Peter Dutton (Dickson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Ageing) Share this | Hansard source

This has been a long and drawn-out process, unnecessarily so. It shows the fact that there is no direction on health policy under the Rudd government. This is a government that promised so much at the last election, but at their every move they have turned health debate in this country into an absolute farce. There has been backflip after backflip by this minister. Promises have been broken—key election promises—in relation to hospitals and private health in particular.

We have been calling on the government for a period of time—in fact, since the budget—to make a series of changes. We took the minister at face value when she mentioned some figures in relation to a number of measures, but it became quickly apparent after speaking to stakeholders that those figures were incorrect and misleading. It was inappropriate for the minister to put a position which the industry clearly had not agreed to. There was, from the industry and from patient groups, a complete denial that the case the minister was putting forward was legitimate. We forced the government into negotiating with a number of parties. This ultimately resulted in outcomes and amendments that this government has been forced to backflip on and ultimately agree with.

It was a shameful process. This government introduced changes which had had no consultation. This was a government which said at one stage that they were open and transparent, that this was a new age of government and that they were going to consult more widely. Well, in relation to this bill, that clearly has not happened. Of course, when you do not consult properly as a government—as the Rudd government refuses to and as this health minister refuses to—the obvious consequences come. In relation to IVF, there were some significant changes made by this government. It was a magic pudding exercise in the end, but, nonetheless, we accept the government’s advice that the patients can be better off and the doctors can be better off—the government can be no worse off.

Language like that is unbecoming to a member of the executive in this chamber, surely, and I would ask the minister to withdraw it.

See this speech in context