Zed Seselja (ACT, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak to this very important issue today. I wanted to address both of the central elements raised in Senator Brown's speech, which is about GP co-payments but also about changes in PBS co-payments. Both are very important. Can I make this point at the outset: this is about making both our Medicare system—our medical benefits system—and our PBS sustainable. If you look historically there has been bipartisan recognition that we have to take measures to make these things more sustainable.

I will go into some detail on how the Labor Party saw fit in office in the Hawke-Keating years to not only introduce a co-payment for GPs but also to increase co-payments for the PBS. We have seen that recognition. That has to be fundamental to this debate. Do we in 10 or 20 years time want to see the Medicare system where people still can have access to their GP or do we want to make it increasingly hard as budgets struggle to keep up? Do we want a situation where we can continue to list the medicines that are needed and people can access subsidised medicine or, where we do not take the measures and therefore see many Australians left behind? That, in fact, is at the heart of what this issue is about. That is at the heart of this debate: in 10 years time, in 20 years time, will we still have these excellent systems that we have?

We believe that the way to make it sustainable is to ask for some contribution by individuals. That has been recognised in a bipartisan way when it comes to the PBS. It has been absolutely recognised by both sides of politics that some contribution when it comes to subsidised medicines is the sustainable way to go. We believe that that also applies when it comes to GPs. So I do want to remind the Senate about the fact of some of that bipartisanship from people like Andrew Leigh and people like Bob Hawke. I will quote from Andrew Leigh. It is worth putting in context when he said this, because it was in 2003. Since 2003 we have seen a significant increase in medical benefits payments by the Commonwealth from around $8 billion to over $18 billion. It has more than doubled since he said this. So if it were true in 2003, it is more true in 2014, given the proportion of our budget that is now being paid out in medical benefits. Dr Leigh described a Medicare co-payment as 'hardly a radical idea'. He made an important point. He said:

As health researchers have shown, costless medical care means that people go to the doctor even when they don't need to—

That was one, but secondly he said:

… driving up the cost for all of us.

That is a really important point. It drives up the cost for everyone and it undermines the sustainability. Andrew Leigh had that to say back in 2003, back when we were paying out about $8 billion under the Medicare benefits schedule. Now we are doing over $18 billion. If it was true when Andrew Leigh said it in 2003, it is even more true now, in 2014.

Of course, we know about Bob Hawke. Senator Brown, I think towards the end of her speech, suggested that this was about getting rid of Medicare; this was about undermining Medicare. It is actually the opposite. I do not think there would be a Labor senator—and I challenge a Labor senator to get up and say this—who would say that Bob Hawke was interested in destroying Medicare. Was Bob Hawke interested in destroying Medicare? No. I do not think anyone could legitimately make that claim. I think people would say that Bob Hawke was committed to Medicare. One of the ways he showed his commitment was in seeking to make it more sustainable.