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

My question is to the Prime Minister. On 22 October this year, the Prime Minister’s website, under the heading ‘Fixing our hospitals’, said:

… if significant progress toward the implementation of the … reforms has not been achieved by mid-2009, the Government will seek a mandate from the Australian people at the following federal election for the Commonwealth to take financial control of Australia’s 750 public hospitals.

Of course, that reflected the Prime Minister’s election commitment. I have here a printout from the website this morning which shows that the section containing that commitment to a referendum has been deleted. Does the Prime Minister stand by his election promise to the Australian people either to fix Australia’s public hospitals or to take them over?

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

I am glad the member for Dickson has time to examine my website given his other activities in recent days directed at his friend and colleague the member for Curtin.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

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

Order! The Prime Minister has the call.

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

They are such a happy, united company, the HMAS Liberal Partydivided on the deputy leadership, divided on the treasurership, divided it now seems on forest carbon sinks, divided on the national water policy, divided on most things. But I thank the member for Dickson for his question.

The government’s position on this has not changed one bit. I would strongly suggest that the member for Dickson reflect on statements I have made most recently in response to a question, I think, from the Australian at a press conference after COAG when I was asked the very same question. Our policy has not changed. We believe first and foremost that it is necessary to partner with the states and territories in exercising cooperative federalism. Secondly, we will make a judgement during the course of 2009 in terms of whether the overall allocation of roles and responsibilities and the general reform program are being effectively implemented. If there is a failure of that, as I have indicated in the past, our position we took to the people prior to the last election remains valid. It has not changed one bit. Could I say to those opposite, as they scramble around for something to say in question time today: you had better go and chase something else, because this one remains a fundamental part of government policy.

I find it remarkable, though, that those opposite would have the temerity to raise any questions about health funding in this chamber. Those opposite should hang their heads in shame about their disinvestment in the nation’s public hospitals over so many years. Let me repeat the figures that I drew to the House’s attention yesterday. In the period to the last Australian health care agreement the indexation which you provided to the state hospital system was some 5.3 per cent. That came nowhere near meeting the cost escalation factors experienced by state and territory hospital systems, taking into account the cost of employing health professionals as well as the technology factors now being deployed in hospitals. You knew that at the time. You simply short-changed the states and territories. I would draw to the attention of those opposite the fact that the previous five-year health care agreement was actually 6.3 per cent. So even against your own historical standard you were consciously and deliberately—

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

I’ve got to protect you, sir.

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

The member for O’Connor will resume his seat. I have got the point. I understand that you are trying to protect me. I would remind the Prime Minister of the need to address his remarks through the chair.

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

For the previous government to give a lesson on high morality to the current government about adequate levels of funding and reform in relation to the hospital system frankly is breathtaking. They sucked out a billion dollars from the system as a consequence of the last health care agreement, and the former minister for health knows that to be a fact. They failed even to meet the standards they set for themselves in the previous five-year health care agreement. This government delivered an indexation factor of 7.3 per cent under the prospect of—

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

Mr Dutton interjecting

Mike Kelly (Eden-Monaro, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Defence Support) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Dr Kelly interjecting

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

The Prime Minister will resume his seat. The parliamentary secretary and the member for Dickson will remain quiet.

Mike Kelly (Eden-Monaro, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Defence Support) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Dr Kelly interjecting

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

The parliamentary secretary will withdraw that remark.

Mike Kelly (Eden-Monaro, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Defence Support) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw, Mr Speaker.

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

The government, through the current Australian health care agreement, has agreed to a 7.3 per cent annual indexation factor with the states and territories, resulting in an Australian health care agreement of in excess of $60 billion for the coming five-year period. But beyond that—and I say this to the member for Dickson, if he is interested in the facts as opposed to he and the Leader of the Opposition only being interested in politics—the facts are these: in terms of the national policy partnerships that we also agreed to with the states and territories on preventative healthcare, on emergency departments and on Australian health workforce needs for the future, putting those factors together, you are looking at an overall increase in the Commonwealth’s allocation to the states in excess of 10 per cent.

That constitutes the basis for real investment in the nation’s desire to have a decent health and hospital system for the future. We have put our money where our mouth is, we have embarked upon a reform program and we have said that it must be delivered on the ground through the measures that we have agreed with the states and territories in the various instruments that we have signed with them. That remains our commitment to the future. I would suggest to those opposite, if they were to have any skerrick of credibility on this question, why did they pull money—billions of dollars—out of the hospital system and then turn around opportunistically to accuse the states and territories of failing to run a first-class hospital system in the country? It is easy to do. It is easy to produce your budget bottom line that way—pull the money out of hospitals, pull the money out of the emergency departments, pull the money out of elective surgery. That is what you did year in, year out. The government has a policy of funding reform and functional reform for the future of the hospital system, and this government is proud of its achievements.