Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is addressed to the Treasurer. Will the Treasurer confirm Treasury estimates that nearly half a million Australian adults will leave private health insurance as a result of the government’s proposed changes to the Medicare levy surcharge? Will the Treasurer also confirm that there is no compensation to the states in the budget for the massive additional pressure this will place on the public hospital system?

Wayne Swan (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, I cannot confirm any of the numbers used by the member who asked the question, but I can certainly confirm that, by the actions of the opposition in the Senate, you are going to hit two income earners in a household on average earnings something like $1,200 in total by denying them this tax relief, Mr Speaker, and you are going to do that precisely at the time that they have finally got a bit of relief in terms of the Reserve Bank decision to cut interest rates. They are getting the money in one pocket and you are taking it out of the other, Mr Speaker—

Wilson Tuckey (O'Connor, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I’ve got to protect you. He’s accusing you of all sorts of things.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for O’Connor will resume his seat.

Wayne Swan (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

When it comes to discussions with the states and these matters are discussed—

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Treasurer, I was going to say to the member for O’Connor that I understood what his point of order was. The Treasurer should address his remarks through the chair.

Wayne Swan (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

These matters are discussed with the states via the COAG process, but we do not for a minute accept some of the estimates that are floating around about the impact on the public hospital system that are suggested by the member who asked the question.

But I have got a suggestion for those opposite: the former Prime Minister Mr Howard will be in the House tonight and I know they will be lining up to suck up to the former Prime Minister—

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The Treasurer will resume his seat.

Stuart Robert (Fadden, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You’re a grubby little man, Swan!

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Fadden.

Stuart Robert (Fadden, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Robert interjecting

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Fadden is warned! The Treasurer will be heard in silence.

Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Families, Community Services, Indigenous Affairs and the Voluntary Sector) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. If under the circumstances of the parliament it is unparliamentary to talk about the ‘dud Rudd government’, surely it is unparliamentary to talk about sucking up to people in this chamber.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Warringah will resume his seat. The Treasurer has the call.

Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Families, Community Services, Indigenous Affairs and the Voluntary Sector) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I know most members on this side have thick skins, but I do not and I find it offensive and I would like it withdrawn.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Treasurer, on behalf of the member for Warringah, will withdraw on behalf of the member for Warringah.

Wayne Swan (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw. Perhaps tonight when they are attending this function—

Government Member:

Kowtowing!

Wayne Swan (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

bowing—

Government Member:

Scraping!

Wayne Swan (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

scraping—

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The Treasurer will get to responding to the question.

Wayne Swan (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Perhaps they would like to ask the former Prime Minister why he left the Medicare surcharge levy at such a low level for so long, because it was never designed to apply to income earners on average incomes. For 12 long years the former Prime Minister and the former Treasurer punished all those average income earners with the surcharge. Now that relief is in sight, what are they going to do? They are going to take it away. They have not got a clue what life is like for people who are living out there under price pressures—not a clue, because if they did they would not be taking this action in the Senate. We stand for providing relief to those on average incomes. We have delivered the tax cuts. There is now some interest rate relief and there was further relief on the way, and they are going to block it. They will pay a very high price for that.

Julie Collins (Franklin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Health and Ageing. Will the minister explain the benefits of the government’s decision to raise the Medicare levy surcharge threshold?

Nicola Roxon (Gellibrand, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Health and Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is important to be able to answer this question when those opposite are trying to pretend that after 11 years they suddenly care about public hospitals, after pulling a billion dollars out of public hospitals. We have started reinvesting. We have started reinvesting in hospitals, but still the opposition will not support tax relief for hundreds of thousands of Australians. When the Medicare surcharge levy was first introduced, about 165,000 people paid this tax. The member for Higgins has not bothered to be here for the debate today in question time. It may be that he is embarrassed about some of these figures. At the time, the then Treasurer said that he thought that this was a levy that the government hoped no-one was going to have to pay. In fact, when we came to office 465,000 people were paying this tax that the previous government pretended no-one was going to have to pay. We do not make any apologies for providing relief for nearly half a million Australians.

When those opposite pretend that there is some science in the figures that were set by the previous government, I thought it might be worth informing the House how these figures were brought about. The Liberals have been saying that there was some science in these figures. They want to pretend that the impact is going to be disastrous in all sorts of areas, so you would have thought from this argument that there was some logic to the $50,000 and $100,000 thresholds. I can inform the House, thanks to some fine investigative journalism by Andrew Tillett and Andrew Probyn, of the logic behind the introduction of the Medicare surcharge levy. In an interview for the West Australian recently, the former health minister Dr Michael Wooldridge explained exactly how these thresholds, which we are hoping to change and are being blocked by the Liberals opposite, were determined. Dr Wooldridge said:

I think the numbers in the end were negotiated with Senator Harradine - it was over a bottle of Jameson’s whiskey late at night ...

That is what I call evidence based policy—obviously no reason to change.

But there was more. Dr Wooldridge went on to reveal that the Liberals had not given a moment’s thought about the consequences of this levy and those thresholds in 10 years time. Dr Wooldridge said:

We were happy to successfully get through 12 months, let alone worry about a problem in 10 years time or more.

Fancy that—a Liberal thinking about short-term politics! We are planning and investing for the future, and those opposite are looking at short-term politics. We do not make any apologies for wanting to provide tax relief for half a million Australians, and it is about time that the Liberals got out of the way and let us do it.

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is again to the Treasurer. I refer the Treasurer to evidence presented to a Senate inquiry by the Western Australian state Labor government that the Medicare levy surcharge would add so much pressure to public hospitals that an extra $53 million a year would be needed to address the demand there. Where in the Treasurer’s budget papers is an extra $500 million a year allocated to the states to compensate them for the changes to the Medicare levy surcharge?

Wayne Swan (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for his question. As I said before, these matters are all negotiated and discussed at COAG. The government does not for one minute accept the propositions that are put forward by the member opposite. But for the record we have already put an additional $1 billion into state public hospitals, not a bad record compared to your withdrawal of funds—the withdrawal of funds by those opposite over a long period of time.

Health is a priority and public hospitals are a priority for those of us on this side of the House. Of course they have never been a priority for those on that side of the House because they are simply stuck in the past and stuck with all of the old approaches, including their commitment to this unfair and unjust Medicare levy threshold surcharge. It is unfair and unjust, and it just shows how out of touch those opposite are if they are going to block this measure in the Senate which would deliver relief to people on average incomes who are doing it tough and need it. Five hundred dollars or $1,000 might not be much to the member for Wentworth, might not be much for the member for North Sydney, but we understand the importance of it, and if there is one thing that the national accounts demonstrate today it is that the people of Australia understand the importance of it. The fact that those opposite did not understand the importance of it is shown by the 10 interest rate rises in a row that hit those working families that you are punishing twice by trying to keep the surcharge.