Steve Georganas (Hindmarsh, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, my question is to the Minister for Health and Ageing. Will the minister update the House on the government’s reforms to make Medicare rebates for cataract surgery more sustainable, and of any alternative proposals.

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

I thank the member for Hindmarsh for this question. It is a good day to be asking the question because today we are tabling the cataract regulation changes in the House. They will be tabled again in the Senate next week. The Rudd government is determined that we are going to be able to reform our health system to make it sustainable and fairer into the future. To do this we cannot reform our health system unless we make some of these hard decisions. That includes us making decisions about where we direct our finite taxpayer resources to ensure that we get best value for money. This is why the government made the decision at the last budget to adjust the Medicare fees for cataracts to better reflect the time and complexity of the procedure. The fee for this one common procedure has been reduced. This procedure commonly takes 15 to 20 minutes now. Whilst people might dispute this, it is not my view that it takes 15 to 20 minutes; it is advice from the Fred Hollows Foundation, the Australian Institute of Eye Surgery and the British Medical Journal.

Andrew Laming (Bowman, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Laming interjecting

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

Perhaps the member with some experience in matters relating to eyes might be interested to know that the British Medical Journal, as far back as 2001, said:

With the remarkable improvement in cataract surgical techniques in recent years—leading to shorter operating time (most surgery now takes 15 minutes), more efficient anaesthesia (from general to regional to topical), and a trend towards day surgery—cataract extraction has become a “minor” surgical procedure.

That it not my view; it is a quote from the British Medical Journal.

What we have seen since this was announced in the budget was a very slick campaign by the ophthalmologists who are, frankly, of course trying to protect their own incomes. In 2010 the highest 10 per cent of ophthalmologists earned at least $1.8 million a year. And those average-earning ophthalmologists earned $580,000 just from Medicare—not from insurers and not from gap payments—and even after this regulation is passed those who are earning average incomes will earn over half a million dollars just from Medicare.

We have negotiated, also, with the profession to set a new higher fee for complex cataract procedures to fairly reflect when the procedure is more complex and takes a longer time to complete. Of course, this is an appropriate reward for specialists for the additional time and expertise they invest in longer procedures. So now is the time for the opposition to decide who they are going to support—the ophthalmologists defending their million dollar salaries or patients and taxpayers who want a fair deal.

We on this side of the House want to see specialists bring their charges back to reasonable levels. It is time for taxpayers to enjoy the dividends that new medical technology and treatments have brought to patient care in recent years. Those on the other side of the House and the professions cannot expect taxpayers to keep supporting new items and new medicines if they are then blocked from enjoying the benefits and savings that flow from technology.

I think everyone on this side of the House would recall that in budget week the shadow Treasurer made it clear that the opposition will support every initiative announced by the Treasurer on budget night other than the PHI—the private health insurance rebate changes. At that time the shadow Treasurer made it clear that this measure was going to be supported. Following that, the shadow Treasurer made it clear that $14 billion of spending was going to be cut but I do not see how the opposition is going to be able to honour this pledge when they cannot even decide if they will back this measure which will save Medicare $100 million over four years.

Of course, such bold statements are going to require some pretty tough decisions and I was wondering if the opposition had a health spokesperson who might be able to make those sorts of tough decisions. Is there a health spokesperson with leadership and backbone? Is there a health spokesperson who is going to be able to stand up for patients and taxpayers? It is little wonder that his own party humiliated him in the seat of McPherson.