Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

At the request of Senator Ludwig I move:

That, for the purposes of paragraph 48(1)(a) of the Legislative Instruments Act 2003, the Senate rescinds its resolution of 19 June 2008 disallowing the Health Insurance (Dental Services) Amendment and Repeal Determination 2008, made under subsection 3C(1) of the Health Insurance Act 1973.

During the election last year we announced we would be delivering a $290 million Commonwealth Dental Health Program to help reduce public dental waiting lists that had blown out to 650,000 across the country. We also announced that we would be delivering the Medicare Teen Dental Plan, which will involve an investment of $490 million. This means that we would be investing, in total, $780 million over the next four years in dental health—compared to the previous government, which spent less than $4 million on dental health over the four years until the 2007 election. So that is $780 million over four years compared to $4 million over four years.

At the same time we made it absolutely clear that we would abolish the Howard government’s poorly targeted and failing chronic disease dental scheme. We were entirely open about our policies. We made it clear that in order to fund our dental program we would have to redirect funding from the Liberal scheme to the Labor scheme—not unreasonable, given we won the election. We had made a choice, and so did the public. They chose in favour of Labor’s better targeted dental programs. That choice was necessary to maintain our budget surplus, and that is the clear choice now facing the Senate.

Today’s motion will decide whether the government can implement the dental policies which the Australian public voted for or whether the government will have to suspend its investment in public dental services because of the economic vandalism of those in the opposition. The motion will decide whether the government can provide a million more dental consultations and treatments for needy Australians, especially pensioners and concession card holders, or whether these people will continue to languish on public dental waiting lists because of the opposition’s irresponsible approach.

It has been estimated that there are about 650,000 Australians languishing on public dental waiting lists. Thirty per cent of Australians are reported to have avoided dental care due to the cost of services. Fifty thousand people each year end up in hospital with preventable dental conditions, putting more pressure on our hospitals. Tooth decay is Australia’s most prevalent health problem, with gum disease ranking as the fifth highest. Over a quarter of the Australian adult population have untreated dental decay—untreated because they are not accessing the dental care they require.

This alarming state of affairs is even worse amongst the poorer, most needy Australians. Concession card holders such as pensioners have lost on average 3.5 more teeth than non-concession card holders. As the member for North Sydney said, under the Liberal government things had got to the point where:

Dentistry remains out of reach to those on low incomes with around 30 percent of Australians unable to see a dentist because of cost.

That quote is from 6 March this year by the member for North Sydney. It is clear from these terrible facts that we need action on dental health, particularly for disadvantaged Australians, such as pensioners.

Rather than addressing these problems, the Howard government spent much of the past decade cynically playing the blame game. They did nothing but say, ‘Dental health is not our responsibility; blame the states.’ But it was the Howard government that helped create some of these problems in the first place. One of their first acts of government was to scrap Labor’s Commonwealth Dental Health Program in 1996. They ripped $100 million a year from Australia’s public dental system and this led to the explosion in public dental waiting lists which we see today. Six hundred and fifty thousand people waited, sometimes for years, for treatment. Then, belatedly, the Howard government introduced a dental scheme which was not targeted at people most in financial need and which had a referral process and eligibility criteria so complex and restrictive that few people could access it.

The previous government’s failed chronic disease dental scheme deserves a little bit more scrutiny. Labor recognises that, for those able to navigate their way through the complicated referral process and the red tape, the former government’s chronic disease dental scheme offered some help. But many people missed out—often the most needy people in our community. For example, in the four years up to 31 July 2008, under the Liberals’ chronic disease dental scheme no-one under the age of 30 received any services in the Northern Territory, despite it having some of Australia’s most needy Indigenous communities. This is a fact. No-one under the age of 15 has received any services in South Australia. This means that no child born in South Australia or the Northern Territory during the term of the Howard government received any help from the scheme. Only three people under the age of 20 received any services in Tasmania, Senator Colbeck, under the previous government’s scheme. Only nine people under the age of 25 received any services in Western Australia—and I am looking at a Western Australian senator as I am speaking—under the previous government’s program. Only 21 people under the age of 10 received any services in my own home state of Victoria. That is, on average, less than one person every two months.

Moreover, the former government’s scheme was not targeted at the most disadvantaged, such as pensioners and concession card holders. Under the Liberal scheme, a multimillionaire could get help but a pensioner with a toothache could not. Under the Liberal scheme, if you were a pensioner and you had a toothache, how much help do you think you could get? The answer is none. If you were a pensioner and needed a tooth extracted, how much help could you get? That is right—none. If you were a pensioner in any part of Australia and needed a simple filling to save a tooth, how much help could you get? That is right again—none.

In addition, take-up of the Liberals’ chronic disease dental scheme has been highly skewed, with many states receiving far less than a fair population share. While one in five concession card holders live in Queensland, about 18.9 per cent, it has received only 4.4 per cent of benefits under the chronic disease dental scheme. While one in 11 concession card holders live in South Australia, about 8.9 per cent, it has received only 2.5 per cent of benefits. Again to my colleague from Western Australia, while one in 12 concession card holders live in Western Australia, about 8.5 per cent, it has received only 0.7 per cent—less than one per cent—of benefits for necessary care. While three per cent of concession card holders live in Tasmania, Senator Colbeck, it has received only 0.3 per cent—less than half of one per cent—of benefits.

These figures show clearly that the Liberals’ chronic disease dental scheme has failed. It has failed pensioners, it has failed the poorest, most disadvantaged people in our community with the worst dental health and it has failed our kids and our teenagers. It has failed to help them maintain their teeth to prevent much worse problems later on in life. That is why the government is seeking to redirect funds from the Liberals’ failed program to support better-targeted dental programs, such as the Commonwealth Dental Health Program and the Medicare Teen Dental Plan.

We have made a decision—as governments need to—that we should be helping the most needy people in our community first in the most effective way possible. But, thanks to the economic vandalism and irresponsibility of the opposition, Labor’s more targeted approach is being put at risk. In particular, if the motion before the Senate fails, the government will have to suspend implementation of the Commonwealth Dental Health Program. A million additional dental consultation and treatment services will not be able to be provided—one million services that would benefit pensioners and concession card holders.

If the opposition gets its way, every state and territory would miss out on the additional services and investment in public dental services they would receive under the CDHP. The Liberals are clearly returning to form. They ripped $100 million a year from public dental services when they were elected in 1996 and they still want to block the Rudd government from any further investment in public dental care. This means that every state and territory is at risk of missing out on more dental services. If the Senate blocks the government’s motion, pensioners and concession card holders will miss out on a range of benefits under the CDHP.

States and territories would receive considerably more under Labor’s CDHP than they received over the last four years to 31 July 2008 under the Liberals’ failed scheme. I will go through those figures because I noted your earlier interjection. Victoria—my home state—would receive 3.7 times more funding; Queensland would receive 11 times more funding; South Australia would receive 10 times more funding and—the Western Australian senators should be very conscious of this fact—Western Australia would receive 35 times more; Tasmania would receive 38 times more funds from our scheme than the existing scheme; and the Northern Territory—and I know there are Northern Territory senators present as well today—would receive 174 times more money from our scheme than from the existing scheme.

About 6.6 million people as concession card holders would be eligible for treatment under the CDHP. About 4.3 million of these people are pensioner concession card holders and their dependants. This compares to the Liberals chronic disease dental scheme, which is not targeted to concession card holders. Only about 1.1 million people meet the complex eligibility requirements of the Liberals’ scheme.

The CDHP has a number of priority areas: people with dental related chronic diseases, Indigenous Australians and preschool children aged zero to four years. The CDHP priorities for people with dental related chronic disease includes people with cancer, transplant patients, cardiac patients and people with HIV-AIDS. So it is simply untrue for Senator Colbeck to claim, as he has done, that the CDHP will not benefit people with chronic disease. It is simply not true, Senator Colbeck. The Liberals’ chronic disease dental scheme has also had little benefit in particular for Indigenous Australians and children, with no young people at all up to the age of 14 receiving services in South Australia or the Northern Territory over four years.

The CDHP includes a number of initiatives to support and expand the dental workforce, including the establishment of new public dental clinics, improved training for dentists and fly-in fly-out services to remote areas. The Liberals’ chronic disease dental program does not include any funding for workforce or rural initiatives. There is no funding for rural initiatives under your scheme. All of these initiatives which will help pensioners, people with chronic diseases, children and Indigenous Australians will not be able to be implemented if the Senate supports the opposition’s politically opportunistic and irresponsible approach.

The opposition is demonstrating its economic irresponsibility in its claim that you can have it both ways and keep both the Liberal’s failed dental scheme and Labor’s better targeted policies. The Rudd government is committed to economic responsibility. That means we will have to maintain a strong budget surplus and make tough choices. The Liberal opposition is blowing a multibillion-dollar hole in the budget. The Charter of Budget Honesty costings which Labor took to the election are consistent with what the government is doing and include savings from closing the Liberals’ failed scheme in order to pay for Labor’s better policies. Compare our commitments to the previous government’s record of ripping $100 million a year from public dental services and leaving 650,000 people to languish on public dental waiting lists.

It is a very clear choice today in this chamber whether or not you want to stick with a policy that is untargeted and failing or go for a targeted expansion in dental health care in this country. I urge senators, particularly those from the smaller states, to listen to those statistics that I described and understand exactly where your ideological binge is getting you to. You are going to be denying, massively, your own state populations if you vote to keep the existing scheme and not implement Labor’s.