Brendan Nelson (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. What does the Prime Minister have to say to the several hundred thousand older Australians on desperately low incomes, struggling to keep their private health insurance, who will face turbo-charged private health insurance premium increases as a result of almost one million Australians leaving private health insurance with the Medicare surcharge changes?

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The first responsibility of government is to make sure we have a decent public hospital system. And can I say to those opposite: if ever I saw a demolition derby being conducted on the public hospital system of Australia, it is the 12-year history of the Howard government—12 years of denuding a public hospital system of appropriate funding to manage for its growth. There was at least $1 billion sucked out of the contribution by the Commonwealth to the states for the management of the nation’s public hospital system. What this government has done in the nine months since being elected is reinvest $1 billion, $500 million of which has already been delivered, into extra funding for our hospitals, and we are proud of that fact.

The second thing that we have done is commit $600 million to a fund to help slash elective surgery waiting lists, to which we have already provided an upfront allocation of $150 million. That is designed to bring about 14,000 extra procedures, which have already been delivered.

In terms of senior Australians, we have a plan to introduce the Commonwealth Dental Health system—a scheme which it took the Howard government less than 12 months to abolish when they were in government. So let us get real about this. In the 12-year history of the Howard government, they pulled $1 billion out of public hospitals and, in the nine-month history of this government, we put $1 billion back in. When first elected, it took the Howard government less than 12 months to abolish the Commonwealth Dental Health scheme and, in nine months, we have reintroduced the Commonwealth Dental Health scheme.

Chris Pearce (Aston, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The Prime Minister was asked what he had to say to older Australians who will face premium increases in private health. Prime Minister, could you please answer the question.

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

The Prime Minister is responding to the question.

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would say to the honourable gentleman who has just intervened that seniors and pensioners use the public hospital system and therefore what they want is a public hospital system which they can get proper access to. When we were recently in the electorate of the honourable member for Kingston, when we had our community cabinet down there, some senior Australians who are finding it very difficult to get elective surgery came to visit me. Our response to that, rather than to perpetuate 12 years of blame game, is to come up to the mark and ask: what can we do to partner with state governments on that? We have provided, for persons such as those in Kingston, a $600 million fund to help slash elective surgery waiting lists—$150 million already to deliver 14,000 extra procedures. That is practical action, concrete action to help Australians, including senior Australians, to deal with their healthcare charges.

As to the other part of the question which the honourable member raised, can I go to the future of the Medicare levy surcharge. In 1997 the $50,000 threshold captured the top eight per cent of single-income earners—and there they left it. By 2010 this $50,000 threshold will capture the top 45 per cent of single-income earners. This is basically a huge grab for money on their part. That is what it is about and therefore what we are saying is that we need to look after those middle-income earners of Australia.

Brendan Nelson (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That is money for health care!

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would suggest that, if the Leader of the Opposition is trying to pump up his leadership stakes with this sort of performance on this sort of issue in question time, perhaps he should reserve that for this evening when all those opposite will gather at a function to honour Mr Howard. I know the member for Wentworth will be there with bells on. The member for Wentworth will be doing the tables all evening, I imagine. Someone with a tally sheet will be walking behind him. The only regrettable thing is that the member for Higgins will not be there.

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

Mr Speaker, on a point of order: if the Prime Minister cannot answer a question that goes to the heart of whether poorer people can afford—

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

Order! The member for North Sydney will resume his seat. He knows that an invitation for a point of order is not an invitation to debate.

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The honourable member for North Sydney obviously does not like an answer which goes to what we are doing for public hospitals and the public healthcare system in Australia. That is of direct relevance to seniors, as is the ability of seniors to access appropriate dental care. That is why we have re-established the Commonwealth Dental Health Program.

On the question of this Medicare levy surcharge, as I said, if we left it at the $50,000 threshold, rather than capturing the top eight per cent of income earners, as it did in 1997, by 2010 it would capture the top 45 per cent of income earners. Those opposite are arguing presumably that these represent top income earners in Australia. That is how radically out of touch they have become. Our new threshold of $100,000 for singles and $150,000 for couples will return the figure to around eight per cent by 2010. That was the threshold that you used back in 1997. You left it in place for 12 years. It delivers a financial penalty to many, many Australians and, as a consequence, we are acting. So I would say again to—

Brendan Nelson (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You’re a bloody bureaucrat!

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I beg your pardon?

Opposition Member:

An opposition member—He said he was a bureaucrat.

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

Order! The Leader of the Opposition regrettably used another adjective the first time. I would ask him to withdraw.

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think there was an adjective used there on the way through—I may have misheard it. I think there was a really interesting adjective used there—but that’s life.

Brendan Nelson (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I withdraw.

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

The Prime Minister will continue his answer.

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

I want to hear something about the strike area.

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

The member for North Sydney will contain himself.

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Up you come, Joe. Come on, Joe.

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

The Prime Minister will not provoke the member for North Sydney, and the member for North Sydney will not be provoked.

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The critical issue here is that, if you are dealing with the health needs of senior Australians, your first responsibility is to make sure you get a properly funded public hospital system. Your second responsibility is to ensure that you re-establish the Commonwealth Dental Health Program—something which those opposite abolished a decade ago. We have done that. We have done it in nine months. We are proud of our record on this and we are proud of the fact that we intend to deliver this advantage to middle-income earners through the action we propose in the Senate. Again I challenge those opposite. On the day after we have had one modest interest rate cut, which affects so many working families across Australia, they are contemplating opposing a measure in the Senate which will, for income earners of the type I described before, lead to a further $1,200 a year hike. I would say to those opposite that, if they are concerned about families under financial pressure, they should act in the Senate and act appropriately in defence of the interests of those working families under financial pressure.