Nola Marino (Forrest, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Certainly, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker. Before the 2007 election, the Prime Minister, Mr Rudd, and the Minister for Health and Ageing repeatedly promised that they would not change the private health insurance rebate which had been introduced under the Howard government. Yet here we are and we have a completely contradictory piece of legislation introduced by the Labor government. The government clearly misled the Australian people prior to the 2007 election. These bills, which were rejected by the Senate in September 2009, are flawed and if passed will affect all Australians, both directly and indirectly. I am extremely concerned for people in my electorate. The coalition is strongly opposed to this legislation, which is likely to result in all of those with private health insurance facing even higher premium increases in the future. Furthermore, those without insurance will be affected, with more people reliant on the public health system. The government itself has admitted that this will be the case.

The Labor government initially claimed that 25,000 people were likely to drop private health insurance as a result of this legislation, with estimates that potentially 40,000 Australians would downgrade their cover. That, in turn, puts pressure on the system. However, Senator Ludwig later admitted that 1.7 million people with health insurance will be impacted by the changes proposed in this legislation. The health insurance sector has also stated that the government has seriously underestimated how many people will drop their health insurance and has anticipated the figure would be almost 250,000, a significant difference from the Labor government’s estimate of 25,000 people. The health insurance sector also projects that another 730,000 people are likely to downgrade their hospital cover and 775,000 people are likely to drop ancillary cover. All of these have implications for the public health system. The most important issue in the lives of the majority of people, as we know, is their health. My constituents frequently remind me of this. They frequently remind me of their concern about the Prime Minister’s failed election promise in relation to the health system.

What is also of concern is that this legislation comes when there has been an increase of more than 14 per cent in the Australian population over the past decade. Every Australian knows that the cost of health care is growing, as are the waiting lists for public hospitals. The coalition believes that it is the right of all Australians to have choices, to take charge of their own healthcare needs and to plan for their future needs. In my electorate of Forrest, 66 per cent of voters—that is 56,650 people—have private health insurance. This means that, if passed, this legislation will force 66 per cent of people in my electorate to pay more for the Labor government’s reckless spending and bad financial management. I wonder why the Labor government is attacking the health system. Why attack those with private health insurance cover in spite of inheriting the best economy of any government in the history of federal politics? The Labor government has wasted billions of dollars through its cash splashes and is forcing those with private health cover to help pay for their debt, their deficit and their bad decisions by saving $1.9 billion through this attack on people with private health cover.

We have seen reckless spending such as the $1.7 billion of waste in the BER program, which went from a $14 billion spend to a $16 billion spend of taxpayers’ funds, including $7.3 million for plaques and display signs. We have seen the Labor government spending over $1 billion on consultancy fees when this measure regarding private health will save $1.9 billion. This is at the same time that the government is attacking people with private health insurance, who are taking pressure off the budget and the public health system by having private health insurance. It is contradictory. We continually see examples of the Labor government failing the health portfolio. In December last year, the WA Liberal Minister for Health, Kim Hames, criticised the federal Labor government’s rollout of GP superclinics in WA. In a West Australian newspaper article, Minister Hames stated that he is concerned about delays and the lack of consultation with doctors. Minister Hames said: ‘We are not really satisfied with the progress, and there have been difficulties getting the agreements in place and the contracts out. There has been quite a lot of dissatisfaction with local general practitioner groups.’ They don’t seem to be such super clinics, at least in WA.

The government, through other defective health legislation, also tried to target thousands of Australians by proposing that they pay hundreds of dollars more for what is life-changing cataract surgery. A majority of these people are seniors, the very people who can often least afford to pay more and those who need the surgery most. They are attacking the most vulnerable. I had countless seniors in despair over what they saw as a heartless decision. When I met them in the shopping centres and in their homes, they were very vocal on this issue. They saw this as an appalling attack on elderly and often frail people in my electorate and around Australia. I presented a petition from the south-west of Western Australia. There were hundreds of signatures gathered in just a few days. It was not until sustained pressure from the coalition and people just like those in my electorate that the Labor government was forced to back down on this plan to dramatically cut the Medicare rebates for cataract surgery. It should not have come to this. The government should not even have considered using cataract rebates to help fund their program blowouts and to help pay off their debt and deficit.

There was also the IVF debacle, where Minister Roxon was forced to backflip on the Labor government’s proposed halving of the Medicare rebate for IVF treatment. The latest health legislation to raise concerns is also national e-health—more importantly, the absolute guarantee that will be required for the security of patients’ information. I note that the coalition’s shadow parliamentary secretary for health, who at the time was Matthias Cormann, captured the government’s inaction on health in an article in the Australian on 27 August last year, when he said:

On health Kevin Rudd promised the world and has delivered next to nothing. All we’ve had is a review into public hospitals, followed by a review into the review. After all their reckless spending there is now nothing left in the locker for health.

In conclusion, this legislation will put further pressure on public hospitals. We have heard members speak about this issue. It is the complete opposite of what the Labor government promised at the last election, increasing the cost of private health insurance for millions of Australians and resulting in fewer people with private health cover. I remain opposed to this legislation.

(Quorum formed)

See this speech in context