James Bidgood (Dawson, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Health and Ageing. Why are changes to the Medicare levy surcharge thresholds necessary?

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

I thank the member for his question. Obviously I informed the House yesterday of a changed proposal that is being put to the Senate when there is a debate on the Medicare levy surcharge. We have of course been encouraging senators to support this proposal. But I noticed that the new shadow minister for health, the member for Dickson, came out of the blocks very fast yesterday to say that this was outrageous and a proposal that he would not support.

I would like to draw the House’s attention to comments made by the new shadow minister for health in August 2006, when, as the Assistant Treasurer, Mr Dutton revealed the numbers of taxpayers who were being hit by the Medicare levy surcharge and revealed that they had doubled since the introduction of the measure in 1997. This was not a passing comment; this was a detailed answer to a question on notice. The member for Dickson, the new health spokesperson for the opposition, conceded that in 1997, when this measure was first introduced, 167,000 people were paying this tax and by 2001 198,000 people were paying this tax and by 2002 it was 235,000 people—and it was very good of the member for Dickson at the time to take the House through these numbers—next it was 282,000 and, by 2004, it was up to 362,000. As we know from other tax office figures, by 2005-06 there were 465,000 Australians paying a tax because the previous Howard government was too lazy to change the tax thresholds. So we know there is an opportunity for the member for Dickson, the new health spokesperson, and the new Leader of the Opposition to note ‘Rudd’s $1,200 health savings’ as headlined by the Daily Telegraph, which I am holding.

The opposition has a choice: do they want to support $1,200 in tax relief for many average working families or are they going to keep opposing this measure? When the new Leader of the Opposition made his first speech after having become the Leader of the Opposition, he told his first press conference:

I know what it is like to be very short of money. … I know Australians are doing it tough and some Australians, even in the years of greatest prosperity, will always do it tough.

The Leader of the Opposition has an opportunity now to provide relief to those very many families who are doing it tough. He can direct his senators in the other place to vote for this measure, and 330,000 people will immediately benefit from it. It is time for the opposition to stand up and say whether they are for tax relief or not. Is the Liberal Party any longer a party that supports tax relief or not? There will be an opportunity to vote for this in the Senate today, tomorrow or in the coming days, and the Leader of the Opposition and the new shadow minister for health and ageing can provide that relief to 330,000 people. They should do it now.

Peter Dutton (Dickson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question goes to the Minister for Health and Ageing and follows her previous comment. Given the government’s revised Medicare levy surcharge thresholds, will the minister inform the House how much private health insurance premiums will increase as a result of these changes? How many people—in particular, how many of the 360,000 older Australians with private health insurance earning less than $30,000 a year—are now expected to drop out of private health insurance and move into the public health system?

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

I am particularly pleased to answer this question, and I congratulate the member on his new position. I have to draw the line at being asked a question of great concern for our public hospital system. If I recall correctly—maybe people on this side of the House will be able to help me here: which government was it that pulled a billion dollars out of our public hospital system? It was the opposition. And which government—

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

Mr Speaker, on relevance: a past minister who told the parliament the truth is entitled to a detailed answer. But I bet she hasn’t got it; it is just more pensioner-bashing!

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

The member for O’Connor will leave the chamber for one hour under standing order 94(a).

The member for O’Connor then left the chamber.

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

As I was asking: which government is it that in the first nine months of coming to office has put an extra billion dollars into our public hospital system, $600 million into elective surgery and millions of dollars into nursing—all issues ignored by the previous government? What I am sure the new shadow minister is aware of is that private health insurers do make requests to government to increase their premiums each year. That premium round is due at the end of the year. They start putting in their submissions to PHIAC and others, the actuarial studies are done and, by February or so, we will be asked to approve those premium increases. I have made it absolutely clear that I will take a very dim view of any insurers who think that adjusting—

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

Mr Hockey interjecting

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

Order! The minister is answering the question.

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

I am trying to answer the question. I am not particularly being provided with the opportunity by those opposite. We know that, when it comes to private health insurance and investment in our public hospitals, those opposite always want to go for the cheap line. They never want to look at the actual statistics. They never want to look at the actual detail. They do not care about the working families who would get tax relief through this measure. They do not want to have an explanation of the premium round increases.

Peter Dutton (Dickson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

How much will they rise by? Answer the question!

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

The member for Dickson has asked the question. The minister has the call.

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

If the shadow minister—

Peter Dutton (Dickson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Answer the question!

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

The member for Dickson is warned!

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

I wonder whether, if I speak slowly enough, he will get thrown out. It seems like he is going to approach being the shadow minister as someone who just wants to interrupt and never wants to actually hear the answer to the question. As the shadow minister knows, the premium round will be dealt with in the new year. We have made very clear that we will take a dim view of private health insurance funds who think that a tax whack for working families is an excuse to try to jack up their premiums. We will take a very dim view of that and we have put them on notice of that. But, if we want to look back at the premium rises that occurred under the previous government year after year after year so those who were in private health insurance paid more and more and more, courtesy of premiums always ticked and flicked by the previous government, he can go back and look at those figures.

Of course it would not be appropriate for me to predict what applications private health insurers will make to the government. It is a matter for them. It is a matter for us then to assess. It would not be appropriate for us to try to make some estimate today, as the shadow minister well knows.