Michael Johnson (Ryan, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

As the member for Ryan, I am very pleased to speak on the Tax Laws Amendment (Medicare Levy Surcharge Thresholds) Bill (No. 2) 2008 and to follow a colleague from Queensland. But I must say on hearing the presentation by the member for Flynn that I am not sure whether he is very passionate about what he was trying to advocate. If you believe in something, you have to be a bit passionate about it. You have to come in here and say, ‘This is fantastic; this is good for the country; this is good for our constituents.’ I have to say that I am not sure that the member for Flynn gave that very strong impression. I certainly intend to give a very passionate presentation representing the coalition side and, indeed, the side of the people of Ryan.

As we know, this bill is to amend the Medicare Levy Act 1986 and the New Tax System (Medicare Levy Surcharge—Fringe Benefits) Act 1999 in order to increase the Medicare levy surcharge thresholds on annual taxable income from 2008-09 and in subsequent years. The bill proposes that the thresholds be increased for individuals from $50,000 to $75,000 and for families from $100,000 to $150,000, with the family threshold going forward to be double the single threshold.

This is the second attempt by the Rudd Labor government to penalise families and Australians at large for taking up private health insurance. What the member for Flynn did not say and what I am happy to say to all those Australians who might be listening and to the people of Ryan—for anyone who might be listening who does not know, Ryan is the seat that represents the suburbs of the western part of Brisbane—is that this is basically an ideological assault on private health insurance by the Rudd Labor government. The Labor government has a problem with private health insurance—I am not so sure why—and it is coming through in this piece of legislation.

The bill proposes transitional arrangements so that individuals who obtain private health insurance before 1 January 2009 will avoid liability for the Medicare levy surcharge threshold for the period 1 July 2008 to 31 December 2008. As I said, this is the second attempt by the government to give legislative effect to the 2008-09 budget measure first proposed in a tax laws amendment bill. The earlier bill, as I know that the constituents of Ryan will be all too aware, proposed to increase the Medicare levy surcharge thresholds for individuals from $50,000 to $100,000 and for families from $100,000 to $150,000. These proposed changes to the thresholds attracted considerable public debate and the bill was referred to the Senate Standing Committee on Economics for inquiry. As we know, with the combined position of the coalition and Senator Fielding, the bill was rejected by the Senate on 24 September 2008.

I want to refer to Senator Fielding’s remarks. He is, of course, the Family First senator and he put families first in explaining why he did not support the Rudd Labor government’s ideological assault on the people that he represents. Senator Fielding said:

Most people giving evidence to the Senate committee that examined the increased Medicare levy surcharge thresholds agreed that the increases would lead to people dropping out of health insurance cover, which would lead to increases in the cost of health insurance premiums and would put pressure on public hospitals that are already buckling at the knees with huge waiting lists.

He went on to say:

Evidence to the committee estimated that there would be an increase in health insurance premiums of up to five per cent as a result of changes to the thresholds, let alone other cost increases to the health sector.

He continued:

Families buy health insurance for all sorts of reasons, and price is just one of those factors they take into account, but, in an environment where many families are doing it extremely tough under high mortgage interest rates, high petrol prices and high grocery prices, families are making a significant sacrifice to keep their health insurance. These families, struggling to pay for health insurance, are making a decision in the interests of their loved ones and their own health, but they are also taking some of the burden off the public hospital system.

I say, ‘Hear, hear!’ to Senator Fielding. That was true when he gave his speech in the Senate in September and it is true today. I hear from the government that he is considering a reversal of his position. I am not so sure that he is, but I would say to Senator Fielding that his remarks in the Senate in September are as accurate today as they were then.

I get the impression that Senator Fielding has concerns about the state of the Victorian health system, but, if he were from Queensland, he would be horrified. I notice we have in the chair a member from Victoria, Mr Deputy Speaker Andrews. The previous occupant of the chair, Mr Deputy Speaker Scott, is from Queensland and certainly, as the member for Maranoa, he would agree with me that in Queensland the health system is in a diabolical position. In a moment I will give a couple of examples of the state of complete horror that the Queensland health system is in, because they really are very critical reasons as to why the federal opposition opposes this bill.

The Rudd government predicts some half a million people—583,000 people—will drop their private health insurance, a figure which is down from 644,000. Even with the revised prediction, Access Economics estimates that by 2012 well over one million Australians will have dropped their private health insurance or not taken it out. Access Economics also predicts that, with the thresholds set at $75,000 and $150,000 by 2012, over 770,000 episodes will have been shifted to the public system, a massive extra burden on the already struggling public health system. Coming from Queensland, I want to draw the House’s attention to that. I know that all my Queensland colleagues will agree, certainly the people of Ryan will agree and, indeed, every Queenslander will endorse my statements, my concerns and my anxieties about the state of the Queensland health system.

If you are going to push people off private health insurance, it is only logical that they will go into the public health system. But, if the public health system is in such a mess, all that is going to do is to put a burden on the people that should have first priority in the public health system. I am sure Queenslanders listening will be aghast at the extent to which the Queensland Minister for Health, Mr Robertson, is having to defend the state of Queensland Health. In the interview that he gave on 4BC last Wednesday he hung up on Mike Smith, the 4BC broadcaster, when he could not defend his policies and the state of his oversight of the Queensland health system. When he was interrogated and put under the hammer, the health minister hung up on the 4BC interviewer. It is just astonishing that the health minister, unable to defend his government’s position under scrutiny and under genuine interrogation, hung up on a radio broadcaster.

This is the state of Queensland Health. It is just unbelievable. More than 750 emergency department patients waited at least eight hours for admission to Queensland’s largest public hospital in August. This is not information that the Queensland government has released of its own volition; this had to be prised from it. A Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital document leaked to the Queensland opposition reveals that at least half of the almost 1,600 emergency patients needing a bed in August had to wait eight hours or more. I am talking about not just feeling unwell but emergency need, and those people had to wait eight hours for a bed. This is almost double the target that Queensland Health has set.

I think the comment of the opposition health spokesman in Queensland is very apt. Mr Mark McArdle said:

This is just a cold and heartless way to treat very sick people who desperately need hospitalisation.

If you do not believe what the opposition spokesman for health said then take it from someone who is independent. The Chairwoman of the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine in Queensland, Dr Sylvia Andrew-Starkey, said that she had earlier raised serious concerns about the overcrowded emergency department. The Queensland government got a heads-up and yet they ignored it.

I suspect that when the polls come around in Queensland, the people of Queensland will be waiting with their baseball bats, certainly for Mr Robertson and, I suspect, for many of his colleagues. It is about time too. The Labor government has been in power now for nearly 20 uninterrupted years and this is the state in which we find the Queensland health system. Why is this relevant to this debate? It is relevant because when people go off private health insurance they are more likely to go onto the public waiting lists. For those who can take out private health insurance it is the position of the coalition to encourage them and to support them to take out private health insurance.

It stands to reason that people in Queensland are concerned about the state of Queensland Health when we get this situation here. The Sunday Mail in Brisbane very recently, a couple of months ago, revealed that the Queensland health department—would you believe this?—counts chairs as beds. It counts chairs as beds—but not just chairs. If there is anyone in Queensland listening to this and saying, ‘This can’t be right. The member for Ryan must be off his tree here,’ let me continue. It is not just chairs but trolleys. Mr Deputy Speaker Andrews, I know you come from Victoria and perhaps you are concerned about the state of the health system in Victoria, but can I assure you that in Queensland it is much worse. For anybody in the press gallery who has not heard this, talk to your Queensland colleagues in the gallery, because they will certainly make it very clear what the situation is.

Chairs, trolleys, cots, stretchers and—get this one, anybody listening—lounge suites are counted as beds in the Queensland health system. This is absolutely absurd. The Queensland health data dictionary defines an ‘available bed’ as ‘a bed which is immediately available to be used by an admitted patient if required’, and an ‘available bed alternative’ includes ‘an item of furniture’. This is just unbelievable. So a bed equals an item of furniture, and ‘item of furniture’ expands to include, for example, trolleys and cots. And there are ‘non-recognised beds’—in other words, chairs, trolleys, cots, stretchers and lounge suites.

Any Australian that is listening to this will be shaking their head in absolute disgust. Goodness! If you are a Queenslander listening to this, ring up your state member, ring up the Premier’s office, ring up the health minister’s office and just give it to them, because your health depends on efficient service. Your family’s health depends on the capacity of the hospitals and the emergency services to take care of you. When you go to hospital and you need a bed, you do not want to be sitting on a lounge suite. When you go to hospital in Queensland, you do not want to be forced to sit on a chair. When you go to hospital in Queensland, you do not want to be told, ‘Yes, there’s a bed available,’ and find when you look around for a bed that you are then directed to a cot. For goodness sake!

I say to the people of Queensland: get on the telephone and call the Premier’s office. Call the office of the Minister for Health in Queensland, Mr Robertson. Call your local state MP. Of course, if you live in Indooroopilly, call Mr Ronan Lee, your Greens member, who abandoned the Labor Party. Call Mr Ronan Lee. He says that he left the Labor Party in Queensland because he was disgusted at Premier Bligh’s views on the environment. I suspect he could add his disgust at the way that the Queensland Premier and her predecessor governed Queensland when it comes to health matters. Goodness gracious me. I have to say this again, because it is just unbelievable: beds in Queensland hospitals include chairs, trolleys, cots, stretchers and lounge suites.

Let me go on here. This is the interesting bit. The Queensland health minister defended this. The Queensland health minister disagreed that it was misleading the public to identify those things as beds. Where is he? Is he for them being counted as beds or is he against them being counted as beds? The bottom line is that this is from the Queensland health data dictionary, produced by the Queensland health department under the administration of a Labor Premier. And I repeat: Labor have been in power in Queensland for nearly 20 uninterrupted years, from Goss to Beattie and now to Bligh. Interestingly, I had the opportunity of flying down to Canberra today with the former Queensland Premier Wayne Goss, and I suspect that he as well would be absolutely aghast at this. So, Mr Goss, I know you are in the building somewhere. If you are in front of a TV screen and you are listening to this, I am sure you are shaking your head as well.

But why is this relevant? Why is it relevant to the people of Queensland and why is it relevant to the people of Ryan, in the western suburbs, who I represent? Well, it is very relevant to this bill, because you are going to be struggling to get a bed—a real bed, one that you can actually lie down on, one that you can be treated in comfort on. We do not want a six-foot tall patient to be forced to lie in a cot or an elderly lady who needs a bed to be told, ‘Go and sit on that lounge suite over there.’ This is just absurd. Why is this relevant to this bill? Again, it is relevant because, if you take up private health insurance, you are doing a great service to many Australians who need priority in accessing the public health system.

But, if the support of the government is not there, what is going to happen? More likely than not, you are going to leave private health insurance. That is why all members of the coalition can be proud of what the Howard government did in supporting private health insurance, with some 10 million Australians having private health insurance. I encourage them as much as possible to stay in private health insurance, because in a sense this is also a form of service to the country. I note that the Minister for Veterans’ Affairs is in the House. I am sure that in doing the job he does he acknowledges Australians who serve our country, but let me say, Minister, that you must acknowledge all those who take out private health insurance. They are doing a great service for contemporary Australia.

Let us get to a constituent of Ryan and her concern. This is a real person with real concerns. I wish I had more time, but, alas, with only a few minutes to go I am going to have to wrap it up soon—and I am just starting to get into it! I am certainly getting into it in a passionate way, unlike my Queensland colleague there, the member for Flynn, from the Labor Party. I know that the member for Flynn is new to the parliament and I wish him well in the two years that he has left as the member for Flynn, because we are certainly coming after him. We are coming after you, Member for Flynn! I am sure that you are going to enjoy your time in the parliament in those two years. You are a very passionate guy on the football field, but try and bring that passion into the parliament. Come on! Defend your policies. Get up with vigour and defend them.

A lady called Elizabeth from the western suburbs of Brisbane, from the Ryan electorate, emailed me in May and said:

Dear Mr Johnson,

I am a disability pensioner in your electorate of Ryan. I am seriously concerned that the raising of the Medicare Threshold will increase my private health insurance considerably.

I am already struggling to pay my rent and MBF by cutting down on food, and I would like to know what you are going to do about this situation. I feel that I have a right to choose the doctor/hospital of my choice!

To Elizabeth from the Ryan electorate: thank you very much for your email to me in May after the budget. Of course, as your federal member, I am going in to bat for you.

When I got the opportunity to make contact with Elizabeth, she informed me that she had also contacted the government because she knew that I was in opposition. She was very upset about that too, I might add. The Prime Minister’s office just told her that the Medicare surcharge increase would not affect private health insurance costs. Of course, we all believe in fairies at the bottom of the garden as well! This is just absurd. The Queensland health system is in chaos and the Prime Minister is saying to Elizabeth from the Ryan electorate that the Medicare surcharge increase will not be affected by the private health insurance policy of the government. Really, we were not born yesterday.

I want to say to the people of the western suburbs, the people of Ryan, thank you for all your contact with me. Thank you for your support of the opposition’s position. Certainly the Turnbull opposition is going to take the fight to Labor on their rampant vandalism of private health insurance in this country. Half the population in this country are being hit by Labor and the other half are going to be suffering when pressure is imposed on them when premiums go up because private health funds will need to accommodate that extra loss that will be a consequence of the government’s policy. To the people of Ryan, where there is some 62 per cent uptake of private health insurance: I will continue to bat for you. (Time expired)

See this speech in context