Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I always love following a member from the other side in debate. The member for Lyne is a former gastroenterologist to whom I am sure 80c is not much or to whom $5 is nothing—but it just shows me how out of touch members on the other side of this House are. Sure, it is nothing to a gastroenterologist. Sure, it is nothing to a member of parliament. We can afford those increases, but, if you are a pensioner who takes 17 different types of medication—and, believe me, that is not unusual—80c is a significant amount. It is all very well to say, 'It's only 80c. It's only $5. The GP tax is only $7. Changing the way pensions are indexed shouldn't matter too much.' This shows just how out of touch the members on the other side of this House are and how they do not understand how pensioners and how families fight each and every day to balance their budget and make their income stretch to cover medications, visits to the doctor, putting food on the table and sending their children to school. Members on the other side of this parliament make a hoo-ha about the schoolkids bonus, saying it is absolutely useless. They say that people squander the money. People in my electorate use it to buy shoes for their children and to buy books and all of the things that students need. To the people of my electorate, these are not small amounts of money; these are amounts of money that make it possible for families to survive.

The pharmaceutical benefits scheme co-payment will increase the price of prescription medication by $5 for general patients—up to $42.70 for a script—and from 80c to $6.90 for concessional patients. There are only five electorates in Australia that have more people over the age of 65 than the Shortland electorate. Coming from an electorate that has one of the oldest populations in this country, I understand how hard it is for pensioners. Each and every day, they come and tell me how difficult it is. This is, purely and simply, a cost-cutting measure. It is expected to raise $1.3 billion over the next four years. This is a minuscule amount in comparison to the damage that it is going to cause to the people that have to buy medicine.

In early June, the COAG Reform Council found that 8.5 per cent of people in 2012-13 delayed or did not fill their prescriptions due to costs. In disadvantaged areas, this was 12.4 per cent. I know from the people who visit me in my office that this is the case. I have had families come to me who have two or three children. When two of their children get an infection, they have to share the medication because they cannot afford to buy two lots of antibiotics or whatever the medication is. That is very bad health practice. It is not in the interests of the person that is sharing that medication, and it is not in the interests of the long-term health and wellbeing of our society.

The last time a Liberal government increased a tax on medicines was in 2005. I was a member of this House at that time, and I know how hard it was for pensioners in particular and for families when that increase came into being. The rate of prescriptions being filled fell by 11 per cent. You can look at that as being a cost-saving measure, but I look at it as being a measure that can lead to an increase in health costs. If a person does not take their blood pressure medicine, they can end up having a stroke or a heart attack. If a person does not take an antibiotic for an infection, they can end up in hospital. That is an even greater cost to the health system. Sometimes, measures that are put in to cut costs are counterproductive. This legislation is driven by an ideological campaign to get rid of universal health care, to create a two-tiered health system and to create a system of user pays. This government and those on the other side of the House have never been comfortable with Medicare and bulk-billing—because we have our GP tax that they are pushing as well—or with any form of what they would call socialised medicine, with socialised medicine being a system where the people who are on lower incomes and have less disposable income are assisted. The Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme has been one of the most widely applauded schemes throughout the world. This is undermining the operation of that scheme.

This government, under Tony Abbott's leadership, will unfairly slug sick Australians. Before the election he said there would be no cuts to health or education, and yet there is an $8 billion cut to health and education in this budget. These price increases come off the back of that $8 billion cut. This says to me and to people throughout Australia that the Abbott government doesn't care, the Abbott government breaks its promises and the Abbott government is not committed to Medicare and ensuring universal health care; it is not committed to ensuring that Medicare survives. The PBS system works very differently to the Medicare system. It does not operate on a levy. When a drug company is seeking to have a drug listed, it must go to the PBAC, which determines whether that drug is going to be cost effective and whether it is going to offer something new. Once it goes through that process, it then jumps a couple of other hurdles and goes to the minister and then cabinet. Once the cabinet meets and decides it is a medication that is going to deliver benefits to our community it is listed.

The PBS has been operating in Australia since 1948. It has delivered timely access to medicines to Australians. It makes sure that medicines meet the appropriate standards and ensures the quality of that medication. The PBAC may and does reject applications that come before it. It considers all the issues that are going to ensure that the PBS is viable and can operate long term.

The previous government introduced a number of changes to ensure the long-term viability of the PBS. This government now is keeping those in place but at the same time is attacking the affordability of the scheme. This has been criticised on a number of levels. Even the government's own Commission of Audit recommended that the price of medication be increased only for general patients by $5. It did not recommend that pensioners and those people with concession cards pay extra for their medication.

There has been a wide range of interest groups that have been highly critical of this increase. The Pharmaceutical Guild of Australia has criticised the increase in the cost of medicines for consumers and has argued that it will particularly affect the elderly and those on social security. A lot of the people who I represent in this parliament struggle each and every day to survive. A lot of these people's lives have been made a lot harder by this government's cruel budget of cuts and hurts. This is another aspect of it.

Medicines Australia acknowledged that the co-payment increase may lead to adverse health outcomes due to patients not filling their scripts. That goes without saying. It has been shown that this is what happens when prices go up. Back in 2005, 11 per cent of prescriptions were not filled. The Consumer Health Forum has expressed great concern over growing out-of-pocket expenses that Australians pay for health care and strongly opposes the increase to the co-payment safety net.

It once again goes without saying that this government is about changing our health system. This government is about creating a user pays system. This government is about making medicine less affordable. It will deliver poor health outcomes on all levels. People will not go to the doctor. People will not have their prescriptions filled. People will get sicker and they will die younger. I do not think that that is something that we in this parliament want to see happen. Michael Moore, the CEO of the Public Health Association of Australia, has stated that the measures are inequitable and will affect society's most vulnerable.

The underlying issue is that co-payments are already fairly high—$6 is a significant amount of money to pay. Yes, there is a safety net. But, before that safety net kicks in, people have to spend a significant amount of money. These increases are indexed to CPI. These increases will continue to rise. The fact that we already have statistics showing that a fairly high number of people defer filling their scripts because of the cost really should warn the government that this is not the way to go.

The government is always attacking and blaming the opposition for the fact that the sun may not come out and it may rain one day. But its manufactured budget crisis that is not supported anywhere other than on the government benches of this parliament is not a reason to hit pensioners and families in the way that it has. After all, we must remember that Australia has a AAA rating from all rating agencies. It has the 13th lowest debt level in the world. I just see this as the government trying to abrogate its responsibilities and work towards directing its budget cuts at those people who can least afford it. That is what this budget does. The biggest impact of its cuts and cost increases fall on those who can least afford them—pensioners, people who are sick and families.

This government has shown through this cruel budget that it does not believe in giving Australians a fair go. It does not believe in equity. It does not believe in a society where all people have equal opportunities. I think it should really stand condemned for this— (Time expired)

See this speech in context