Terry Young (Longman, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, Australians are currently enduring a crippling cost-of-living crisis that also includes both housing and power bill crises. Now they're facing a collapse in bulk-billing. Can the Prime Minister confirm the rate of bulk-billing has declined from 88 per cent under the coalition to 77 per cent today under Labor?

Mark Butler (Hindmarsh, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Longman for that question indeed. The 88 per cent figure the member for Longman very unwisely took from his tactics committee was described by the College of GPs as a 'misleading and highly skewed' figure. I understand why the Leader of the Opposition would use it, but why would the member for Longman take a sucker punch like that? I thought the member for Longman was smarter than that. The reason why the College of GPs said this was 'misleading and highly skewed' is that it took into account all of those COVID vaccination and other services that were required to be bulk-billed to be delivered.

The actual story of bulk-billing in the last decade is a story first penned by the Leader of the Opposition when he was the health minister, when he said that there were too many free Medicare services, echoing the view of his mentor, John Howard, who said that bulk-billing was 'an absolute rort'. He tried to abolish bulk-billing altogether and introduce a tax for every single Australian patient to pay every time they visited their GP.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! I'm just going to invite the minister to pause, and I want to hear from the Manager of Opposition Business.

Michael Sukkar (Deakin, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, it was a very tight question in relation—

Government members interjecting—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Members on my right, we do not need laughter when someone is on their feet. It's highly disrespectful. The manager is entitled to raise his point of order, and, if anyone interjects, they won't be here to hear it.

Michael Sukkar (Deakin, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The point of order is on relevance. It was a very tight question in relation to bulk-billing having reduced under this government. The minister seems to have confirmed that, but he's now straying into an area that was not dealt with in the question and can't be directly relevant to the question.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the point of order, the Leader of the House?

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, to the point of order, the question makes clear there are only two sorts of issues that can be discussed in this: bulk-billing rates under this government and bulk-billing rates as they used to be before this government. Given that the minister has spent all of his answer dealing with one or the other, he's clearly in order.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The manager on a further point of order?

Michael Sukkar (Deakin, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's incorrect to suggest that the minister has only dealt with the question. It's very clear that the minister is now straying into areas that cannot be conceivably related to bulk-billing.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm going to listen carefully, but the minister is on topic because part of the question says, 'How are the figures much lower than those when the coalition was in government?' I suggest to the manager and the House that the minister is potentially not agreeing with that and arguing the point in the question. So, whilst he was asked about figures, he was also asked about the previous government, because that was mentioned in the question, so he'll have to address that part of the question to talk about the previous government. If he wasn't asked about figures in a previous term or a previous government, he wouldn't be able to talk about that, but he is being directly relevant. But I just want to make sure that, with his remarks, he is being directly relevant to that part of the question.

Mark Butler (Hindmarsh, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The history of bulk-billing over the last several years, which is the point of the question, is very clear. When the Leader of the Opposition, the former health minister, was not able to get his GP tax through the Senate, instead he initiated a six-year freeze to the Medicare rebate that the College of GPs said, when we were coming into government, had resulted in a freefall in bulk-billing.

Now we have put in record investments to turn that around, but, if there is an issue with bulk-billing in this country—and we'd like to see it higher than it currently is—it all lies at the feet of this man, the Leader of the Opposition, who, as the Prime Minister said, was voted by Australia's doctors as the worst health minister in the history of Medicare. If that verdict is not enough, perhaps another verdict is that former prime minister Tony Abbott thought he was so bad, he didn't even let him deliver a second health budget.