Julie Owens (Parramatta, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in absolute opposition to the sale of Medibank Private. We on this side of the House are absolutely committed to keeping Medibank Private in public hands. The previous speaker, the member for Moncrieff, claimed several times in his speech that the opposition were engaging in a scare campaign regarding the sale of Medibank Private, but I have to say that it does not need the opposition to scare the Australian people when it comes to this government—it is scary enough all on its own. In fact we could take a holiday for the next year and the Australian people would still be increasingly fearful as they look at this government’s approach to industrial relations, welfare, the selling off of our assets and the way it is completely ignoring one of the most serious issues we face: that is, climate change. We oppose the Medibank Private Sale Bill 2006 bill not because we are trying to scare the Australian people but because the government has well and truly failed to make its case. It has failed to make any economic argument that the sale of Medibank Private would benefit the community, nor has it made the case that it has the right to sell Medibank Private from underneath its members.

There are elements in this legislation that demonstrate that the government knows full well that it has not made its case. This is a bill that on the one hand sets up the framework for the privatisation of Medibank Private and at the same time protects the government if it has got it wrong. We of course believe that it has got it wrong. It is telling that the government moves in this bill to protect itself from its errors but is not concerned about protecting the community if it has got it wrong. So it protects itself, but it puts the community right in it. We believe of course that the best way to protect the Australian community is to get it right: get the bill right before you bring it to this House. Do the work and make sure that you get it right, then you will not need to build in protections for yourself. We do not believe that the government has made a case for the privatisation of Medibank Private—and, looking at the contents of this bill, nor does the government.

Once again we are looking at a piece of legislation that is more about ideology than reality. I once heard a very wise woman in my electorate talk about politicians. I cannot remember who she was, unfortunately, and I would really like to give her credit because she gave a beautiful explanation of some of the characteristics that you see in politicians from both sides of the House. She said that in politics you can find people who are so based in idealism and ideology that they cannot see reality but that, on the other hand, there are those at the opposite end who are so based in reality and pragmatism that they have lost the ability to see the ideal. I can see my parliamentary colleague nodding. We all know people in this House who sit at either end of the spectrum—each has its their place as one of a range of views. Sometimes it is quite good to be able to borrow a purist view to inform your own perspective on a complex issue. But save us from a government that is founded in one end or the other.

When it comes to this government and its Prime Minister, particularly when it comes to privatisation, we have an ideologue—a man so obsessed with ideology that he cannot even bother to deal with the practicalities of actually going about what he believes he must do. He has a blind belief in the ideology of privatisation. For the Prime Minister, private is always better than public. It is a matter of faith. Never mind all of the opinions that offer a contrary view. Never mind the practical problems of the rights of members, which have been raised by so many in the debate that has surrounded the government’s decision to privatise Medibank Private. For the government, private has to be better because it is, according to John Howard. Never mind the realities of the company—its three million members and their rights. Never mind that three million members have made their choice to stick with Medibank Private, many of them having done so for many years. This is Howard’s ideology and he believes he is absolutely right!

He spruiks choice. The whole government spruiks choice. Never mind that three million Australians have made their own choice and chosen to go with Medibank Private as it is. Never mind that those three million members are happy with Medibank Private. Never mind that the vast majority of them, certainly the ones whom I have spoken to, actually like Medibank Private exactly as it is. This is old ideology first raised 20 years ago as part of a sweeping privatisation agenda. It has been carried along in his bag of tricks for 20 years and is being brought out now and foisted on three million Australians. There is nothing new in this Prime Minister. All the big-ticket items from this Prime Minister come from 20 years ago. There is nothing new here, and we can see that in the Prime Minister’s complete inability to face the climate change challenges that this country faces.

Ironically, Medibank Private was created by the Fraser government back in 1976 to contribute to an efficient, competitive and viable private health service industry. There are now three million Medibank Private members, as I have said. That represents almost 30 per cent of the entire private health insurance market. Those three million people are exercising their right to choose to go with Medibank Private. Again, Howard spruiks choice like a mantra but dismisses it completely for those three million people—

See this speech in context