Nick Champion (Wakefield, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

Labor believes in a fair go for all, and in 1944 the Curtin government established the Acoustic Research Laboratory to look into the effects of excessive noise on military personnel. It was the last full year of the world war, and there was an attempt to look at the occupational issues that arise from military service—and we know that they are substantial. In 1947, the Chifley government introduced hearing services through that Acoustic Research Laboratory, and in 1947 it also expanded those services for children affected by the 1939 to 1941 rubella outbreaks. Since that time, for 67 years, Australian Hearing and its predecessors have been providing vital services to many Australians—today some 450,000 Australians.

This was not something that was trashed by those opposite in those years; in fact, they built on it. In 1968, the then Liberal government expanded that service to include pensioners as well. That is a good thing: Labor had a good idea and the coalition built on it. Even John Howard, for all his many sins in this place, added to those services, because there is a distinct need in the community, and that need has to be met, and it can only be met by government services.

Australian Hearing provides those services to a diverse section of the population—to the young and the old, to veterans and others. We know that without its support—not just the services it provides but also the laboratory services, the testing and likewise—many people would not be able to receive this assistance. We know that groups like Deaf Children Australia talk about hearing impairments being barriers to personal development and social inclusion for children and young people who are either deaf or hard of hearing. It is obvious to all of us that, if you cannot hear, you really face an uphill climb in terms of learning and participating in society. When we had the recent week of activism, we certainly learnt that from some of the individuals who came up to Canberra to tell us.

What we see here is not a sensible privatisation but simply ideology for ideology's sake. This is simply the government following the recommendations of its Commission of Audit. It put this Commission of Audit in place basically to evade its own election commitments. So we see the GP tax, the cuts to hospitals and the attacks on Australians on welfare, and now what we see is a totally unnecessary privatisation of what has for 67 years been an incredibly important service to pensioners and young people and, prior to that, to all those veterans after World War II.

We know that privatisation will disrupt the service. We know there is a great deal of uncertainty related to the scoping study that this government has imposed upon Australian Hearing. There is great uncertainty for the service and a great chance of a break and disruption in that service. Of course, we know who will suffer most. It will not be those in capital cities on high incomes, who can afford to buy services, it will be those in the outer suburbs, those in regional communities and those in remote communities in the bush. People who live in the suburbs of Warringah, Sturt or North Sydney will not be the people to suffer it will be those furthest from the GPO.

This is just another broken promise by this government. Its schools policy said school children first. Its Indigenous election policy provided a better future, more job opportunities, empowered individuals in communities and a higher standard of living. This privatisation will undercut all of those commitments that were given by this government at the last election.

This government is on an ideological crusade. There has not been a more ruthless, nasty commission of audit since Otto Niemeyer advised the government during the depression. We know what it has given us: the GP tax, cuts to hospitals and schools, attacks to welfare recipients, attacks now to the hearing repaired, devastating their services with a totally unnecessary privatisation, which will disrupt and damage services in what has been an incredibly important service for 67 years. (Time expired)

Ian Goodenough (Moore, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is there a seconder for the motion?

Tim Watts (Gellibrand, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion.

John Alexander (Bennelong, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am grateful for the opportunity to speak on this motion and I thank the member for Wakefield for giving the House a chance to hear the Abbott government's track record in this important policy space and its determination for a strong, independent review process of the recommendations made by the National Commission of Audit.

Since its creation in 1947 Australian Hearing has developed an enviable reputation for its work with hearing-impaired people. They are a trusted provider of high-quality hearing services, committed to access and equity, quality clinical care and excellence in customer service. Australian Hearing continues to perform strongly in a contestable and increasingly competitive environment, achieving a before-tax profit of $12.5 million in 2013-14. It is now one of over 230 registered hearing providers under the Australian Government Hearing Services Program and its research division, the National Acoustics Laboratories, is a world leader in hearing-loss assessment, prevention and rehabilitation.

In 2013-14 Australian Hearing provided 446,870 hearing health services to customers, almost 70 per cent of which were provided under the voucher program. It continues to build on its legacy with a greater focus on innovation and collaboration and is well placed to provide hearing services as policies, markets and technologies change.

In response to recommendations by the National Commission of Audit the government announced a scoping study on future ownership options for Australian Hearing and funded this study in the recent budget. Following a competitive procurement process, PwC and Freehills were appointed to provide independent advice and recommendations around possible future ownership options to ensure the objectives of the scoping studies are met.

These objectives are to: maintain service at quality levels for customers and private investors, included in regional and rural Australia; ensure any recommended outcomes treat Australian Hearing employees in a fair manner, including through the preservation of accrued entitlements; minimise any residual risks and liabilities to the government; and maximise the benefit to the government.

The scoping study will assess the capability and competition in the market and is intended to identify the most effective and efficient way of delivering services to the public in an evolving market. The government has not made a decision on the future ownership options of Australian Hearing and will not do what the member for Wakefield desires—to confect the outcome before the results of the independent expert review are received.

Australian Hearing's head office is located at the Australian Hearing Hub at Macquarie University, in my electorate of Bennelong. I have been fortunate to tour this unique, world-class facility that was purpose designed to facilitate collaboration and research into hearing disorders. Through its position within the hub, Australian Hearing maintains a strong connection to organisations like Cochlear, Siemens Hearing Instruments as well as academia and community sector groups.

Last Friday I was delighted to welcome the Prime Minister and the Minister for Health for a tour of Cochlear's facility next door to the hearing hub. This tour followed a government announcement a $538.8 million to help Australian health and medical researchers find the cures, treatments and medical devices of the future. The funding will support 773 National Health and Medical Research Council grants to ensure Australia remains a world leader in medical research. The tour also followed the Prime Minister's announcement last week of the industry and innovation competitiveness agenda, which Cochlear CEO, Dr Chris Roberts, stated 'would enhance their international competitiveness, cut red tape, grow their export capacity and streamline market access'.

Over the past few years, I have been campaigning strongly on a key plank of this agenda: the recognition of approval by trusted international standard organisations for medical devices. For Australian patients, this will facilitate the speedy access to the latest generation medical devices offered by Bennelong based companies like Cochlear, J&J, Medtronic Australasia and St Jude Medical. To quote Dr Roberts, this is a huge win for an export company like Cochlear that sells devices into dozens of countries around the world that require country of origin approval. It means Cochlear is better placed to export its products, create jobs and improve health outcomes. It is clear that in 12 short months the Abbott government has taken strong action to support a competitive hearing services industry and find Australians in need of these health services. I again thank the member for Wakefield for giving us the opportunity—

Justine Elliot (Richmond, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I too rise today in support of this motion. I commend the member for Wakefield for moving this motion. It is a vital service that Australian Hearing provides and one of great importance to the people in my electorate of Richmond. This motion really does recognise the outstanding work of Australian Hearing—and note it has been delivering these services since 1947.

I too have many concerns about the Abbott government's Commission of Audit recommendation that Australian Hearing be privatised. If this were to happen, it would be another cruel cut by this government to a vitally essential service. Privatising Australian Hearing will continue the attack on those who are the most vulnerable in our community. The fact is Australian Hearing is a government organisation that has been changing the lives of people affected by hearing disorders for decades. And it has been doing that by providing accessible affordable hearing care services.

Australian Hearing has a very long and proud record of providing these services and in making a massive difference in the lives of so many. It is a record it should be very proud of in changing those lives. It is a record of helping children hear their parents voices for the first time and a record of people helping elderly people enjoy a better quality of life. I hear that firsthand from people in my electorate. There is a very large proportion of elderly Australians who live in my electorate and they tell me how important Australian Hearing and the services it provides are. Australian Hearing's record is also about helping young adults to fully participate in the community and improve their job prospects because they are able to hear clearly. These are really important issues.

Australian Hearing and the National Acoustics Laboratories play a significant and important role in providing world-class hearing services at a low cost to hundreds of thousands of Australians every year. And Australian Hearing has an internationally recognised reputation as a best practice government provider and research organisation. This record of achievement is now under threat because of the Liberal National parties' cruel budgetary cuts. But the fact is the government has absolutely no case for privatisation and has ignored the widely expressed concerns about risks to the quality and access of these services.

The Commission of Audit review has led to this government allocating funds for a scoping study to investigate privatisation. This misguided and short-sighted decision has already seen more than $400,000 being spent on legal and business advisory services to privatise Australian Hearing. It really is an absolute disgrace that the government is spending this money to find a way to provide inferior services to Australians with hearing impairments.

The government must reject the Commission of Audit recommendations to privatise Australian Hearing outright and instead guarantee that Australian Hearing, including its research division and the national acoustics laboratory, is to be maintained or, in fact, improved so that people can still access those services. Because moving to privatisation puts at risk the high-quality low-cost hearing health services provided to more than 450,000 people every year. Australian Hearing has 468 service centres and visiting sites, and many of those are in regional areas. On the New South Wales North Coast Australian Hearing service centres are located at Ballina, Tweed Heads, Grafton and Lismore. They are absolutely critical in providing hearing services.

It is those services in regional areas that make such a huge difference. People in these areas, particularly in mine, just would not be able to afford to access a hearing service if Australian Hearing were privatised. In addition to these service centres, in my electorate and throughout the New South Wales North Coast they also have a network of 10 smaller visiting centres scattered across—so that further extends their coverage to those who need the service their local community and to those who often are not actually able to travel to a major service centre. That is the issue when you are in a regional and rural area; it is often very difficult to access services. When you look at their website and see where they do go in the New South Wales North Coast, it is quite extensive.

Australian Hearing provides an extensive array of services to young adults under 26 years of age, Indigenous Australians, former military personnel and elderly Australians with complex hearing needs. These are people who simply cannot afford the full commercial services for hearing tests, fitting hearing devices and some rehabilitation programs as well. Privatising the services will be devastating for all of those particular groups. If this does happen, it would just be another example of this government's cruel and unfair budget and also of their broken promises. We have seen it in so many areas, whether it is the aged pension, education, childcare assistance, the petrol tax or the proposed introduction of the $7 doctor tax. These are cruel and very harsh cuts. The privatisation of Australian Hearing on top of this would just be another broken promise and it would be devastating for those with hearing impairments. I condemn this government's plans to privatise— (Time expired)

Karen Andrews (McPherson, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak to the motion by the member for Wakefield. In doing so, I want to acknowledge the important work done by Australian Hearing throughout our nation and the crucial service provided to children, young adults, Indigenous Australians and seniors.

Hearing loss affects one in six Australians and the numbers are growing. Detection and treatment can enormously improve the quality of life of those who suffer from hearing loss. In 2005, it was estimated that hearing loss cost our economy $11.75 billion dollars. This was mostly in lost productivity as people with a hearing impairment found it difficult to secure employment. You will get no argument from the government on the importance of hearing services and I will certainly not attempt to in any way diminish the value of the work being done by Australian Hearing. It is vital work. There are three Australian Hearing offices in my own electorate on the southern Gold Coast at Robina, Burleigh West and Palm Beach. I fully acknowledge the important work done at these offices and I thank the professionals who work for there for the assistance that they provide and the difference they make in the lives of those affected by hearing loss.

To the member for Wakefield, I say I can wholeheartedly agree to certain sections of this motion about the importance of the service that is delivered by Australian Hearing. What I do find disappointing is the scaremongering that he and so many members on the other side of the House are engaging in. I want to make the point very clearly that the government has not agreed to the privatisation of Australian Hearing. What we have funded is a scoping study to determine exactly how effectively services are being delivered and whether there may be other models that could improve service delivery. It would be foolish to reject outright the recommendation of the National Commission of Audit, which was the first large-scale audit in 20 years of Commonwealth government activity. It is important to remind ourselves in the context of this debate of the commission's terms of reference which include to:

Now I know that many members opposite have a very irrational, emotional response to the suggestion that some government services could be delivered more effectively and efficiently. But on this side of the House, we take very seriously our responsibility to ensure that taxpayers' money is spent wisely and that we get the best possible community outcomes for our investment.

The idea that a large bureaucracy and more money will result in better outcomes for the community is, quite simply, nonsense, but it drove so many of the policy decisions of the previous Labor government. As a result, government spending grew at unsustainable levels but problems were not solved. The classic example was the massive $17 billion wasted on school halls without literacy and numeracy levels improving at all. So it is a very poor intellectual argument when Labor members whip up a scare about particular services being cut and use emotive examples of people who have been helped to say, 'Look, these people would not have the help they need if there was any change in service delivery.' I can assure those listening to the debate that the government have no desire to cut services, and we are particularly mindful of the community service obligations we have to those who live in regional and remote areas. In fact, one of the objectives of the scoping study is to:

So I say to the member for Wakefield: instead of whipping up a scare, let's wait to read the findings of the scoping study and let's rationally analyse the findings of the government's response. The assumption in this motion—that the privatisation of Australian Hearing will result in an interruption to service delivery and impact the quality of services and access to services—has no factual basis. Let's keep in mind that many health and community services are actually provided by the private sector, with the government investing in the provision of those services to those who need it most, and especially those in regional areas. I have no doubt that, should a sale be agreed by the government down the track, we would go to great lengths to ensure an appropriate funding model is created in order to continue the availability of high-quality hearing services for all eligible Australians.

Stephen Jones (Throsby, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Development and Infrastructure) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is a terribly important issue and it affects over four million Australians—hearing loss affects over four million Australians, and a full half of them are at working age. It would probably surprise you to know that, when you look at the employment statistics for people with hearing disabilities, males are 20 per cent more likely to be unemployed than the rest of the population; it is 16½ per cent for females. So we cannot underestimate the importance of this issue. Ours is a wealthy country doing very, very well in a whole heap of areas of providing health care and services for people who are less advantaged or have a disability, but it would astound you, I am sure, Mr Deputy Speaker, to know that 24 per cent of people who need a hearing aid do not have one.

I congratulate the member for Wakefield on bringing this motion before the House, because the purpose of it is really quite transparent. It is to seek a champion on the other side of the House for Australian Hearing. The member for Wakefield, a champion in his own right, is willing to stand up here and say, 'We need to defend Australian Hearing services.' The member for McPherson has called us irrational or emotional. That is quite right: we are quite emotional about this because Australian Hearing was established by Ben Chifley in the immediate aftermath of World War II. There were lots of Australian servicemen coming back with hearing impairments. Combined with veterans and young people suffering hearing loss, something needed to be done. We could not, as those opposite have suggested, just leave it to the market. There was a clear need for Australian government intervention.

This is an incredibly important service. It provides services from over 468 locations around the country. There are five in my own electorate, providing an invaluable service. A few weeks ago, I had the benefit of talking to the family of young Felix Williams. He is an infant receiving a cochlear implant and, since shortly after birth, has had the benefit of services from Australian Hearing in my electorate. His parents are very, very worried about the prospect of privatising Australian Hearing and they are encouraging us to take a stand in parliament.

During this debate, we have heard two speakers from the other side: the member for Bennelong and the member for McPherson. I see that the member for Ryan is going to speak on this issue. Maybe the member for Ryan will be the champion that we are looking for on the other side of the House to stand up for Australian Hearing, the staff who work there and the services that they provide to people with hearing impairment throughout the country. We call upon the member for Ryan to be the champion that this parliament needs on the coalition side of the House to stick up for Australian Hearing services.

We have heard speakers before such as the member for Richmond, a great champion for regional Australia, speak up about the importance of Australian Hearing in providing services to regional and rural Australia because this is an area where nobody seriously suggests that the market is going to provide a solution. And we already know that incomes are lower, distances are greater and all the other social disadvantages and health disadvantages are greater in rural and regional Australia. I am very surprised, astounded that we have not got a member from the Nationals standing here debating the importance of maintaining Australian Hearing. But they are missing. They are absent in this debate as with so many others.

What Australian Hearing does in the way it is able to provide bulk purchasing arrangements for hearing devices is something that will be lost if we contract it out or if we fragment the way the purchasing occurs in the audiometric market. What Australian Hearing does very well, apart from the great work of the National Acoustic Laboratory, is it provides as a bulk purchaser of the very expensive hearing devices. I mentioned Felix Williams in my electorate. The cochlear implant is around $20,000 for one device. Australian Hearing, through its market interventions, is able to drive down the cost.

It is a great pity that we do not have more time to speak about the impact this is going to have on Indigenous Australians. We already know that Indigenous Australians have chronic rates of hearing loss, up to 10 times higher than the four per cent of the non-Indigenous population that has hearing loss the World Health Organization classifies as a massive public health problem. So it is a great pity that we do not have more time to debate this as well. This proposition should be rejected. Those opposite should champion Australian Hearing.

Jane Prentice (Ryan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Australian Hearing has been catering to the needs of Australians with hearing problems since World War II and is still going strong despite the competition from other providers. With its associated research partner, the National Acoustics Laboratory, Australian Hearing is rightfully recognised as the No. 1 hearing service provider in Australia. Selling the government's share, as suggested by the National Commission of Audit, would not change the preeminent market position Australian Hearing currently holds.

But the fact is the government has not made any decision on the future ownership options of Australian Hearing. As suggested in the National Commission of Audit Report, the government is investigating the possibility of privatising Australian Hearing and has taken on the recommendation of the commission to engage in a scoping study regarding this serious issue.

Australian Hearing has stayed at the top of the hearing providers in Australia despite the fact hearing services have become subject to the issuing of a voucher which could be used by eligible people at any hearing service of their choice. This points strongly to the quality of the service and products provided by Australian Hearing.

I understand the idea of privatising a government owned service can be a tough pill to swallow but there are other things to consider as part of this debate. Australian Hearing, according to the National Commission of Audit, holds a monopoly on certain parts of the hearing market. In our country, monopolies are illegal. Other providers are excluded from competing against Australian Hearing and this may well be inflating the price of those services due to lack of competition as the member for Throsby—who has now just left us—heard during the inquiry into IT pricing. As well as freeing up some of the $13 billion currently held in government assets, privatising Australian Hearing will lead to better value for money for the government as these services become cheaper by dint of competition for business.

Currently one in six people, according to Australian Hearing, suffer some form of hearing loss. As our population ages and people are living longer, the government needs to consider how we can stretch our health dollar to benefit as many people as possible. Opening up those parts of the market which are currently protected is one way the government can get better value. This government is not proposing a stop to providing hearing vouchers to those who qualify for them. We are talking about allowing the market to do what the market does best and determine the price for those hearing related products. This is just common sense. Australian Hearing is in the strongest of market positions to continue to provide world-class services. It is doubtful that prices will rise, because there will be too much competition as less-established providers try to gain market share. As we saw in Queensland with the Newman government's successful introduction of dental vouchers, the pressure was taken off government-sponsored services as the private sector well and truly took up the slack once people could choose their own dentist, and the vast majority of these services were covered within the price of the voucher.

Success breeds success, and Australian Hearing is a very successful business. Its profit last financial year was $12.5 million—an increase of 297 per cent from the previous year. It is wrong that this or any government should own, fund and regulate Australian Hearing. The National Commission of Audit has made recommendations regarding several government-owned businesses, and Australian Hearing is just one of those businesses. It would be irresponsible for the government to ignore those recommendations and to not at least investigate the possibility of and potential for privatising Australian Hearing. With those comments, I reject the intent of this motion.

Don Randall (Canning, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.