Bob Baldwin (Paterson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Tourism) Share this | Hansard source

As I rise to speak on these bills tonight, it is abundantly clear to me and members in this House on our side that this government is paying for its financial waste and mismanagement with the health of the Australian taxpayer. Recently I received an email from one of my constituents—Richard Grigg of Tenambit—who writes: 'The government has placed two pieces of legislation about private health insurance on the parliamentary program for debate on Monday and subsequently. Both of these pieces of legislation will make it progressively more and more expensive for me to remain insured. And, of course, if people like me drop out of or downgrade their insurance, there will be increasing pressure on the public system.' I am pleased to place on the Hansard record Mr Grigg's views. And that is not an isolated case of being contacted in my office with people expressing concerns about what will increase the cost of private health in this country.

I rise to speak on these important bills in the context of what they mean for electorates with the sorts of demographics like those of my electorate of Paterson and my parliamentary neighbour's adjoining seat of Lyne to the north. The previous coalition government's private health insurance reforms, in the form of rebates, the Medicare levy surcharge and Lifetime Health Cover, saw the number of people with private health insurance increase 75 per cent from 6.1 million to over 10.7 million people.

I have worked hard as the local member to promote, protect and defend this system because I know what the impact would be on an electorate like mine without it. The Prime Minister and other Labor members have, over many years, repeatedly ruled out any changes to the private health insurance rebates. Hand on heart, standing firm, they ruled out any changes.

In fact, if I go back to 23 September 2004, in a letter to the editor in TheCourier-Mail the current Prime Minister, as then shadow minister for health, made it abundantly clear she would maintain the rebate, and I repeat for the Hansard record: 'Labor is committed to the maintenance of this rebate and I have given an ironclad guarantee of that on a number of occasions.' Well, that 'ironclad guarantee' has about the same amount of justification, balance and truth as: 'There will be no carbon tax under the government I lead.' This Prime Minister will say and do anything to get into power and hold power, even if it is at the expense of the health of the people of Australia.

Labor is totally wrong to imply that private health insurance is for the rich; 5.6 million people with private health insurance have an annual household income of less than $50,000 and 3.4 million have an annual household income of less than $35,000. In my seat of Paterson, the average weekly income for families without children is $1,841. The average weekly income in New South Wales and Australia is $2,120 and $2,081 respectively. For families with children, where the family budget has to stretch to cover private health insurance along with all the other significant costs of raising children, the average weekly income is $2,133 and the New South Wales and Australian averages are $2,370 and $2,310 respectively. Increasing the cost of private health insurance, along with the increased cost of living through things such as the introduction of a carbon tax, will only see people reduce their private health insurance.

The Private Health Insurance Amendment (Lifetime Health Cover Loading and Other Measures) Bill 2012 and the Private Health Insurance Legislation Amendment (Base Premium) Bill 2013 will have significant and important consequences for the New South Wales mid-to-north coast with its large retiree populations. I spoke on the Private Health Insurance Amendment (Lifetime Health Cover Loading and Other Measures) Bill 2012 in February this year, so today I will address the companion base premium bill.

The ability of retirees to access health care in regional and rural areas is generally paid for with private health cover and it is vitally important—just as it is in the electorate of Lyne to the north and other electorates with young families and high proportions of retirees. You see, in an electorate like mine, there are not a lot of hospitals. So people—particularly aged people who need fairly urgent services—will travel to the private hospitals to get their needs addressed, whether it is for a hip replacement or a shoulder replacement or a range of other operations. And they rely on their private health insurance to be able to get access to these services quickly.

For the record, there are 27,058 people in my electorate of Paterson aged 65 and over. Many of these people are self-funded retirees trying to make their savings last and living off interest but writing down capital. They are the people struggling under the added costs, as I said, of such things as the carbon tax as winter sets in, trying not to use the heating. The government should speak to the Council on the Ageing if it does not think this is a real problem out there in the community. These are the people who are trying to do the right thing by taking on private health insurance so they do not become a burden on the public system.

That is the point: without a private health system, adequately supported, there will be a massively increased burden on the public health system. People in electorates like mine, with its high aged demographic and lots of young families who require access—and, quite often, urgent or instant access—to hospitals do not need to be stuck on the waiting list.

I would now like to address some related health issues in relation to this bill. In Australia, according to the most recent census, 80.2 per cent of services are bulk-billed—that is 95,576,188 services per annum. In my electorate of Paterson, 566,357 treatments are bulk-billed out of 722,685 services. Despite the large retiree population in places like Port Stephens, Nelson Bay, Anna Bay, Forster, Tuncurry and right up the coast, we come in at 78 per cent—just under the national average. For the benefit of the Labor candidate for Paterson I am going to send the Hansard transcript of my remarks today, along with the speech I delivered in this place in February this year, to him and his campaign team. You see, on 9 April 2013, to quote the Maitland Mercuryof that day:

Mr Marshall—

my opponent—

who is spruiking the Country Labor brand—said a Labor focus in Paterson would provide residents with better health care, education and transport initiatives.

He said there was a severe shortage of GPs in the Port Stephens area which needed to be rectified as more people moved to the area, and he wanted a super health clinic built in Nelson Bay.

I will repeat that—he wanted a super health clinic built in Nelson Bay:

“When I moved here it took me 11 times to find a GP because all of their books were full—people need to be able to see a doctor,” he said.

Let us be clear: he said that the reason he was running for Paterson was that he had had to wait weeks to see a GP. In fact, my opponent called for a GP Super Clinic to be provided at Nelson Bay. I was pleased to inform my opponent that the GP Super Clinic at Nelson Bay had actually been in operation since 16 May 2010. People in this House would remember the then minister, Nicola Roxon, being at the opening and actually coming here on the floor of the chamber and presenting me with a photo of me attending that opening with her. That says a lot for their candidate, who does not even understand Labor policy or its achievements in my electorate. I indicated to him that perhaps he could visit Nelson Bay, considering that he wants to represent the people there. He would not miss it, because this clinic is in one of the main streets. I even took a photo and sent him a photo of the clinic in case he lost his way.

Just for the record, the Nelson Bay clinic bulk-bills seven days a week, whether or not you are a concession card holder. There are four doctors available on most days. It promotes preventative health, including pap smears and melanoma tests, along with allied health services such as physiotherapy, podiatry, speech pathology and dietetics.

An estimated 50,000 bulk-billed patients presented at Nelson Bay clinic in the last 12 months. This includes all Port Stephens residents, all Indigenous and Torres Strait Islanders, concession card holders and children 15 years and under.

I would encourage my opponent to actually visit the area to gain an understanding of the health needs of the people in the electorate of Paterson, as diverse as it is. The issues are different depending on whether you are in Dungog, Forster, Tuncurry, Bulahdelah, Seaham or Karuah, to name but a few. The one thing they have in common, like all areas of Australia, is that their population is rapidly ageing. My electorate of Paterson and other areas where Australians hope to one day retire will bear the weight of the impact far more than others. In fact, a table from New South Wales Health statistics, applying to the Dungog LGA alone, shows that 23,628 hospitalisations were recorded in 2007 when Labor took office. In the period 2008-10, 33,724 hospitalisations were recorded.

Labor's private health insurance cuts are already putting more pressure on public hospitals, which are already struggling under the $1.6 billion cut to hospital funding in Labor's MYEFO. This includes retrospective cuts to public hospital funding that has already been spent and allocated in 2011-12 and 2012-13. It has caused the closure of public hospital beds and operating theatres and delays to elective surgery. The government has since announced a reversal of its position, but only for Victoria. I would like to hear my opponent's views on private health insurance for people both in the Dungog shire and all over my electorate if, God forbid, his party is re-elected.

This government's appalling disregard for the health needs of the people of Paterson is reflective of the approach taken by this Labor government in general. Bulahdelah lost its GP quite some time ago when Dr Habashi had to retire. The call has gone out from the community and me to get a new doctor. One thing that would make Bulahdelah more attractive to a new doctor would be for it to be designated an area of need. But this government has failed to step up to the plate and sign for an area of need.

I understand that currently there is a doctor who might be considering taking it on as a VMO. I am equally as harsh on the New South Wales government and Hunter New England Area Health Service for not facilitating that, because what is most important here is the health concerns of my constituents; without a doctor in Bulahdelah, it places at great risk the operations of the hospital but, more particularly, the work being done at the Great Lakes Nursing Home. So I say to all levels of government, state and federal: get off your backsides and do what you can to facilitate doctors coming into our town. Anything else is just not acceptable, and I am sure that members in control and in positions would not tolerate or accept this situation in their own electorates.

I have real concerns, as I said right at the very beginning, that this government is paying for its financial waste and mismanagement with people's health. We have already seen that evident in the way that this government abolished the Medicare Chronic Disease Dental Scheme program in December 2012. Yet, in 2014, the funding comes in for its replacement.

This is not about good health care. The government talk about good health care but do not actually understand good health care. If you take a model away and you hold onto the funding before you introduce another model, then the only people who suffer are those with chronic diseases and illnesses. They are suffering and paying for it because of the government's economic mismanagement. They are taking the money off those most in need and putting it in their own pockets to pay for their waste and mismanagement, a hallmark signature of the government.

I say to this government: wake up to yourself. You should not be messing with people's health. With this bill, along with all the other bills in relation to health that this government has put forward, you attack private health insurance and you will put a burden on the rest of the system. That burden on the rest of the system will affect health services provision to each and every Australian, particularly those most disadvantaged—the exact same people who Labor claim they champion each and every day. Introducing bills such as these is a blinded approach and all you are going to do is further affect those who are severely disadvantaged in our area.

See this speech in context