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

My question is to the Minister for Health. Will the minister update the House on the action the coalition government is taking to support the health of all Australians, including my Redlands City constituents in the seat of Bowman? Is the minister aware of any alternative approaches?

Greg Hunt (Flinders, Liberal Party, Minister for Health) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I want to thank the member for Bowman, who, even to this day, is offering pro bono eye clinics to his constituents and others in the south Brisbane area. He would know that, over the course of the last year, we've been able to contribute to the health of Australians by bringing on board new drugs, such as Opdivo for lung cancer and Entresto for chronic heart failure; guaranteeing Medicare; and, in addition to that, delivering the highest bulk-billing rates on record.

In particular, this year, we've already been able to start with a $110 million package for youth mental health; and 19 new breakthrough research programs for rare cancers and rare diseases, such as glioblastomas and other forms of brain cancer. We've been able to make huge strides, including the agreements we've had with the RACGP, AMA, Medicines Australia and the Pharmacy Guild; and the reforms of private health have delivered the lowest changes in 17 years—lower than any year under Labor.

He also asks are their alternatives? Yes, there are alternatives to an approach of genuine reform and genuine delivery. The alternative on that side of the chamber is a very simple proposition—that is: Labor hates private health insurance, and Labor is willing to damage and destroy the public health system to carry out their ideology. What we saw on Sunday was a con job where Labor attempted to pretend, finally, that they were a friend of private health. The reality is very different. They have a proposal to strip away the lowest-cost private health policies, which would lead to a 16 per cent increase in private health. In addition to that, they would strip away the rebate. They would slash the rebate for pensioners, seniors and lower income Australians.

What has been the response to this policy? Only yesterday the Australian Prudential Regulatory Authority responded by saying, 'APRA does not consider industry profits or capital levels to be the primary drivers of rising premiums' for private health. They go on to talk about the need for genuine reform. Interestingly, what do they conclude? 'It is very much in the community's interests that the current reform process continues.' But other people have gone far further. You would imagine the Queensland Teachers Union Health Fund might support the Labor proposals. They said, in response to the opposition's announcement, 'Insurers might reduce benefits for certain procedures or restrict them.' What have the Members Health Fund Alliance said? They represent 23 not-for-profits. They described Labor's policy as 'Damaging competition, destroying jobs in small and regional communities and leaving consumers without health cover.' In other words— (Time expired)