Dan Repacholi (Hunter, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

It's an absolute pleasure to do this speech in front of so many of my colleagues. I am standing here today in support of the Health Legislation Amendment (Improving Choice and Transparency for Private Health Consumers) Bill 2026. At its core, this bill is about something pretty simple. It's about making sure Aussies know what they are going to be paying for their health care. It's about giving people confidence in their private health insurance and it's about making sure the system is fair. Right now, for too many people, it unfortunately is not.

While we're focused on making the system fairer and more transparent, those opposite have been very clear about their views on Medicare. They have argued that the system is unsustainable and that more of the burden should fall on individuals. I've spoken to plenty of people across the Hunter who have walked out of a GP appointment with their referral to a specialist only to hesitate, not because they don't want the care but because they don't know what it's going to cost them. That uncertainty is a real problem. We know that more than 800,000 Australians have delayed or missed specialist care because of cost. That is not just a number. That is people putting off treatment, and that is conditions getting worse. It is families worrying about bills instead of focusing on getting better.

As somebody who serves as Special Envoy for Men's Health, I see this play out in a very real way. Blokes are already less likely to go to their doctor. They already tend to put things off. If you add in cost uncertainty on top of that, it becomes another reason to delay, another reason to say, 'I'll deal with this later.' I've had men in my electorate tell me straight up they did not follow through with a specialist appointment because they were worried about getting hit with a bill they just couldn't afford.

Tim, a young bloke from Kurri Kurri, told me he was referred to a cardiologist. He had a young family, a mortgage and rising bills. He asked what it would cost. He couldn't get a straight answer, so he waited. That's not good enough. Health care should not come with that kind of guesswork.

Alex from Morisset needed a knee procedure after years of working on the tools. He had private health insurance. He thought it was covered. But when he started asking questions, he realised that there were multiple gaps, with different fees for the surgeon, the anaesthetist and the hospital. He said, 'It felt like trying to price a job without a quote.' That's the reality that people are dealing with.

I will give you another example. I spoke with Pete from Cessnock, who had just been diagnosed with prostate cancer. Like a lot of men, he had not been for regular check-ups. When he finally did, it was serious. He did the right thing. He got the referral. He was ready to act. But when the questions came of how much it would cost, what is covered and what is not, he told me that he felt overwhelmed not just by the diagnosis but by the financial uncertainty that came with it. He said to me, 'I just want to focus on getting better and not having to worry about the bill.'

This is the kind of uncertainty that is not accidental. When more of the burden is pushed onto individuals and people are expected to navigate the costs on their own, this is exactly what happens. There is confusion, delay and people missing out on care. That's exactly why transparency matters so much, and it's exactly why this bill is actually trying to fix this. It improves transparency. It gives Australians access to clear, comparable information about what medical services actually cost. Through changes to the law, it allows the Medical Costs Finder website to publish real data on what specialists charge and what out-of-pocket costs patients can expect.

Importantly, this information will not rely on doctors voluntarily uploading it. We tried that, and it simply didn't work. Out of thousands of eligible specialists, only a handful chose to share their fees. That is not transparency. That is a system that leaves patients in the dark. This bill fixes it by using data we already have—medical data, hospital billing data, insurer data. It brings it together and makes it available so people can compare costs and make informed decisions.

We believe in strengthening Medicare and helping people navigate the system. Those opposite have argued that the current model cannot continue and that Australians will either have to pay more or face reduced access to care. This bill takes a much different approach. It puts the information in the hands of patients. That means someone in the Hunter can look up what a procedure might cost in Newcastle compared to somewhere else. They can see whether a doctor participates in gap-cover arrangements. They can understand what their insurer is likely to cover. This is common sense. It's something that people expect.

This bill also provides transparency around hospitals and insurers. It will show which doctors operate at which facilities. It will show which insurers have arrangements with those facilities, and it will show the proportion of policy-holders facing different out-of-pocket costs. All of that matters when people are making decisions about their health. At the same time, it protects patient privacy. No personal information will be published. This is about system transparency, not individual exposure. And there will be a process for medical practitioners to review and query the data that's published about them. So this is balanced. It's practical and it's most certainly overdue

I want to spend a bit more time on why this transparency matters in the real world. When people cannot see the cost up front, they're making decisions in the dark. They might pick the first specialist they referred to without knowing that there are more affordable ones right near them. They might assume their insurance will cover more than it actually does, or they might avoid care altogether. That's not a system working for patients. With better information, people can ask better questions. They can ring around; they can compare, and they can make a choice that suits their situation. That's empowering for patients. It also encourages fair pricing across the whole system, because when fees are visible, there is more pressure to keep them at a reasonable cost, and that benefits everyone.

I've spoken to a family in Singleton whose teenage daughter needed a specialist consultation. They were trying to do the right thing, following the medical advice they were given, and get Olivia the care she needed, but they were given very little clarity on the cost. They rang three different clinics and got three very different answers. They ended up delaying the appointment while they tried to work out exactly what they could and couldn't afford. That delay should not happen. Another local, a retiree, Jane from Branxton, told me she felt embarrassed about asking about the costs when speaking to a specialist office. She said she felt like she was being difficult just for wanting to understand how that bill worked. No-one should feel that way. Transparency should be the norm, not something people have to push for. This bill helps change that culture. It sends a clear message that patients have the right to know, and it makes that information easier to access.

The second part of this bill deals with something that has been chipping away at the confidence in private health insurance. That's a practice known as product phoenixing. It sounds technical, but it's pretty straightforward. An insurer closes a product and then opens a very similar one at a higher price or with reduced value, and they avoid proper scrutiny in this process. That is not fair on consumers. That is not fair for the people of the Hunter. People think they are comparing apples with apples, but they are not. It undermines trust. This bill closes that loophole. It requires insurers to seek approval for premiums, not just when they change an existing product but also when they introduce a new one and when they make changes that reduce the cover or the benefits. It brings those decisions under proper oversight. It also strengthens the process around premium approvals. It formalises the premium round. It introduces a clearer public-interest test. It allows the minister to ask for more information and require insurers to justify their applications. All of that is about one thing: making sure Australians are getting value for money.

I've had people in my electorate tell me they feel like their premiums keep going up but their cover does not feel like it's keeping up with that pace. The frustration is real. Families are making tough choices about what they can and can't afford, and, when they do pay for private health insurance, they want to know it's worth it. This bill helps rebuild that trust. It puts stronger checks in place, makes the system more transparent and makes insurers more accountable. I've also heard from younger families in Cameron Park who are weighing up whether to keep their private health cover at all. They are looking at rising premiums and uncertain benefits and wondering if it's worth it. If we want people to stay in the system, we have to make sure the system is fair and clear. This bill is part of that.

From a men's health perspective, transparency and confidence matter. We know that men are less likely to engage with the health system. We know they are more likely to delay. If we make the system clearer, simpler and easier to understand, we remove more barriers. We make it more likely that they will actually take that next step, book the appointment, follow through with treatment and get checked early instead of late. That saves lives. And it's not just about physical health. When people avoid care because of cost concerns, it adds to stress. It weighs on them. It affects their mental health as well. I've spoken to blokes who say they worry about their bills and it keeps them up at night. That's part of the picture too. Clear information helps take some of that pressure away. It gives people a sense of control, and that really does matter.

I also want to touch on the broader context. Health costs are one of the biggest pressures that people are feeling right now. The cost of living is tight. Families are budgeting carefully. When health costs are uncertain, it creates anxiety. This bill does not solve every issue in this system, but it's a practical step in the right direction. It gives people more control, more information and more confidence, and it holds parts of the system to account. That is what good reform should do. I want to go back to something very simple. If you were getting work done in your house, you would expect a quote. If you were getting your car fixed, you would expect a price. You would not agree to a job without knowing what the actual cost is going to be. But in health care too many people are asked to do exactly that—sign up for treatment without knowing the full picture. That is what this bill changes. It puts information back in the hands of patients. It gives them the ability to compare and contrast, to ask questions, to make choices and to make the system more accountable.

I've spoken to older residents in places like Cessnock and Singleton who are trying to manage on fixed incomes. They tell me they worry about needing specialist care, because they are not sure what it will cost them. That uncertainty should not be there. Health care should be about getting better, not about guessing what the bill will be. This bill helps address that. It strengthens Medicare by supporting better decision-making. It improves private health insurance by closing loopholes and increasing oversight. And it delivers on a clear commitment to transparency.

There is still more work to do on health. There always will be. But this is a solid step forward. It is practical. It focuses on the consumers and it responds to real issues that people are facing. As somebody who spends a lot of time talking to people about their health, especially men, who do not always engage early, I know how important it is to remove barriers. Cost uncertainty is a barrier. Lack of information is a barrier. This bill tackles both of those. It also sends a broader message about the kind of health system we want in this country—one that is fair, one that is clear and one that puts patients first.

At the end of the day, that is what this is all about. It is about patients. It is about helping people get the care they need when they need it without unnecessary stress or confusion. That is something that everyone in this House should support, and I really hope those opposite get onboard and support this, because at the end of the day the people in the Hunter and the people all around Australia want to see us work together. They want an opposition that works with us in government so we can make Australia a better and fairer place. That is why this bill is so important and that is why I support this bill. I commend the bill to the House.

David Smith (Bean, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

I also rise today to speak to the Health Legislation Amendment (Improving Choice and Transparency for Private Health Consumers) Bill 2026. Now, it would not shock anyone in this House that I believe that the Morrison government made many mistakes and missteps in their term of government. Whilst a lot of time could be spent discussing those that made major headlines, one that did not receive as much attention was their failed price disclosure tool, Medical Costs Finder.

The Morrison government spent $24 million setting up the Medical Costs Finder website, which they claimed would use Medicare data to display the cost of common medical services alongside the fees that individual specialists voluntarily shared on the website. But how did this work out in practice? By the end of 2022, out of the approximately 6,300 eligible specialists registered to practise in the 11 specialities covered on Medical Costs Finder, just six doctors had chosen to display their fee information—six out of more than 6,000. But that was in 2022. Maybe it improved over time. But, even three years later, only 88 doctors have voluntarily displayed their fee information—just 88. It is clear that the system was not working and that this was preventing Australians from accessing information that they needed when making decisions regarding their health care. This bill before the House fixes that.

It is simply unjustifiable to expect Australians to commit to a medical treatment without knowing the cost of that treatment. It is unjustifiable to expect Australians to commit to a medical treatment without being able to compare those costs against the fees charged by other providers. Australians have the right to know the level of support that is provided by their private health insurer so they can determine from the outset their likely out-of-pocket costs. This bill will allow the government to publish details about what individual specialists charge for particular medical services.

This information is already collected by government. It's just a matter of allowing it to be published. This move will improve transparency and take the guesswork out of health care, helping to ensure that Australians have all the information they need when making choices concerning the health of themselves and their loved ones. And it does this without increasing the administrative burden on our doctors.

This bill also outlaws another practice that is becoming increasingly problematic in the insurance system, which is the practice of product phoenixing. For those who are unaware, product phoenixing is when an insurer closes an existing product and then opens an identical or similar new product at a higher premium. We know that this practice is hurting the hip pockets of Australians and damaging their confidence in the insurance system. That is why we promised at the last election to address it, and that's why we are delivering on that promise. Not only does this provide more protections to Australians; it also provides them with assurance that our insurance system is working as it should and is there to support them.

This doesn't protect only new entrants to private health insurance but also the 15.3 million people who currently hold private health insurance policies, who are currently left unprotected from this practice. The bill will achieve this by amending the approvals that insurers are required to receive from the minister for health. Currently, private health insurers are required to apply to the minister for health if they wish to change the premium for an existing product. This creates loopholes that have been exploited by providers to maximise their profits and hurt the Australian people. This bill before the House creates changes that will require an insurer to seek ministerial approval for the premium charged for a proposed new product and, importantly, where changes are made that reduce cover, a benefit or a term of condition of an existing product.

We know that the cost of medical and hospital services is a key driver of health inflation for consumers, which ultimately feeds into higher out-of-pocket costs and higher private health insurance premiums. We know that fees can vary widely across specialists, even for the same procedure in the same part of Australia. And we know that this is hurting Australians. That is why we promised to address this issue, and that is why we are delivering on this promise and advocating the passing of this bill.

On this side of the chamber we are dedicated to working for the Australian people to ensure that our healthcare system is strong, transparent and accessible for all. If only that was the case for everyone in this chamber, though. Can we really be shocked that we are still here cleaning up the mess of the previous government when they have members on their front bench who still believe that our Medicare system should be privatised, stripping Australians of the quality health care they deserve? Can we be shocked when they have members on their front bench who are committed to talking down Australia and Australians and members who are willing to bet against the Australian economy and people?

The member for Goldstein has gone on record in this House declaring that Australia runs an 'illness system', not a healthcare system, stating that it is a system designed to keep people ill to feed the benefits of the unions and the people they are paid to represent and to maintain the political control of the Australian Labor Party. He is more obsessed with grand political conspiracy theories and union bashing than with the health care of the Australian people. The only thing the member champions in health care is the privatisation of Medicare. But on this side of the House we will champion all aspects of our public healthcare system. That's why I'm proud to stand for this bill.

In more specifics, this bill will amend the Health Insurance Act 1973 and the Private Health Insurance Act 2007 to allow for the publication of information about medical practitioners and their billing, including names, locations, fees charged by location, and their utilisation of gap cover arrangements with insurers, where insurers pay a medical practitioner more if they agree to charge no or fixed out-of-pocket costs. It will allow for the publication of information about hospitals, including medical practitioners who provide services at the facility and insurers that have gap cover or contracting arrangements with the facility. And it will allow for the publication of information about insurers, including the proportion of policyholders who experience different gap cover arrangements and the out-of-pocket costs under those arrangements.

Transparency and honesty in our medical system are crucial so that Australians and people in my community are able to make fully informed healthcare choices. Honesty in our system and in how we talk about our system matters. Unfortunately, not everyone in this House would seem to agree with that. The member for Goldstein has, in this House, declared that there are no bulk-billed doctors in this capital city. He has come here and claimed that people in my home, in my community, do not have these services. This is a blatant falsehood.

I will not stand here and say that there is not more work to do on the bulk-billing rates in my community, but to exploit the concerns of my community—to which he is a stranger—for his own political gain and narrative is unacceptable. I'll stand here with every opportunity I have, be honest about the challenges we face and fight for my community—not exploit them and the constituencies of others to suit my own narrative. The member for Goldstein has gone on record in this House saying, 'Let's be honest about health care,' and I agree: let's be honest about it.

There is only one side of this chamber that is committed to fighting for Australians' right to access affordable and accessible health care, and it's not just this bill that proves it. We've made record investments in Medicare and bulk-billing, which has worked to ensure that bulk-billing rates Australia-wide are now over 81 per cent and that 97 per cent of Australians live within a 20-minute drive of a registered Medicare bulk-billing practice.

The Albanese government has made record investments in our healthcare system, reaching new agreements with the states and territories to deliver record funding into the hospital system. Here in the ACT, it will mean an additional $557 million boost to hospital funding alongside additional funding of $75 million to assist with the challenges of being a smaller jurisdiction. This is part of a package that is worth over $4 billion in the ACT.

Twelve months after the Albanese government's landmark $792.9 million women's health package, we are seeing real and impactful changes being delivered. This includes the first PBS listing of new contraceptive pills in more than 30 years and the first PBS listing of new menopausal hormone therapies in over 20 years. More than 6,700 women with endometriosis have access to treatment at PBS prices, saving $4.9 million on 26,000 scripts in the past year. Women undergoing in vitro fertilisation are receiving earlier and more affordable access to a form of fertility treatment, with more than 46,000 women with specific low levels of reproductive hormones accessing 273,000 scripts in the past year.

The Albanese government has delivered the largest cut to the cost of medicines in the history of the PBS, with the maximum cost of a general script falling from $42.50 to $30 in January 2023 and now to $25. This Albanese government has established 1800MEDICARE, because life isn't nine to five and access to health advice shouldn't be either.. In my community, the Albanese Labor government has invested in and established the Medicare urgent care clinic in Woden and the Tuggeranong Medicare Mental Health Centre in Tuggeranong. (Quorum formed)This bill is another example of the Albanese Labor government's plan to assist Australians with the cost of health care to ensure that the last thing Australians are worrying about when seeking medical treatment is their wallet. This fits into the broader picture of Labor's commitment to stand in the trenches with the Australian people in the fight against the cost of living. That's why we've also cut student debt, cut the cost of PBS medicines, cut 30 per cent off of home batteries to lower power bills, supported apprentices with 10,000 bonuses and introduced paid prac for nursing, teaching, social work and midwifery students. I'm very excited to see this latest commitment be delivered and added to that list. I commend this bill to the House.

Madonna Jarrett (Brisbane, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

We all know that it's Labor that's the party that delivers better, affordable and quality healthcare to Australians. We established Medicare in 1984, and, under the Albanese Labor government, we've delivered expansions to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, including $25 scripts. We've rolled out urgent care clinics across the country, including one in my electorate of Kelvin Grove. We've delivered a landmark women's health package, which means more choice, lower costs and better healthcare for women.

Australians know that they can always trust the Labor government to deliver accessible and affordable healthcare. There is no doubt that our system is one of the best in the world, but its trajectory has waxed and waned, reflecting the values of the party in power. Going back to 1972, Labor was elected and promised a universal, compulsory national health insurance scheme, and that was to replace voluntary arrangements. Despite this being met with fierce opposition from the coalition, the AMA and private health insurers, the policy was eventually legislated and Medibank was born. In 1975, the newly elected coalition government gradually dismantled the scheme until it was eventually abolished in 1981. This was despite an election commitment to maintain Medibank.

Various reports show that the Fraser years reduced people's access to the universal scheme and encouraged private health insurance membership, promoting the role of private care as a substitute for a public system for those who could afford to pay. The ideology was to support private funding and the provision of health care and that the government's role was to provide a safety net reserved for the disadvantaged, which saw means testing reintroduced and rebates payable for medical services reduced. After the 1984 election, the re-elected Labor government restored the publicly funded universal scheme under its new name, Medicare—the green and gold card that we all know so well. It was to provide free access to all public hospitals without means testing.

Medicare is a proud Labor legacy. Access to affordable healthcare was not just the right thing to do; it was the fair thing to do, and it was an investment in Australians and in Australia. For decades, private health insurance has continued to operate alongside Medicare as a complement, providing additional cover for services and amenities not covered or reimbursed by Medicare. That's because this Labor government and many Labor governments before us have recognised the importance of a strong and accessible public healthcare system, but Medicare can't do it all.

Private health insurance aims to fill gaps, and, for many, it's about minimising the time you have to sit on a public hospital waiting list. There are two types of private health insurance: hospital cover for things like accommodation and theatre fees, and general treatment for services like maybe dental, maybe physio. Many insurers often combine hospital and general cover, but most private health insurers let you know you can choose your own surgeon or other specialists and have treatment in a private hospital or as a private patient in a public hospital. Insurers can tell you what they'll pay for and how much you'll pay. This will help Australians choose a level of cover that suits their needs and their budget. But often costs can be hidden, leaving us consumers vulnerable to exorbitant specialist fees. So the Health Legislation Amendment (Improving Choice and Transparency for Private Health Consumers) Bill will help transparency in the private insurance area. It will enable Australians to make informed decisions about their health care and their private health insurance. It will also provide clarity on individual medical practitioner fees and out-of-pocket costs.

This bill also protects consumers by prohibiting phoenixing, closing a loophole that allowed private health insurers to discontinue a product and reintroduce an identical one at a higher price or with reduced value without ministerial oversight. Schedule 1 of the bill aims to enhance consumer transparency by requiring clearer information on expected medical fees and likely out-of-pocket costs for private health. An increasing number of Australians are not taking up referrals from their general practitioner to see a specialist due to cost. In fact, data says that in 2024 almost nine per cent of people delayed or missed specialist care. That's over 800,000 people, and the decision was made because of costs. That's simply not good enough. It leads to poorer health outcomes for Australia and higher costs in the long run.

The most common cause of out-of-pocket costs is medical specialist fees. It's unreasonable to require patients to commit to a course of medical treatment without clear, upfront information about the associated costs. Patients should be able to understand what they will be charged and have the opportunity to compare those costs with fees offered by other providers, enabling them to make informed and financially-sound decisions about their care. Understanding the level of support that is provided by their private health insurer is also vital in determining their likely out-of-pocket costs. This bill will provide consumers with the opportunity to plan for upfront costs.

Since 2022, specialists and insurers have been able to participate in the Medicare Costs Finder by voluntarily publishing their fees and their out-of-pocket information. This platform was created to provide transparency for patients seeking clearer information about medical expenses. But guess what? Uptake has been too low, with only one to two per cent of specialists and 10 per cent of insurers participating on the website as of December 2025. That's simply not good enough. There is a product there; there is a system there to provide transparency for patients and it's not being utilised. People deserve to know what their costs will be right from the start. So this legislation will allow for the publication of 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. While the focus is on the charging practices of non-GP specialists, general practitioners and their billing could also be published on the website in future.

Schedule 1 will amend the Health Insurance Act of 1973 and the Private Health Insurance Act of 2007 to do a few things. The first allows for the publication of information about medical practitioners and their billings, including their names, their locations, their fees charged by location and the utilisation of gap cover arrangements with insurers where insurers pay a medical practitioner more if they agree to charge no, or fixed, out pocket costs. The second allows for the publication of information about hospitals, including medical practitioners who provide services at the hospital and insurers that have gap cover or contracting arrangements with that hospital. The third allows for the publication of information about insurers, including the proportion of policyholders who experienced different gap cover arrangements and the out-of-pocket costs. The forth includes an immunity from civil proceedings, and the fifth modernises the secrecy regimes that make it consistent with the amendments to secrecy provisions in portfolio legislations made by the Regulatory Reform Omnibus Act 2025.

Importantly, the amendments will continue to protect the privacy of consumers. No patient information will be published. The Department of Health, Disability and Ageing is establishing an internal review process for medical practitioners to inquire about, or to request that the department review, the fee information that is published about them. Without passage of this schedule, Australians will continue to have uncertainty about the potential costs of their treatment, and that's just not fair. Patients will continue to be unable to compare private healthcare providers and unable to seek better value for their health care. Frankly, they'll make more-informed decisions with the passing of this legislation.

Currently, private health insurers are required to apply to the minister if they wish to change the premium of an existing product. This has typically occurred once a year through the annual premium review round process. Schedule 2 of the bill relates to changes to strengthen ministerial oversight of private health insurance premiums to better protect consumers. Insurers are not required to seek approval for the premium charge for new products. Some insurers have avoided the intent of the premium round by shutting down an existing product to new customers and introducing a new, nearly identical product priced higher than the minister had approved for the original one. This process is known as phoenixing. This hurts not just new entrants to private health insurance, who are directly impacted, but the 15.3 million people who hold private health insurance, who are left unprotected from unscrutinised changes.

To address this issue, amendments to the Private Health Insurance Act 2007 will require insurance companies to apply to the minister for approval of 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 if they reduce the cover, a benefit or other term of condition of an existing product.

Additional changes are being made to formalise and enhance existing practices that also occur under the annual premium round process. These include specifying the premium round submission date in the legislation while allowing the minister to make a legislative instrument to vary those dates, encouraging submissions to be made through the premium round by introducing a more stringent public interest test to be applied to the applications made outside of the premium round submissions, and allowing delegation of the minister's premium approval power but not the power to refuse an application. This could enable a reduced process for certain categories of applications outside the premium round. A delegation would likely be for relatively straightforward applications where they're more clearly in the public interest, and details will be worked through with the industry. There are more changes in that schedule.

These reforms are an important step in holding private health insurers to account and empowering consumers to make informed decisions about the cost of their health care. The government will always pursue reforms that ensure that private health insurers deliver genuine value for money and greater transparency for consumers and that put consumers rights at the centre of healthcare decisions.

Australia has one of the best healthcare systems in the world, and many of us are really proud that everyone can get access to quality health care. I've lived through the flip side. While living in the US—another developed country, by the way—I saw families go broke because of an unexpected illness or injury. I saw elderly people suffer in pain because they couldn't afford a knee replacement. I saw young people not getting health checks because it was too costly.

Not that long ago, we saw Medicare almost broken and people putting off seeing a doctor or buying their medicine. Why? Because Medicare was neglected under the LNP and, as a result, it became too costly. This Labor government, like those before it, is committed to Medicare and has poured billions of dollars back into strengthening the system. Those opposite don't like it when we get out that green and gold card in this House, but our communities do.

It's a strong reminder of the LNP's efforts to undermine Medicare every time they're in government. I outlined some of the history earlier. They know their record when it comes to investing in health care. It's shameful. The previous leader of the LNP, Peter Dutton, was voted the worst health minister in the world. Under Scott Morrison, they were sharpening their knives to privatise Medicare. That's their go to. They froze GP bulk-billing for years, leading to higher costs to see a GP, and the list goes on.

On this side of the House, we know the importance of backing our healthcare system, we know the importance of making sure our communities have access to high-quality affordable health care when they needed it. What's Labor done? We've been funding our hospitals, we're investing in Medicare, we're rolling out urgent care clinics across the country, including one in my electorate, in Kelvin Grove. We've had almost 4,000 patients visit that clinic, and it's only been open for less than six months. We're increasing bulk-billing rates, we're rolling out mental health centres across the country, and we're providing $25 scripts—or $7.70, if you're on concession. Why? By backing a strong healthcare system, we are backing everyday Australians. We're making sure every person in my electorate and every person across the country has access to affordable health care when they need it.

With this bill, we're going further. We're protecting consumers who are under the private health insurance system as well because that is a key part of our healthcare system. We're providing greater transparency so that patients and people who need medical care can make informed decisions in relation to their health care. I commend this bill to the House.

(Quorum formed)

Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

This legislation—the Health Legislation Amendment (Improving Choice and Transparency for Private Health Consumers) Bill 2026—delivers on the Albanese government's election commitment to ensure greater transparency in costs charged by medical specialists, rebates provided by health insurers and outlawing product phoenixing. It is also legislation that, ultimately, will assist with cost-of-living pressures that Australians are experiencing because the legislation will help people make informed decisions about their health care and their private health insurance needs.

This will be done through the Medical Costs Finder website, which will publish individual medical practitioner fees and insurers' out-of-pocket data for common medical services.

One of the most frequent grievances I hear from people in my electorate is about the fees charged by a medical specialist, the low rebate paid by Medicare or the low private health insurance rebate that they get and therefore the out-of-pocket costs paid by the patient. Whilst the medical specialists, private health insurers and Medicare each blame each other for the often exorbitant out-of-pocket costs, there is general agreement across the community that some medical specialists are simply charging too much for their services. With respect to that, I'll quote directly from a press release issued on 17 October 2025 by Private Healthcare Australia which I believe exposes the staggering increase in some medical bills. The press release says:

Between 2018-19 and 2023-24, the median out-of-pocket medical fees charged by doctors including surgeons, anaesthetists and assistant surgeons has surged for many procedures. Some of the biggest price rises have occurred for:

The press release goes on to say:

Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) data shows average out-of-pocket fees for hospital episodes have risen by 65% since 2020.

It then goes on further to say:

Doctors are entitled to charge fairly, but fees that double, triple and increase up to nine times in a few years are unsustainable. Patients end up facing massive bills or waiting years for treatment in the public system. Neither Medicare nor private health insurers can keep pace without pushing up taxes and premiums.

The last part of the press release says:

Studies by the Australian Bureau of Statistics, La Trobe University and Patients Australia show up to 20% of Australians are delaying or skipping specialist appointments due to cost. The Grattan Institute estimates over a million people each year miss out on seeing a specialist because they cannot afford it.

Those figures confirm why this legislation is so important and welcome. It's a step in the right direction and it will help patients.

In particular, I refer to schedule 1, which the minister also referred to in his second reading speech. I note the member for Brisbane in her contribution just a few moments ago also referred to schedule 1. Schedule 1 is effectively the summary of what is going to happen with respect to ensuring that people have access to the information that they need. I will read directly from the minister's speech:

Schedule 1 will amend the Health Insurance Act 1973 and the Private Health Insurance Act 2007 to:

Importantly, with these changes and with the additional information that will be provided on the Medical Costs Finder site, no patient information will be published, and the privacy of consumers will continue to be protected. I believe having that information available to people is critical in ensuring that they can make the choices they need to in order to make a decision that is in their best interests.

The government is certainly trying to bring down medical costs for people across the country, and we have done so through a number of measures. This is going to add to that. I can use the measure of bulk-billing data. As a result of the government's increasing of the bulk-billing incentive for doctors, we've now seen nationally that 81.9 per cent of people are getting bulk-billed, and that's a 4.6 per cent increase. It is higher than at the same time last year. In South Australia, the figure is 80.4 per cent. That is almost six per cent higher than it was, again, this time last year. In my own electorate of Makin, we are now seeing bulk-billing rates of 85.6 per cent, whereas, in October 2025, before the bulk-billing initiative was expanded to include all Australians, it was just 78.4 per cent. We now have in my electorate of Makin 17 GP practices that fully bulk-bill, and that is an increase of 10 on what it previously was.

I quote these figures only to highlight how, by providing information and additional support, people are able to get their medical needs looked at without being out of pocket in the way they would have been previously. That is a good thing, because if people can afford to see their doctors at the right time, it ensures that they perhaps don't develop further and more expensive complications down the track. So we need to try and ensure that people get to their doctors when they need to, and that includes their specialists. As I said and quoted from that press release earlier on, when nearly a million Australians are choosing to defer their appointment with their specialist, ultimately it will mean that their medical condition will deteriorate. That in turn means that, when they finally do need the treatment, it will be much, much more expensive for them.

If they don't go to a medical specialist, then their choice is to go to a public hospital. Again, if they go to a public hospital, the problem is that, firstly, the public hospitals are already under pressure right around the country, as we know. But, secondly, they will very likely have to be put on a waiting list, which again means that they're not only suffering for a long period of time but, by the time they come to getting the treatment they need, the costs might have gone up as well. So it's a lose-lose situation for everybody if we can't get those people who need medical attention treated at the time they are first diagnosed with the treatment that they need.

I suspect that, as a result of this legislation, some people who are already on elective surgery waiting lists—by the way, in some cases, people are waiting for a year or more for the surgery or the treatment that they need. But as a result of this legislation, it is my view that, when people are able to shop around, when people know that there perhaps is a cheaper alternative, even if it means that they have to pay for it themselves, they may well come off the elective surgery waiting list in the public hospital and choose to go to a private specialist because they can now find a private specialist that they can afford to provide the treatment that they need. Whereas, right now, most people usually get a referral from their GP. The referral is to a specialist that they don't question, and they have no idea whether they could possibly get the same treatment at a much better rate using another surgeon. It's not often that people shop around when it comes to medical treatment. They usually rely on the advice of their GP, and I think that's going to change as a result of this legislation and change for the better.

What it will also hopefully do—this is clearly one of the intentions—in ensuring that people have access to the list of costs for what specialists are charging, is bring some of those fees down a little. As I pointed out earlier, when quoting those costs from the press release that I referred to, some of the fees, in the minds of most people, are unrealistic and, quite frankly, it is time that some of them did come down—even in the medical field.

Every day there is new technology out there—and, yes, sometimes it's expensive—that allows for much more efficient procedures. As a result of that, you would think that perhaps the costs of those procedures would come down. But that hasn't always necessarily been the case. People just get used to charging a certain fee, and then they continue to do so even though they might be able to deliver the same treatment at a much reduced fee because of the new technology that is around. Again, this is all about bringing down prices and costs for consumers. In my view, that is a good thing. It is a good thing because people will be able to not only save money but perhaps afford to pay for treatment that they need to get.

The other matter relating to all of this is obviously the issue of some private health insurers using the practice of phoenixing. This is where they drop a particular type of cover, pretending that it is no longer available, but then reintroduce it in a different format and charge a lot more money for doing so. That is going to be outlawed. I welcome the practice because it is stopping people from accessing health insurance, or it is at least increasing the premiums for people unnecessarily.

It's interesting to note that in 2024-25 there was $31.1 billion paid in private health insurance premiums. That is a lot of money that is being paid by families across the country in order to get the health cover they need. Sadly, for many of them, on top of that, when they do need some kind of medical support or treatment, they usually find themselves being out of pocket to the tune of hundreds of dollars if not thousands of dollars. That is a terribly sad thing. I particularly feel for the people who have chronic conditions—conditions whereby not only is their own lifestyle changed and affected each and every day because of the chronic condition they have, but in most cases a person with a chronic condition will also be someone who probably has to regularly see a specialist of some sort or another. So they not only have to deal with other increased costs in their lives because of their condition, but the constant treatment that they need from the specialist must surely be a burden that many of them would find difficult to face. I know, from speaking to people in my electorate, that has often been the case. People are really struggling to pay for the treatment they need if it means going to see a specialist.

In wrapping up, this legislation is good legislation. It provides information out there in the marketplace that people will access, and ultimately that will reduce the cost of health services for people who need them throughout this country. I commend the legislation to the House.

Jodie Belyea (Dunkley, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

This is an important piece of legislation that strengthens the foundations of Medicare and supports the delivery of affordable, accessible and high-quality health care for Australians. At its heart, the legislation is about ensuring that programs we use to support primary care providers have a clear legislative framework, strong accountability and the integrity needed to continue delivering for Australians— (Quorum formed)

The Albanese Labor government has made no secret of its commitment to strengthening Medicare. We came to government with a clear understanding that Medicare is one of Australia's greatest achievements. It reflects our value, as a nation, that every Australian should be able to access health care when they need it, regardless of their income, their postcode or their circumstances.

But we also recognised that Medicare had been under significant pressure. Australians were finding it harder to access bulk-billing services, general practices were struggling with rising costs and families were increasingly worried about the cost of seeing a doctor. That is why our government has delivered the single largest investment in Medicare's history. Our record $8.5 billion investment is strengthening Medicare, supporting patients, training more doctors and nurses, and helping more Australians so that they can access affordable care close to home.

The proposed legislation before the House today, the Health Legislation Amendment (Improving Choice and Transparency for Private Health Consumers) Bill 2026, complements that investment. Primary care incentive programs are a vital part of how governments support the delivery of health care. They encourage best practice, improve access to services and provide financial support to the doctors, nurses and practices that Australians rely upon every day. Programs such as the Medicare Bulk Billing Practice Incentive Program are already helping to make health care more affordable for millions of Australians.

However, these programs have not always had the clear legislative foundations necessary to support their long-term administration and integrity. This legislation addresses that issue. It establishes a clear framework for Commonwealth primary care incentive payment programs, ensuring they can be administered effectively, transparently and responsibly. It provides strong mechanisms to protect public funds, enforce compliance and maintain the integrity of programs that support healthcare delivery across the country. Importantly, it also provides a framework that can support future primary care initiatives as Australia's health system continues to evolve. This is sensible legislation, this is practical legislation and it's legislation that supports the broader objective of ensuring Medicare remains strong for generations to come.

The importance of strengthening Medicare is something I hear about regularly in my electorate. Whether I'm speaking with families in Frankston, meeting with seniors in Seaford, talking to young parents in Carrum Downs or chatting with local residents at community events across the electorate, accessible, affordable health care is always a priority and welcomed. People want to know they can see a doctor when they need one. They want to know that costs will not be a barrier to receiving care, and they want confidence that Medicare will continue to be there for them and their families. That is exactly why the Albanese Labor government's investment in Medicare matters.

We are already seeing results. On 1 November, the government expanded the general practice bulk-billing incentive to all Australians and began providing practices with an additional 12.5 per cent incentive payment if they bulk-bill all of their patients all of the time. This was a major reform. It sent a clear message to general practices that we value bulk-billing and that we are prepared to invest in it, and the results are already becoming clear. The latest quarterly bill data shows that the national GP bulk-billing rate was 81.9 per cent for the January to March quarter. On that note, I would like to conclude. Thank you.

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

I want to thank the member for Dunkley for her contribution and all members for their contributions to the debate on the Health Legislation Amendment (Improving Choice and Transparency for Private Health Consumers) Bill 2026.

Schedule 1 of this bill makes important changes to support greater transparency in healthcare pricing, which will help Australians make more informed decisions about their private healthcare choices. It does that by providing consumers with more detailed information on the medical fees that they can expect to be charged and their likely out-of-pocket costs for their private health experience. Currently, consumers have more information about routine goods and services in the community than they do about healthcare choices, choices that can have a profound impact on their quality of life but also on their finances. Without passage of this schedule, we would continue to see many Australians simply not knowing what their private healthcare journey was going to cost until they were in it. Right now, they're unable to easily compare the costs of alternative providers and therefore unable to make an informed choice about their healthcare.

Schedule 2 strengthens ministerial oversight of private health insurance premiums, ensuring that consumer interests are better protected. Allowing insurers to close an existing product and open an identical or very similar new product at a higher premium without ministerial scrutiny presents an unacceptable risk to private health insurance customers and needs to be stopped. This practice, commonly known as phoenixing, is something that I warned insurers about over some period of time. I indicated to them that, if I didn't see a cessation of that practice by the industry itself, we would do exactly what we are doing now, and that is legislate. This will be achieved by requiring ministerial approval not just for proposed premium changes, which happens with the premium round every year—it will also be required when an insurer proposes to open a new product or reduce a certain coverage, benefits or terms and conditions of an existing product.

Changes are also being made to formalise and enhance the process for the approval of premiums. The arrangements are substantially aligned with how the annual premium round has been managed over recent years. I want to thank the member for Kooyong for her contributions to this debate in particular and for her commitment to holding specialists to account over the fees that they charge patients. The first part of this bill, not the phoenixing part but the first part around informed consent, is essentially the implementation of an election commitment we made last year. That was to make the Medical Costs Finder effectively mandatory.

To his credit, my predecessor Greg Hunt introduced the Medical Costs Finder with the ambition of providing consumers with the information about what medical specialists in their community would charge for particular procedures. He did that on a voluntary basis, expecting that specialists would upload and disclose the fees that they were going to charge. When we came to government in 2022, of the thousands and thousands of specialists covered by the Medical Costs Finder, six had uploaded their fees—not 600 or even six per cent, just six of the thousands and thousands covered. Even after the AMA—

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

It was a start!

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

'It was a start,' the member for Riverina says—a modest start. Even after the then AMA president, Steve Robson, to his credit, urged his colleagues to upload and took the lead by doing it himself, that number still, years later, has not cracked triple figures. It is still less than 100 out of several thousand. It's not quite perhaps the failure of the COVIDSafe app, but, frankly, it's pretty darn close.

That is why we are acting to upload the data for the specialists themselves. They won't have to do it. We have access to all of that information, including the out-of-pocket costs that they charge, and we will populate the Medical Costs Finder so that patients do go into that enormously important process of health care knowing what they're going to be charged and knowing that they may have a choice in their community about different specialists that they would be able to access based on the fees that they would be charged.

The government is not going to accept the amendments that have been circulated by the member for Kooyong, but we do understand the intent behind them, and I'll talk a little bit about them during the debate on those amendments. They come from a good place, and I think they identify a range of issues that we intend to work with stakeholders on and are working already with stakeholders on as we design the Medical Costs Finder changes that will be enabled by the passage of this bill. I thank members for their contribution to the bill so far and look forward to further debate in consideration in detail.

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

The question is that the amendment moved by the honourable member for Wentworth be agreed to.

A division having been called and the bells having been rung—

As there are fewer than seven members on the side for the ayes in this division, I declare the question negated in accordance with standing order 127. The names of those members who are in minority will be recorded in the Votes and Proceedings.

Question negatived.

The question is the amendment moved by the honourable member for Mackellar be agreed to.

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

The question is that the amendment moved by the honourable member for Kooyong be agreed to.