the publication of medical fees. You heard that right. The government is holding individual clinicians to strict compliance obligations while exempting itself from equivalent accountability when things go wrong. It is entirely appropriate that one of the country's leading paediatricians happens to be in the chair right now. Mr Deputy Speaker, this government is going to hold you and your colleagues to a different standard from the one to which it holds itself. That may cause you some consternation and may cause you to rethink my suggestion to you: that you might best serve your community by going back and being a great paediatrician. But I'll continue.

Mike Freelander (Macarthur, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

You're very kind, Member for Fisher—

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal National Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

I am. If you say it enough and if I say it enough, people might believe it.

Mike Freelander (Macarthur, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

but I am the Deputy Speaker and completely neutral on this issue.

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal National Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

This is a troubling double standard. You don't build in immunity provisions unless you anticipate errors. The government appears to have accepted that it is going to make inevitable errors. Rather than designing a system robust enough to prevent reputational harm to clinicians, its preference is to protect itself from legal consequences. The parliament cannot make a fully informed decision on schedule 1 until the government provides clear answers on data currency, update frequency, clinician input mechanisms and the error correction process. The coalition will press for those answers and seek amendments to address these gaps when this bill comes before the Senate.

I turn now to schedule 2, which deals with regulating premiums. The bill would require insurers to seek ministerial approval for new products and for existing products where certain changes are proposed. This extends the existing approval process to new products. The objective of addressing product phoenixing is one the coalition supports. Product phoenixing is the practice of closing an existing insurance product and reopening an essentially identical product at a higher premium, circumventing the requirement for premium change approval. It's a practice that undermines the intent of premium regulation, and it harms consumers. The coalition supports closing that loophole. However, evidence presented to the Senate committee indicated that product phoenixing primarily involves gold-tier products. These are the same people I spoke about earlier—those who are going to be paying $1,600 a year extra on their premiums if they're over 65.

The bill as drafted imposes the new approval requirement broadly across all new products, including extras policies. That is a much wider net than the problem requires. Requiring ministerial approval for every new extras policy creates red tape for insurers, with minimal consumer benefit. It risks slowing the introduction of innovative new products. The approval requirement should be targeted to the products and market behaviour actually driving the problem. Applying it broadly is ministerial overreach, and it will generate compliance costs that will ultimately be borne by consumers.

The committee also received no satisfactory answers to several critical operational questions: How many applications does the department expect to receive? Does it have the resources to process them? Will insurers face application fees and, if so, what limit will apply? What statutory timeframes will ensure decisions are made promptly and efficiently? An insurer left waiting indefinitely for approval of a new product cannot respond to the market. These are the practical questions any competent legislator would want answered before voting for a bill. The fact that many remain unanswered, despite a year of lead time, reflects poorly on the government's preparation. This legislation has all the hallmarks of a policy announced prematurely with critical detail never properly examined. Fancy that.

The bill's stated purpose is to improve choice and transparency for private health consumers. That goal requires honesty—fancy that—about the state of those consumers right now. According to the government's own most recent Medicare data, the bulk-billing rate for specialist attendances is 28.2 per cent—28.2 per cent for bulk-billing for specialist attendances—with an average out-of-pocket cost, and I don't know where these figures are coming from, of $123.48. It seems pretty generous to me. For anaesthetists, the bulk-billing rate is 8.7 per cent with an average out-of-pocket cost of $244.49. Out-of-pocket costs to see a GP have reached more than $50, the highest level on record.

Research conducted by Redbridge showed that three in 10 Australians referred to a specialist did not go because they simply couldn't afford it. Australian families have been forced to choose between seeing a doctor and paying the bills. Publishing fee information on a website, however well-designed, will not put money back into Australians pockets. It will not drive specialists to lower their fees. It may help some patients make better informed decisions, but it will not address the underlying affordability crisis.

There is also a broader issue of trust that the government appears to have overlooked. Transparency only works when consumers have confidence that the information they are receiving is complete, current and meaningful. A specialist fee published on a government website may provide part of the picture but patients are often faced with a range of costs that extend beyond a single consultation.

We're not opposing this bill. We are doing what an opposition should do. We're insisting that legislation affecting 15 million Australians and the clinicians who serve them is properly designed before it becomes law. The government has had more than a year to work out the details of this policy. The fact that so many fundamental questions remain unanswered is not good enough. The coalition will strive to make this bill better.

Claire Clutterham (Sturt, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in support of the Health Legislation Amendment (Improving Choice and Transparency for Private Health Consumers) Bill 2026. There are two key purposes to this bill. Firstly, it amends the Health Insurance Act 1973 and the Private Health Insurance Act 2007 to allow the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing to publish information for consumers on medical fees charged by medical practitioners, including specialists and general practitioners, together with the likely out-of-pocket costs for their private healthcare experience. The purpose is to support greater transparency and healthcare pricing, helping consumers make informed decisions about their health care and obtain better value from private health insurers.

Secondly, it amends the Private Health Insurance Act to require insurers to seek ministerial premium approval for new products and existing products where certain changes are proposed. The new premium approval process provided in the bill broadly aligns with the current process for premium changes for existing products. The purpose of these provisions is to expand and formalise ministerial oversights of premium setting for private health insurance products.

Overall, the bill aims to strengthen transparency and improve patients understanding of their health care and private health insurance arrangements which can often be very complex, difficult to understand and difficult to apply. Measures that facilitate greater transparency from private health insurance regarding what policies include, how agreements with providers operate and how arrangements affect patients and hospitals, together with measures requiring private health insurance to clearly explain what is and what isn't covered, are critical. People often access their private health cover during times of illness and stress, and they should not be left navigating complexity alone during this time. Anything that helps patients understand what they're paying for and why something is included or not included is something that should be prosecuted, as should the provision of genuine help for patients to assist them to anticipate their out-of-pocket costs.

Furthermore, this bill will outlaw the practice that is known as product phoenixing, where private health insurers close a product and then reopen an identical one at a higher price or reduce the value of a product. This is designed to close a pre-existing loophole.

We know that many Australians choose to take out private health insurance for personal, individual reasons. Private health insurance, especially hospital cover, provides security. It's peace of mind knowing you and your family will be cared for if you're injured or have a health condition. Having private hospital insurance means that, even if the worst happens, there is a security blanket. Hospital cover can provide that security. Private health insurance can also mean more choice in your healthcare, in that you have more choice when it comes to choosing the doctors, surgeons and specialists who might treat you.

Then there is time. Depending on your cover, private health insurance may help avoid public hospital waiting lists so you can access the care that you need more quickly. That being said, in Australia, although our public health system is very good, there are challenges, and there can be long wait times to get elective surgery. Having private hospital cover means you might get faster treatment for elective surgery, unlike those who rely only on the public system. Extras are another important part of private health insurance, and, depending on the type of cover, you may then be able to claim back money for a range of health services that might not be covered by Medicare up to your yearly cover limits.

Many Australians take out private health insurance because they want more security, more choice and quicker treatment than what the public system is able to offer. They also take it out because they know that sometimes lightning strikes. Nobody has a crystal ball about what future health issues might affect them, and many people just want to be prepared. Given its importance as well as the cost, the private health insurance system needs to be transparent and clear about what is covered and at what cost. It also needs to be sustainable and equitable for everyone. In a health system where it's important to have a balance between private and public health services, it is a disincentive to take up private health insurance if costs are opaque, hard to understand or not available until after the event.

This bill, the Health Legislation Amendment (Improving Choice and Transparency for Private Health Consumers) Bill 2026, will enable Australians to make informed decisions about their health care and their private health insurance. It will enable them to weigh up the factors that underpin a decision to take up private health insurance or not. Schedule 1 of the bill is dedicated to this in that it provides consumers with more detailed information on the expected medical fees charged and the likely out-of-pocket costs for a private healthcare experience. The schedule will facilitate the publication of the relevant data on the Medical Costs Finder without the need for input from specialists, as it will be drawn from Medicare, hospital and insurer billing data already collected by the government.

The Medical Costs Finder, operated under the auspices of the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing, is a tool to find and understand costs for GP and medical specialist services across Australia, because it can't be right that patients who need treatment are required to commit to that treatment without knowing what the cost of the treatment will be and without being equipped with the tools to enable them to compare those costs with costs charged by other like providers.

When you go to a restaurant, the prices are on the menu. You know what you're up for before you place an order, and no-one would go to a restaurant and order dinner without knowing what it was going to cost. Now, no-one is saying that the provision of highly skilled surgery by incredibly well-trained and intelligent medical professionals is the same as eating a meal in a restaurant, but the principle of transparency before the event is the same. People need to know if they can afford a service before they commit to it—what savings and sacrifices they may have to make to pay for the health care that they need, what they might need to give up or go without in order to fund the health care that they need.

The fees and charges applied by surgeons and specialists are what they are because the work is incredibly skilled, performed by clinicians who have spent years and years training and honing their craft in order to provide the best possible outcomes to their patients in often incredibly difficult, complex and challenging environments. This bill recognises that, but all it seeks to do is to make sure that patients understand what those costs are prior to incurring them and that patients have had the opportunity to compare the costs of multiple skilled providers. Comparison might not matter to some patients; they know who their preferred surgeon is, and that is the end of the matter. But others do want to investigate and explore, just to be sure, and the capacity for patients to do that on the basis of accurate data is completely reasonable.

The private health system also relies on private health insurers operating with integrity and incentivising people in a fair and transparent and ethical way to take up or maintain private health insurance for themselves and their families. Schedule 2 of the bill is directed at this, and that is relevant to changes to strengthen ministerial oversight of private health insurance premiums to better protect consumers.

Without schedule 2, the status quo would remain, and that status quo is that private health insurers are required to apply to the minister if they wish to change the premium for an existing product, which typically occurs annually as part of the annual premium round process. Currently, there is no requirement for insurers to seek approval for the premium charged for new products, and what has happened in some instances is that this loophole has been used to bypass the intent of the premium round by closing an existing product to new members and then launching a new but very similar product at a higher price than was previously authorised by the minister for the existing product.

This process, known as phoenixing, has driven up the cost of private health insurance policies, far exceeding government-approved average increases. Phoenixing means that some Australians end up paying more than they need to, especially those on newer or top-tier policies. These steep hikes don't just increase costs. They also discourage tailored health care because many policyholders choose to stay on older, cheaper plans to avoid sudden price jumps, which limits their options and may result in them not actually enjoying the benefit of the most appropriate policy for them. Other consumers might then elect to downgrade their cover, which ultimately leads to the risk that they will be underinsured and exposed if their cheaper policy does not include the treatment they actually need, rendering it useless in terms of value for money.

Schedule 2 of the bill addresses this issue through amendments to the Private Health Insurance Act that will require insurers to apply to the minister for approval for the premiums for new and existing products. In addition to requiring ministerial approval for proposed premium changes, insurers will have to apply if they open a new product or they reduce the cover, benefit or other term or condition of an existing product. If a product is genuinely unsustainable, not being taken up or genuinely loss-making, with few available mitigation strategies to counter this, then a new product can still be initiated, just not without the minister's prior approval on the associated premium, making it fairer for consumers.

This is an important reform that has at its heart the purpose of ensuring the private health insurance industry is operating to the benefit of consumers and for the purpose of ensuring consumers are able to make informed decisions and select policies that are appropriately tailored for their individual healthcare needs, all underpinned by accurate and contemporary data.

The government values the private health insurance industry and will always look to implement reforms that ensure the industry delivers value for money and transparency for consumers in a way that facilitates consumers having choice and agency over their healthcare decisions. That is what this bill does, and I commend the bill to the house.

Luke Gosling (Solomon, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak to this health legislation amendment, but right from the outset I want to acknowledge your decades of service to improving the health of Australians, Deputy Speaker Freelander. In my humble opinion, you are a great Australian.

Mike Freelander (Macarthur, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

Well, thank you, Member for Solomon.

Luke Gosling (Solomon, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

I welcome the opportunity to speak about the achievements of our Albanese federal Labor government in relation to this legislation, improving choice and transparency for private health consumers and the many achievements of our government around health in my electorate of Solomon.

The Health Legislation Amendment (Improving Choice and Transparency for Private Health Consumers) Bill 2026 represents the first significant step in taking action to address the impact of specialist fee charging and the consequential out-of-pocket costs for consumers. It delivers on two election commitments: to expand ministerial scrutiny of premiums to provide assurance around the cost and value of private health insurance by driving more transparency on patient medical fees and a commitment to outlaw product phoenixing. The legislation further strengthens Medicare by helping Australians find the best value when they need specialist medical advice and treatment and provides more confidence in their private health insurance by outlawing, as I said, product phoenixing. It will enable Australians to make more informed decisions about their health care and private health insurance.

The proposed amendments will allow for the Medical Costs Finder website to publish individual medical practitioner fees and insurer out-of-pocket data for common medical services. Medical practitioners will no longer need to upload their billing information, as it will be drawn from Medicare, hospitals and insurer billing data already collected by our government.

The bill will also deliver on an election commitment to outlaw product phoenixing. This is where an insurer closes an existing product and opens an identical or similar new product at a higher premium or even reduces the value of the product without ministerial scrutiny. Product phoenixing behaviour was contributing to declining consumer confidence in private health insurance. Currently, private health insurers are required to apply to the Minister for Health if they wish to change the premium for an existing product. The main requirement of the bill will be to amend the Private Health Insurance Act 2007 to require an insurer to seek ministerial approval for the premium charge for a proposed new product and where changes are made that reduce cover, a benefit or a term of conditions of an existing product.

According to the ABS, the cost of medical and hospital services is a key driver of health inflation for consumers, which feeds into higher out-of-pocket costs and higher private health insurance premiums. Fees can vary widely across specialists even for the same procedure in the same part of Australia. This bill will ensure that Australian patients will have the power to compare costs and make informed choices about their medical care while not imposing any administrative burden on our doctors.

The Albanese government's focus on strengthening Medicare has delivered on a range of commitments to benefit Territorians. The Darwin Medicare Urgent Care Clinic has opened near the airport, on Osgood Drive, just adjacent to the ice-skating rink. All Territorians know where that is. It's a cool place! The clinic complements the existing Palmerston Medicare Urgent Care Clinic, which is one of the most successful in the nation. There have been close to 40,000 visits to the Palmerston Medicare Urgent Care Clinic since its opening in October 2023.

Last month's budget made our Medicare urgent care clinics permanent, providing funding certainty for the urgent care clinics in Darwin and Palmerston. These clinics provide walk-in care for urgent, non-emergency medical needs. They are open seven days a week. Medicare-eligible patients are bulk-billed. No appointments are required in order to get the care you need when you need it. I've had so much positive feedback already about the urgent care clinic in Darwin, as I have for some time now around the one in Palmerston.

When it comes to aged care, which takes pressure off our Royal Darwin Hospital and Palmerston Regional Hospital, we've announced the successful tenderer for the 120- to 150-bed aged-care facility to serve Darwin and Palmerston—the rural area in the Top End. The not-for-profit Ozcare has been selected to build and operate this residential aged-care home. As I mentioned, it's going to, importantly, free up beds in our hospital system that are currently taken up by aged-care demands, when those senior Territorians should be in a more comfortable place in residential aged care. Ozcare is a very experienced provider that has done a lot of work, particularly in Queensland, and it will make an enormous difference to the provision of health services and the provision of quality residential aged-care services in my electorate and in the NT generally.

Our government has also delivered a once-in-a-generation change to bulk-billing, which means that more Territorians can see a doctor for free with no out-of-pocket expenses. There are now 25 Medicare bulk-billing GP practices across Darwin and Palmerson, which is an increase of 17 clinics offering bulk-billing services since our changes came into place. More than 70 per cent of all local GP practices are now registered as Medicare bulk-billing practices. We've also launched services like 1800MEDICARE, helping keep people out of emergency departments.

Investments in the PBS will mean that Australians continue to benefit from life-changing medications at lower prices. We have capped PBS medicines at $25, saving Territorians real dollars. The Albanese Labor government's cheaper medicines reforms have already saved Australians more than $2.5 billion since 2022, and there have been more than 1.4 million cheaper scripts in my electorate, Darwin and Palmerston, under Labor's cheaper medicines policies, with two million across the Northern Territory.

We continue to add and amend medicine listings on the PBS, including for cystic fibrosis, chronic kidney disease, various cancers and much more. We've also put in place measures to increase childhood vaccination rates through an enhanced immunisation campaign—sending SMS reminders and growing the National Immunisation Program in our pharmacies. The Albanese Labor government has delivered record hospital funding for the Territory: $3.5 billion over five years from 2026-27, which is an additional—'additional' being the key word—$741 million over those five years. This latest budget also announced $95.5 million over two years from 2026-27 for primary healthcare services in remote Northern Territory and a one-time fixed funding amount of $66 million in 2026-27 for the NT to address the challenges smaller jurisdictions face in delivering health services. As someone who, before politics, worked in the provision of health care in remote areas of the NT, I know this is all very good news for Territorians living in those regional areas.

We're also growing the health workforce to deliver more doctors and nurses than ever before, including the largest GP training program in Australian history and hundreds of scholarships for nurses and midwives to extend their skills and qualifications. We're also building the local Northern Territory long-term health workforce, with our own medical school opening at Charles Darwin University—housed in a brand-new building called Garrwa; its other name is the Better Health Futures Building—which is being funded by our government.

The first cohort of students commenced at Charles Darwin University Medical School in February, delivering a major boost to medical training and the doctor pipeline in the Northern Territory. This delivers on a plan to double permanent medical students in the NT to 200 by the year 2030, enhancing long-term staffing for hospitals like Royal Darwin Hospital. I also want to take this opportunity to acknowledge the long-time provision of a medical program by Flinders University, which partnered with the Menzies School of Health Research and CDU.

Labor is providing Australian women with more choice and better treatment at low cost, making contraceptives cheaper and funding more treatments for menopause. We're helping Australian women suffering from endometriosis and complex gynaecological conditions so that they have access to longer specialist consultations covered under Medicare. This includes funding an endo and pelvic pain clinic in Coconut Grove in Darwin, meaning that more Territory women can access the care they need closer to home. The clinic provides expert multidisciplinary services and care for women with endometriosis and pelvic pain.

Soon, Territory women will have better access to safe, affordable, long-acting, reversible contraception, or LARC, with the Northern Territory selected to host one of eight new LARC centres of excellence being established across Australia. Our government is investing $25.6 million to establish a national network of centres that will provide free advice, support and access to services such as IUDs and contraceptive implants delivered by skilled healthcare professionals at no cost to patients. The centre will also provide outreach services and hands-on training for healthcare professionals, helping to increase access to long-acting contraception in regional and remote parts of the Northern Territory. The announcement builds on reforms introduced by our government on 1 November 2025 that made long-acting, reversible contraception more affordable through Medicare.

The Albanese Labor government recognises the complexity of issues that young people face and the demands within Darwin, the greater Darwin region and the Territory. Darwin headspace has been uplifted to the new headspace Plus, along with a youth specialist care centre in Darwin for young people with complex needs. The existing Darwin headspace centre will be upgraded over the coming period, and there will be a new centre in the NT for people with those very complex needs, whether it be psychotic disorders, personality disorders or complex eating disorders. We need to do much better and provide more support in the Territory for young people and anyone dealing with those serious health challenges.

The service in Darwin complements headspace in Palmerston, which provides young people with access to vital mental health support close to home. These services are open to young Territorians aged 12 to 25, and the centre offers mental health and related physical health, substance misuse and social and vocational support. The Medicare mental health centre in Casuarina has also expanded its hours and provides a welcoming place for people to access mental health information services and supports from qualified professionals. Anyone can reach out for support for themselves, a loved one or a patient that they know about. It's free and no appointment or referral is needed. It's truly a great service that's available to anyone in the Northern Territory.

The Australian government provided $30 million to build acute mental health service capacity in the Top End. Royal Darwin Hospital's brand new mental health inpatient unit with a stabilisation, assessment and referral area will bolster capacity at the hospital and provide a more therapeutic environment for mental health patients. The new three-level building houses the mental health inpatient unit, with 18 inpatient beds, support services and a six-bed stabilisation, assessment and referral area also known as SARA.

The Albanese Labor government also delivered a $27 million operational cyclotron for local cancer care, producing locally made radioisotopes for PET scans. This was something I campaigned for, for many years because for a long period of time we were getting our radioisotopes made interstate. There was a long air journey, which reduces the half-life, and locally made is the way to go. We're very proud of our centre there. The Albanese Labor government has also delivered on a permanent home for the Darwin veterans' and families' hub, providing $5 million to build the centre to help support the 10,000 veterans and families in the Northern Territory. In the not-too-distant future we will be establishing some veteran accommodation as well in my electorate—all aimed, as all of our veterans improvements are, in improving the health and wellbeing of our veterans who have served our nation. I commend this legislation to the House.

Renee Coffey (Griffith, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Deputy Speaker. I rise to speak on the Health Legislation Amendment (Improving Choice and Transparency for Private Health Consumers) Bill 2026. It's fitting to speak on a health bill with you in the Chair, given your 37 years as a paediatrician in Campbelltown and your lifelong work helping children and families get the care that they need. I thank you for your contribution to paediatrics and also to the many, many thousands of patients that you have cared for over the years.

When Australians make decisions about their health care, they should be able to understand the costs before them, not discover them after the bill arrives. This legislation is about making the private health system clearer, fairer and easier to navigate by improving the information available to patients about specialist fees and out-of-pocket costs and by closing a loophole that has allowed some private health insurance products to be repackaged in ways that undermine consumer trust. For people in my community of Griffith, these issues are felt in the everyday pressures families are managing—paying the mortgage or rent, keeping up with groceries or school costs, caring for children or ageing parents and trying to make sure that, when someone they love needs care, they can make an informed decision with confidence. Across Griffith, more than half of my constituents are covered by private health insurance because they want an additional measure of security and certainty.

Medicare is a cornerstone of fairness, providing universal access to essential care and forming the foundation of our healthcare system. Many Australians choose to complement that strong base with private insurance to provide additional options and reassurance, particularly for specialist care and elective procedures. When doing so, they want to know that if they need treatment, if their child needs a specialist referral, if their partner needs surgery or if a parent needs support, they will have choices available to them. Too often, people's experience with the private health system falls short of that standard. We hear the same story from colleagues, friends and family members. Someone trying to navigate the next step in their care, whether choosing a specialist, arranging tests, considering treatment options or preparing for a procedure, find themselves dealing with a system that feels complicated, opaque and just too hard to compare.

At the very moment when people should be focused on their health, they are also left trying to work out what Medicare will cover, what the fund will pay and whether there will be an out-of-pocket cost. All the while, they are frustrated by the fact that it's so difficult to get a straight answer before the bill arrives. This uncertainty is not just an inconvenience; it can have serious repercussions. It causes real stress, can lead to delayed treatment and may contribute to poorer health outcomes. It can leave families putting off care while they reshuffle the household budget or worrying that, at the end of a difficult health journey, they may be hit with costs that they simply did not anticipate. No-one should have to make a medical decision in the dark or only discover the price of their care after the fact. People should be able to ask a plain question and get a plain answer, and that is the context behind this bill.

This bill is about helping Australians make informed decisions when they need specialist advice or treatment. It's about strengthening confidence in private health insurance by improving transparency, and it's about closing loopholes that have undermined trust. My electorate of Griffith is young, diverse and a growing community. It is home to young families, older residents, renters, students, health workers, carers and small business owners. We are also home to some of Queensland's most important health institutions, including the Princess Alexandra Hospital, the Mater precinct and the Queensland Children's Hospital. Our community understands the value of good care, but we also understand the pressure that comes when people cannot clearly see what that care might cost.

Griffith is one of the nation's youngest electorates, with a median age of 34, and, with 48 per cent of private dwellings rented, there is not much room in household budgets for a surprise invoice. If someone in Griffith is referred to a specialist, they should not have to spend hours sifting through bits and pieces of information on top of the stress of a diagnosis or procedure. They should be able to make that decision with confidence.

At a national level, around 12.6 million Australians have some form of hospital cover, equal to 45.6 per cent of the population, according to the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority. In the December quarter of 2025, the average out-of-pocket cost for hospital admission was $471.29, with an average medical gap of $277.36. For many households, that's the difference between going ahead with the care or putting it off. In Queensland alone, nearly half of the state is covered by private health insurance. Within the Brisbane City Council region, including my community of Griffith, the ABS recorded 499,000 people with private health insurance in 2022. So, when we speak about transparency and fair value for people footing the bill, we are talking about millions of Australians and thousands of families in places like Griffith who need to plan for the cost of their care with the right information in front of them.

Schedule 1 of this bill is aimed at giving consumers clearer information about those medical fees that they can expect to be charged and the likely out-of-pocket costs associated with their private health care. In 2024-25, 8.6 per cent of Australians delayed or went without specialist care because of cost, which equates to more than 800,000 Australians each year delaying or forgoing the care that they need. One of the most common sources of out-of-pocket healthcare costs is specialist fees, and that is why transparency is so important. When someone is referred to a specialist, they should not be left trying to piece together what Medicare will cover, what their private health insurer will contribute and how much they may be expected to pay out of their own pocket and nor should they have to wait until after an appointment, test or procedure to find out that the cost is much higher than they had expected.

The Medical Costs Finder launched under the Morrison government was intended to give patients a way to compare costs, understand likely out-of-pocket expenses and make more informed choices about their care. In all fairness, the intent behind the Medical Costs Finder was a good one. The problem was not the intention; the problem was in the design. The model was built entirely on voluntary disclosure, relying on specialists and insurers choosing to come forward and provide the data needed to make that website useful. That approach by the former Morrison government was destined to fail in delivering meaningful transparency, and the results are proof of this. By the end of 2022, across some 6,300 eligible specialists and the 11 specialties listed on the site, just six individual doctors had listed their fees on that website. Even now, only around 88 have done so, because the website those opposite created was based entirely on voluntary disclosure. This is not simply a case of $24 million being spent on a website that failed to meet expectations. It means patients were left without the clear, practical information they need to understand likely costs, compare their options and make informed decisions about their care. It offers no help to a parent trying to find out the cost of an ENT appointment for their child or for a young person seeking clarity on what they might pay to see a psychiatrist for an ADHD diagnosis.

Rather than relying on voluntary disclosure, this amendment will allow the Medical Costs Finder to use Medicare, hospital and private health insurer billing data already collected by the government, making it more practical, more comprehensive and far more likely to produce a tool ordinary Australians can actually use. The principle is straightforward: transparency should be the norm. Patients should be able to see typical fees, likely out-of-pocket costs, Medicare rebates and relevant insurer contributions. Clearer information gives people the confidence to ask better questions, helps GPs and referrers have better conversations with patients, supports informed financial consent and reduces the risk of bill shock at that very moment when people should be focused on their health.

We also know that fees can vary significantly, even for the same procedure in the same city, and that variation is exactly why transparency is needed. If one patient may face a very low out-of-pocket cost and another may face hundreds of dollars for a similar service, people deserve to know that before they commit, not after. This amendment will help make that information easier to find.

The second major part of this bill goes to fairness in private health insurance by tackling a practice known as product phoenixing, a practice that has been eroding trust in this area. Product phoenixing occurs when a private health insurer closes a product and reopens an identical or very similar product at a higher price or reduces the value of the product without the usual scrutiny or oversight. Consumers who pay for private health insurance expect the system to be fair. They expect a policy to deliver what it promises, and they should not be sold a supposedly new product that is little more than the same old cover repackaged at a higher price, nor should they be left wondering whether the complexity of the system is being used to their disadvantage.

The Commonwealth Ombudsman has examined the impact of product phoenixing, including on top-tier gold products. The issue is that new customers or existing customers trying to upgrade may be pushed onto a more expensive product while very similar, older products remain closed to them. That cuts across the purpose of the standard annual premium review process, which exists to provide scrutiny of premium increases and ensure changes are assessed in the public interest. If insurers can avoid that scrutiny by closing one product and opening another that is substantially the same, then the system is not working as it should. This bill closes that loophole by requiring insurers to seek ministerial approval not just for premium changes to existing products but also for premiums charged for proposed new products and for certain changes that reduce cover, benefits, terms or conditions.

This reform has been welcomed by consumer advocates and health sector voices who understand that the status quo has not served patients well enough. The AMA has supported action to stop product phoenixing while also making it clear that the Medical Costs Finder must be implemented carefully so information is accurate, meaningful and fair. The Royal Australasian College of Surgeons has also supported reforms that improve transparency and inform financial consent while making the point that transparency should apply across the whole patient cost pathway, including practitioner fees, insurer rebates and benefit design.

The patient experience through the health system can be seen as a pathway—a GP appointment, a referral, a specialist consultation, a scan, a procedure, an anaesthetist, a hospital stay, a bill from one provider, a bill from another, until finally a gap they did not expect or a far greater one than that which they had budgeted for. If we want people to navigate that pathway with confidence, we need transparency at every point where cost can affect choice, and that's what this legislation is targeted to address.

This bill forms part of the Albanese government's wider efforts to improve affordability, accessibility and clarity within the health system. We have strengthened Medicare because we believe every Australian should be able to see a doctor when they need one, not just when they can afford one. The government has invested to support more bulk-billing, including expanding bulk-billing incentives to all Australians and supporting fully bulk-billing practices through the Bulk Billing Practice Incentive Program. In Griffith, that work is already making a difference. Bulk-billing rates increased to 63.5 per cent in March 2026, up from 58.7 per cent in October 2025, meaning more people in my community can get the care they need without having to worry about the cost. We have also expanded access to Medicare urgent care clinics so people with urgent but non-life-threatening conditions can get the care they need without having to wait in a hospital emergency department. In Griffith, our three Medicare urgent care clinics, South Brisbane, Coorparoo and Carina, have now seen more than 43,000 presentations, taking pressure off hospitals and helping families access timely bulk-billed care closer to home.

We've also continued to make medicines cheaper. The maximum PBS co-payment for Medicare cardholders was reduced from $31.60 to just $25 at the start of this year, while the concessional co-payment remains frozen to $7.70 until 2030. These changes are making a real difference in communities like Griffith. They help the parent filling a script for their child, the older resident managing a chronic illness, the student or renter weighing up every dollar at the pharmacy counter and the person who might otherwise delay filling a prescription because the cost is too high. Since July 2022, Griffith residents have saved more than $18.2 million on more than 2.1 million scripts. That is more money staying in household budgets, money that can go towards groceries, rent, school costs, transport and all the other everyday expenses that families are facing. Most importantly, it means people are less likely to delay or skip the medicines they need because of the cost.

Strengthening Medicare is not just about bulk-billing, urgent care and cheaper medicines, as important as all of those are; it's also about what happens when people move into specialist care, private treatment and surgery. It is about whether people can understand the costs in front of them, whether insurance products are fair and whether the system treats people with the respect that they deserve. Health reform should make the system easier to understand at every point, not just at one part of it. We know an increasing number of Australians are not taking up referrals from their GP to see a specialist due to concerns about cost. This legislation will give hardworking Australians the clarity they deserve about costs and more choice in their health care.

This bill legislates wider scrutiny of premiums so consumers can be more confident in the value of their private health insurance. This bill begins to put that right by giving patients better information when making decisions about specialist care, strengthening informed financial consent, closing a loophole that has undermined confidence in private health insurance and providing stronger safeguards against unregulated charging behaviour. It builds on the Albanese Labor government's broader work to strengthen Medicare, lower health costs and make our health system fairer for all Australians to navigate. For families across Griffith, that means better information, stronger protections and even more confidence in the choices before them.

Rowan Holzberger (Forde, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to support the Health Legislation Amendment (Improving Choice and Transparency for Private Health Consumers) Bill 2026. I particularly want to congratulate the Minister for Health and Ageing for the work that he has done on this bill but also for the work that he has done leading the health strategy, along with the economic team led by the Treasurer and the government led by the Prime Minister. Health is very much at the heart of the Labor story. It's very much at the heart of what I want to do in my community, as it is for so many people in this place—that is, to listen to our community, to fight for our community and to deliver for our community. I think health care is the best received work the Labor Party does.

There are two elements to this bill—but I don't think I've got the full 15 minutes. I particularly wanted to focus on insurance and talk a little bit generally about what I think insurance is really there for. It could be because of the German last name that I have, Holzberger, that I'll always have a bit of an interest in German history. German history and the history of insurance are very much intertwined. In fact, there are two really great insurance markets in the world. In Germany, there are the great reinsurers of Hannover Re and of Munich Re. There's also the market of Lloyd's—Lloyd's of London. Those two markets tell a fascinating story of the history of what insurance is.

Ultimately, in Germany, sometime around the 1400s—or whenever it was—farmers decided to collectivise their risk.

Mike Freelander (Macarthur, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

Or shortly after that.

Rowan Holzberger (Forde, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

Trying to mansplain this to the doctor in the chair is probably a little bit difficult! Farmers got together to collectivise their risk. If a barn burnt down or if a mob of cows just happened to keel over and die, there was this idea that nobody should be disadvantaged by what was, effectively, an unlucky event. Everybody pooled the resources, and, if somebody was unlucky, there'd be that pool there to get that person out of trouble. There was never an intention, from that attitude to insurance, to make a spectacular profit.

On the other hand, Lloyd's of London was very much founded in the days of, for want of a better word, 'exploration' around the world, as the European countries set sail to colonise other countries. You had these quite dangerous voyages that were being undertaken. The phrase 'to underwrite' literally comes from the idea that there would be a board for the voyages that were going, and you would write your name underneath a voyage, effectively betting whether or not that ship would make it safely. Quite often they didn't, so it was a high-risk bet. Accordingly, you'd want a high-risk return.

As I say, it could be a predilection of having 'Holzberger' as a last name, but, for me, it's the former—that model of taking a more collective approach to risk and taking a more collective approach to looking after people who, effectively, through no fault of their own, find themselves either sick or injured. So it is that sometimes, in order to make sure that insurers aren't out there trying to maximise their profits, it is up to government to save them from themselves.

The government has put the insurance industry on notice for this despicable practice of phoenixing a health insurance product so that they can, effectively, circumvent the law, up the premium, make more money and leave the poor consumer either worse off financially or not insured. That despicable practice is coming to an end. They've been put on notice, they haven't changed their ways and this government is not going to put up with that sort of attitude.

Again, this sits very much with the philosophy of this government, which is about real change—about actually making an impact where it needs to be made and not resting on our laurels. I commend the bill on the basis that this is going to fix this problem. It is going to save insurers from themselves, and it is going to mean that Australian consumers can get the insurance that they need at the cost that is fair and reasonable.

The second thing that this bill does is put the specialists on notice. For too long now, we have seen that gap between what the Medicare rebate pays and what some specialists can charge to be completely out of proportion to, well, anything, whereas with GPs you saw maybe a gap fee of 30 bucks or 40 bucks or 50 bucks or something. It was enough for people not to go and see their GP, by the way. It was enough for people to decide to put food on the table rather than go and look after their health. But, for 30 bucks, 40 bucks or 50 bucks, at least there was some sort of explicable consistency to it all. In specialist fees, it's all over the place. Why will one specialist doing a colonoscopy have a gap fee of 50 bucks and another one have a gap fee of $700? It really doesn't make any sense. This puts the specialists on notice.

This legislation will give consumers an opportunity to see what they're up for before they even go in for the operation or before they go and see their specialist. That in itself is going to have some benefit, for sure, and it will, I think, give specialists a bit of a chance to think about what they are charging. There's nothing like letting a bit of sunlight in as disinfectant.

While doing a little bit of reading for this contribution tonight, I came across the Minister for Health and Ageing, Mark Butler, on 30 April this year, being interviewed by Hamish Macdonald on ABC Sydney. He was talking about this subject of specialist fees, and a caller called in. I'm not sure how Hansard will handle my reading out of this transcript, but it goes:

MACDONALD: We've got Steve here from the Southern Highlands. Good morning to you, Steve.

CALLER STEVE: How are you? How are you doing?

MACDONALD: You've got a knee replacement coming up, I think.

CALLER STEVE: I've got a total knee replacement coming up in about three weeks' time. My out-of-pockets- and I'm in the top health cover, my out-of-pockets are nearly $8000.

MACDONALD: Wow. And can you afford that?

CALLER STEVE: [Laughs] Not on top of the elbow operation that I've got to have at the end of the year as well …

MACDONALD: Yeah, right.

CALLER STEVE: I mean, I'm not a self-funded retiree by any stretch of the imagination.

MACDONALD: And did you go into this knowing that you'd be facing those sorts of costs?

CALLER STEVE: Look, before Christmas last year, I had a massive accident where I fell over and I damaged nearly every bone in my body. And I broke my kneecap and I tore my, what's that little cartilage thing, the meniscus. And I damaged an already replaced metal elbow. So I've got to have them all replaced again. You know, and it's just a frightening expense, I can tell you.

And so, in the 21st century, why should people be choosing between $8,000 or putting up with the pain? How have we got to that situation?

I commend the bill to this House. It is not going to do everything, but it is going to do something. Just as this Albanese Labor government is focused on change, this will change and be real change.