Helen Polley (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I too rise to speak on the Private Health Insurance Bill 2006 and related bills. This is important legislation and includes many changes to our current system. The provisions in this package will provide benefits for 45 per cent of Australians—and, for this reason, it has my support. This bill represents a significant change in the way we view health care. Under these new proposals, private health insurance members will have cover for services outside the hospital. Furthermore, the Broader Health Cover provisions will allow funds to offer their members coverage for services which may prevent an episode of hospital care. There is strong evidence that the overall level of community health will be improved and the total cost of the health system minimised if we focus more on preventative health measures and early intervention with those most at risk of developing illnesses. Therefore, this legislation is, in principle, a step in the right direction.

I do, however, have many concerns regarding this legislation, which I will discuss here today. Firstly, the government has said that this package will not have an impact on premiums. Tony Abbott argued in his second reading speech that provisions in the package may even reduce premiums. I wish to remind the Senate that in 2000 and 2001 the federal government said that there would be downward pressure on premiums, yet Australians have suffered a 40 per cent increase in premiums since then. Between 1998 and 2006 the cost of private health insurance increased twice as much as general inflation, and this is unacceptable. If Medibank Private is sold, there is a real possibility that private health premiums will rise even further.

The fact is that the government cannot be trusted on private health insurance premiums. How can private health insurers expand their services yet cut premiums? Even if the private health insurance companies do save money on preventative programs, such as weight loss programs, to avoid a hospital stay, these savings will not be passed on overnight; it will take time for these savings to flow on. Under the National Health Act, one of the objectives of the Private Health Insurers Administration Council is to minimise premium levels. In the Private Health Insurance Bill as it stands, this objective has been removed. Why will the government not include this consumer protection?

The potential increase in private health insurance premiums as a result of this package will certainly have a negative financial impact on families who have private health insurance. Of grave concern to me are the individuals who are just over the $50,000 threshold—the point at which the government requires individuals to take out private health insurance or suffer further tax if they do not. The government needs to lift its threshold to accommodate the average real wage increase from $36,000 to $54,000.

Secondly, the last budget included a massive $55 million over a period of four years to increase consumer awareness of the incentives and benefits associated with private health insurance. This is a gross misuse of taxpayers’ funds. It would have been of greater benefit to the public to direct those funds into our ailing health system. Fifty-five million dollars could have been used to buy equipment for our hospitals and to train more staff. How can the government justify spending this amount of money on advertising? It justifies spending this amount of money on advertising because it has done it for the last 11 long years.

Tony Abbott has failed to address the huge challenges facing Australia’s ailing health system. Quality health care is unaffordable for many Australian families. Tony Abbott should be trying to cut the huge waiting lists in the public health system and he should be trying to find a way to attract and retain doctors and nurses. Instead, Tony Abbott has been throwing mud at Mr Rudd. This Howard government is all about providing for the few at the top with no regard for the little guy. The Howard government governs for itself and not for the country.

There are many benefits associated with having private health insurance, such as flexibility and choice regarding treatment, less waiting time for some procedures, access to the best quality care and general peace of mind. But these benefits are not something all Australians can afford. While this package will benefit the 44 per cent of Australians who can afford private health insurance, the legislation does not provide insurance for the majority of Australians who do not have private health insurance. I am concerned that people who are uninsured will not have access to the best quality services.

A Labor government will secure the future of our healthcare system and, in particular, ensure that the private sector plays a valuable role within that system. The public and private sectors are being placed at risk by the Howard government’s sale of Medibank Private. The bottom line is that Australia needs both public and private healthcare systems to thrive. Australians understand that private hospitals provide a range of specialist surgical and elective procedures while, typically, public hospitals treat emergency patients and patients with acute conditions—a burden they continue to shoulder.

This means Australians need both the public sector and the private sector to thrive. A policymaker who has thrown up their hands in despair of the public system cannot turn their back on it now and solely focus on the private system to solve the mixed system’s weaknesses and downfalls. Rather than address the real policy challenges required to create thriving public hospital and private hospital sectors, the government is obsessed with selling Medibank Private. This is unacceptable to me and unacceptable to the Australian public.

Support for private insurance is discriminatory against those who pay for their own care. Twenty-one per cent of recurrent healthcare expenditure, to the tune of $16 million per year, is paid from the consumer’s own pocket. This proportion is rising steadily. This legislation does not provide for any quality insurance mechanisms for Broader Health Cover to take effect until July 2008. I believe it is an unacceptable risk to have a 15-month wait for the implementation of quality standards. We should delay this legislation until we can be sure that quality standards are being enforced.

I strongly support the requirement for private health insurance funds to provide consumers with standard product information. This will be of significant benefit to our consumers. Labor believes that better informed healthcare consumers will participate more actively in the health decision making process, which would lead to a reduction in the incidence of adverse effects, foster a greater partnership approach between consumers and providers and increase consumer satisfaction with the care provided.

Debate interrupted.