Alan Ferguson (SA, Deputy-President) Share this | Hansard source

It gives me a great deal of pleasure to follow my friend and colleague Senator McGauran, who made so many pertinent points during his speech, about not only this legislation but also a few extraneous matters, which I am sure have kept us both entertained and enlightened, I might say. It reminded me of one of the most important things my father said to me when I was a young lad. He said, ‘Son, if you never tell a lie you won’t need a good memory.’ I wonder whether, when we go back over some of the statements made by the Labor ministers since their change of position in relation to private health insurance rebates, perhaps their parents would have done well to have given them the same advice.

The reason I want to speak on the Fairer Private Health Insurance Incentives (Medicare Levy Surcharge) Bill 2009 [No. 2] and the Fairer Private Health Insurance Incentives (Medicare Levy Surcharge—Fringe Benefits) Bill 2009 [No. 2]and I do not get the chance very often to speak on bills—is that these are important bills because all Australians will be affected. It does not matter what the government says about the numbers who are going to be affected by the taking away of the rebate, the taking away of that rebate will eventually affect all Australians, not just the 11.3 million Australians with private health insurance. I rise to speak on this issue particularly because there are over 900,000 South Australians who are covered by private health insurance.

The Labor Party and Labor government ministers have been willing to say anything to support this tax increase—because that is what it is. If you take away the rebate it is equivalent to putting another tax on those people who are already contributing in a large way to private health insurance. It has always been said that every dollar that is given back in rebates to those who have private health insurance injects two dollars more through their premiums into the health system. That is something that this government just does not seem to understand. Labor has said that it needs this tax because of the global financial crisis. But I remember that it started its attack on private health—because it does not like private health insurance—in its first budget, well prior to the global financial crisis, so named, coming into existence. The Prime Minister says the money is needed for health reform. That is his reason for putting this additional burden on taxpayers. Minister Nicola Roxon says the money from this new tax will be used to fund e-health. So we have another view from the health minister as to why this new impost on people who have private health insurance is being put in place. Then a little later she said that the money from this new tax will be used for new medicines and improved technology. Then the Treasurer really capped it off recently when he spelt out in the budget that this new tax was to pay for the increase in the age pension. Who do you believe in the Labor Party? Which minister has got it right, or has anybody got a right?