Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health and Ageing) Share this | Hansard source

The government sees no need for this amendment. I query why the opposition would move such a useless amendment if they are interested in knowing how these particular dental programs will roll out. These payments will be administered by Medicare Australia, and statistics on the operation of the program will be compiled by Medicare Australia and provided to the Department of Health and Ageing and other government agencies. The opposition spokesperson knows that as a government we are committed to making sure these programs that we introduce do in fact work. I think he acknowledged that in his contribution just before. We will be monitoring this program extremely closely and making amendments to the program if in fact we need to do so. But, more importantly than that, the statistics will be published every month on the Medicare Australia website so that everybody—dentists, doctors, families and even the opposition—will be able to review the progress of the program month by month.

The opposition amendment talks about a review after a whole year. You do not have to wait for a whole year; after the first month, at the end of July, you will be able to have a look at the website and see how we are travelling. I suggest that waiting for a whole year would be a waste of time. As well as that I am sure the dental profession will be extremely active in reviewing from its perspective the progress of the program and letting the government and the public know what they think.

An obvious question though—and Senator Colbeck might want to respond to this, but I hope I am not inviting a debate—is why the previous government did not see any need for a review of the dental benefits that it introduced as part of its extended primary care items. There was no formal review of that particular program. Indeed, there was no need for a review mechanism for everybody to realise what a total flop that particular program was. The Minister for Human Services, Senator Ludwig, said in his speech on the bill this morning that less than $50 million was spent on those items over four years. That was the commitment of the previous government. Compare that to the real commitment to Australia’s children and their dental health that we are undertaking through this and other programs.

There will be plenty of opportunities for review of the success of this program. Month by month statistics will be placed in the website and anyone, including the opposition, has the opportunity to review it. There is no need for regular formal reviews of this sort, outside of the usual accountability mechanisms.

With respect to the continual questioning—irrespective of the fact that we answer the questions—about the costings, Senator Colbeck knows, because we talked about this at length at estimates, that the costings for this particular program were available before the election. They were initially conservative but were then lowered by the process of the Charter of Budget Honesty. We canvassed this at estimates. We have provided answers to the opposition on this particular question, but it is not in the interests of the opposition to listen to the answers.

Furthermore, at estimates we reminded the opposition that this program is demand driven. The Teen Dental Plan will provide up to $150 for every eligible teenage towards an annual preventive dental check. That will target those who are aged between 12 and 17 in families that receive family tax benefit A. Teenagers in the same age group receiving youth allowance or Abstudy will also be eligible for the program. We think about 1.1 million teenagers every year will be eligible for the Medicare Teen Dental Plan. The Medicare Teen Dental Plan will operate as a part of the broad Medicare arrangements through the new dental benefits schedule.

This is a sensible program. We do appreciate the fact that it will start on 1 July with the support of the opposition, but we do think that this review mechanism will not work and is in fact an expensive waste of time.