Luke Hartsuyker (Cowper, National Party, Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Hansard source

That is, the Prime Minister’s reality rather than the Prime Minister’s rhetoric. I know other members have mentioned the concessions that will be lost when self-funded retirees and veterans have their cards withdrawn, but they bear repeating. Under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, holders of a seniors health card pay $5 for a script. When the card is withdrawn, they will pay $31.30—an extra $26.30 per script. For someone who presents only one script a fortnight, that is an extra $681 a year. May I remind the government that many elderly people rely on several medications, not just one, so the extra cost may be multiplied by two, three or four items. Of course, there is the PBS safety net. A cardholder who pays more than $290 for scripts will get them free thereafter. But without a card the safety net threshold is $1,141, a potential loss of $851. And thereafter they still have to pay $5 a script when the safety net applies.

Cardholders are entitled to $500 a year to help pay for essential services. Without a card, they are not. Cardholders are currently entitled to the seniors bonus payment of $500 in this financial year. Without a card, they will not be entitled to any future bonuses. Cardholders qualify for a telephone allowance of $88 a year. Without a card, they do not. There are other possible concessions covering medical bulk-billing, transport, education, recreation and entertainment that will be lost if the person does not have a card.

All these cuts are mean and, I would say, unnecessary. They are hitting particularly hard those who are most vulnerable, those who have provided for their own retirement and some veterans. For most elderly people, the prospect of falling ill and the difficulty of finding the money to pay for medicines is a constant worry. This measure will increase that concern for a wide cohort of Australians. There is no doubt that, in response to this change, some people will fail to take the medication that their doctor prescribes, purely because they will no longer be able to afford it. The effect of that on the community is increased long-term cost to our health system. It is quite clear that noncompliance with medical directions from a GP is a major source of poor health outcomes, and increasing the cost of medicines to a group who cannot afford to pay can only make that situation worse than it currently is.

We have a situation where the government is removing a vital benefit. Access to quality health services is something that we see as universal, and assisting our senior Australians to provide for their own health outcomes is something that we should be encouraging. Rather than this benefit being taken away, it must be retained. I would like to quote from a letter than I received from my local branch of self-funded retirees. It is from Mr Ross Gooley, the President of the Coffs Harbour branch of the Association of Independent Retirees. He said:

I ask you to consider very carefully the further damage that will be caused when inevitably the proposed measures result in the loss of valuable and much-needed benefits to non-wealthy self-funded retirees.

That is precisely the point. We are not stripping benefits away from this nebulous class of millionaire pensioners. We are stripping away benefits from non-wealthy self-funded retirees—retirees who saved for their retirement and who, by being prudent and frugal, are trying to look after themselves in their later years. Rather than rewarding that prudence, rather than rewarding that savings effort, we are basically kicking sand in their faces. This is a measure that should be condemned. It is a measure that I cannot support and I know that it is a measure that will be raising great outrage within my electorate.

See this speech in context