Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice, on 25 March 2011:

  (1)   What was the involvement of the Treasurer or department in the new health proposal, including:

     (a)   the process behind how this new health agreement came about; and

     (b)   at what time and on what date the decision was made to overhaul the first National Health and Hospital Plan.

  (2)   Was the Treasurer or department:

     (a)   made aware of what was wrong with the National Health and Hospital Network; and

     (b)   advised that it needed to be scrapped.

  (3)   When were the Treasurer or department first made aware that a new health proposal was being considered.

  (4)   Who advised the Treasurer or department that a new health proposal was being considered.

  (5)   When were the Treasurer or department first asked to provide advice.

  (6)   In relation to any advice sought from the Treasurer or department:

     (a)   what was the nature of the advice sought;

     (b)   when was the information sought; and

     (c)   when was the advice provided.

  (7)   Did the Treasurer or department provide costings advice to the Prime Minister, the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet or any other department in relation to the new health proposal; if so:

     (a)   when was any advice in relation to costings provided;

     (b)   to whom or to which department was it provided; and

     (c)   when was the advice provided.

  (8)   How long was the Treasurer or department given to cost the new health deal and was there agreement on the costs.

  (9)   Given that Labor’s new health proposal only relates to ‘growth’, not existing hospital costs and the Commonwealth will fund up to 45 per cent of the growth in hospital costs in 2014 15 and up to 50 per cent in 2017 18, which is estimated to cost $16.4 billion, and noting that all of the promised increase in Commonwealth funding is beyond the forward estimates:

     (a)   where is the money coming from;

     (b)   how was the figure of $16.4 billion arrived at;

     (c)   what assumptions have been used;

     (d)   can a copy of all costings documents, including supporting documents, be provided;

     (e)   how accurate are costings for items beyond the forward estimates;

     (f)   what assurance can be given as to the accuracy of the health costings; and

     (g)   what guarantees do the taxpayers of Australia have that the costings will not change.

  (10)   In relation to the estimated cost of $16.4 billion, how will this be funded.

  (11)   Given that the Government can commit to the spending now, can a list be provided detailing offsetting savings; if not, will the proposal be funded from general revenue.

  (12)   Is the Treasurer or department aware of why the National Funding Authority was dumped.

  (13)   Is the Treasurer or department aware of the parameters of the National Funding Pool.

  (14)   Who was responsible for the decision to introduce the National Funding Pool, and in relation to this:

     (a)   what role did the Treasurer or department have in relation to the introduction of the National Funding Pool;

     (b)   when was the decision made; and

     (c)   if the decision was made by another Minister or department, when was the Treasurer or his department made aware of its proposed introduction.

  (15)   What is the difference between the dumped National Funding Authority and the National Funding Pool, and can an outline of the parameters of each be provided, including:

     (a)   management structures;

     (b)   responsibilities;

     (c)   accountability;

     (d)   funding;

     (e)   reporting framework;

     (f)   Commonwealth legislative requirements for the establishment of each body;

     (g)   state and territory legislative requirements for the establishment of each body; and

     (h)   Commonwealth and state and territory ‘accounts’.

  (16)   Did the Treasurer or department have any input or role in relation to the drafting of the Heads of Agreement – National Health Reform document; if so, can details be provided.

  (17)   Given that, in the health and ageing incoming brief to government, there is a reference to the Health Expenditure Working Group which has been established under the deputy heads of Treasury structure to quantify the costs of services agreed for transfer to government under the agreement (the first agreement) which will inform the amount of goods and services tax (GST) revenue to be withheld in the Commonwealth forward estimates for dedication to health and hospitals:

     (a)   did the department prepare any advice on the amount of GST required;

     (b)   was it quantified; if so, what was the amount;

     (c)   was it the case that the amount of GST to be recovered under the 30 per cent clawback would not have been sufficient to cover the health and hospitals costs that were going to be needed over the forward estimates; and

     (d)   if this is the case, was the dumping of the 30 per cent GST clawback a hollow decision.