Steve Georganas (Hindmarsh, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

As I said, it was a scheme that was poorly designed and that led to waste and dissatisfaction. I have seen many constituents who accessed the service only to find out that the money was gone within a couple of visits, they had not got what they wanted and they had not got the services they were paying for. I have seen many, many people. In fact, a couple of dentists have come to me to tell me that this is happening quite widely. Last year, we saw Medicare recover money—I cannot remember how much, but it was in the millions—where dental treatment had not been done properly but the money had been paid. That is taxpayers' money. I have heard many stories of treatments that have been of low value and poorly performed or that have remained inaccessible to those who need them the most. That is what our scheme is about: providing the services to those that need them the most. The system needs to improve, but improvement is anathema to those opposite. They would prefer a culture of fear, to scare people, to say we are taking something away when in fact we are actually giving back bigger and better dental services. Those opposite have been crying out with false alarm this morning, saying that Labor plans to deprive people of dental services. That is not correct. As I said, the only people who have deprived the Australian public dental care are those opposite—they cut the Commonwealth dental scheme in 1996. That was their very first act, and the fear I have is that an Abbott led government would do the same thing again. They would repeat what they did in 1996; it would be history repeating.

This is one example of a continual string of ironies where the coalition says positive change is negative change; where an increase in services means a decrease in availability—we are increasing services; that is the reality. The Abbott coalition strive to convince the people to fear the very changes that will benefit them most. They are trying to put the fear into people that these changes are going to benefit the Australian public, particularly low income earners, pensioners and children. I am proud to speak in favour of this bill. We have a record of campaigning for and promising that we will deliver a dental scheme, and that is what this is.

As a result of this package, which was announced by the Minister for Health in late August, 3.4 million Australian children will be eligible for funded dental care through the expansion of the government's current child focused dental scheme. That means that we are putting preventative measures in place. When these children grow up to become teenagers and adults, they will have much healthier teeth and that means they will not have to access these services, costing us less in the long run.

Currently, under the bill children aged 12 to 18 will be able to access dental care. Almost 3½ million children aged two and over will be able to access the care they need. That will be a good start in dental hygiene, and will set the path for fewer problems in the future, costing governments less money. That is why this is a good bill—it also covers the preventative side of things. Funding will be provided to the states for around 1.4 million additional dental services for adults on low incomes such as age pensioners, concession card holders and people with disabilities and special needs.

When the Howard government cut the Commonwealth dental scheme in 1996, the waiting list went up to 750,000 people, with an average waiting time of 2.4 years. We are delivering 1.4 million services, which will wipe out the bulk of the waiting list. If those opposite were to form government at the next election—shock, horror!—one of the first things they would do is revisit what they did in 1996. We know that deep down in their hearts they do not believe in the dental scheme. We asked those questions and they were honest enough to tell us when they were in government that these services had nothing to do with a federal government. Further, outer metropolitan, rural and remote areas will receive additional capital and workforce to provide the services where they are needed.

This package relies on federal funding complementing state funding. Many things have to be negotiated between the Commonwealth and the states, and I envisage, for example, New South Wales and Queensland may try to sabotage the process, as we have seen with other negotiations that have taken place, and the poor people of Queensland and New South Wales will be the worse off for that. (Time expired)

See this speech in context