Senate debates

Thursday, 16 October 2008

Tax Laws Amendment (Medicare Levy Surcharge Thresholds) Bill (No. 2) 2008

In Committee

1:12 pm

Photo of Mathias CormannMathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Health Administration) Share this | Hansard source

A double negative makes a positive, Minister—I am sure that even you understand that. So the minister is not saying there is not an inevitability of some increases. The reality is this: Professor Deeble said there would be an additional five per cent increase, Access Economics said there would be an additional five per cent increase—under the original measure, I grant you that. But it stands to reason that if you expect that 500,000 people will leave private health insurance as a result of this measure—and the minister says that it is the young and healthy who will leave in the first instance, who will not access treatment to the same extent as the older and sicker and who will walk out with the contributions that they would otherwise have made—of course premiums will have to go up. That is basic logic. I do not think that anybody seriously suggests that premiums will not go up. Everybody accepts that premiums will go up. The minister accepts that premiums will go up as a result of this measure. The question is: by how much? And the real concern is that, during the Senate inquiry, Treasury told us that they had not actually included an assumption about future premium growth as a result of this measure in the forward estimates costing of that $960 million saving—which became $879 million and has now become $740 million.

I ask you the question again, Minister, because this is something that Health and Treasury officials have confirmed in the Senate inquiry. Just tell me if there is a change of position. Health and Treasury officials gave evidence to the inquiry that future premium increases as a result of this measure would be funded out of the contingency reserve. Could you please confirm for me that future health insurance premium increases as a result of this measure would be funded out of the contingency reserve?

Comments

No comments