Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Hansard source

In continuation on my contribution on the Health Insurance Amendment (Professional Services Review Scheme) Bill 2023: the fact that the Albanese government is overseeing plummeting bulk-billing rates at a time when Australians are struggling to pay bills just proves how unbelievably important it is to ensure that the viability of Medicare is safeguarded into the future. The coalition will always be committed to supporting the integrity and financial viability of Medicare to ensure that all Australians have access to the critical support provided by Australia's healthcare system into the future. In fact, this bill continues the reforms started by the former coalition government to strengthen the PSR's review mechanisms, particularly for claims relating to the MBS.

We were glad to see the government pass the Health Legislation Amendment (Medicare Compliance and Other Measures) Act 2022 in December. This was a coalition bill that we proudly introduced in the 46th Parliament to strengthen the compliance powers of the PSR and add a degree of flexibility to the PSR's ability to address any inappropriate practice. We understood that it is vital that there continues to be rigorous and effective health practitioner compliance to protect the financial integrity of Medicare. We also have a strong track record of supporting our hardworking healthcare practitioners and peak bodies to correctly claim health payments with a clear focus on education, engagement and consultation. Australians rightly expect that their tax dollars are being used appropriately and effectively, particularly when they're being spent on our healthcare system, which is facing increasing pressure. We need to support practitioners who are doing the right thing by the taxpayer and by their patients but we also need to identify the healthcare practitioners who are not acting in good faith.

We acknowledge that this bill builds on the coalition's work to strengthen the PSR and protect the viability of Medicare through additional reforms; however, we do have concerns about the lack of consultation that was undertaken prior to the introduction of this bill, particularly in regard to the review on which these reforms are based. Time and time again we are concerned by the government's refusal to allow for appropriate levels of consultation on their policies, to follow proper process. Dr Philip stated in his report:

Given the timeframes set for this Review, my formal consultation with stakeholders has been necessarily limited, supplemented by informal discussions with participants, and I have based most of my work on desktop analysis.

It is really disappointing that the limited time frames for this review have acted as a significant barrier to Dr Philip's ability to undertake thorough consultation. That is why the opposition saw it as critical to gather more information from stakeholders on the impact of these reforms through a committee process. As we noted in our comments, we support this legislation but we do have concerns over the failure of the Albanese Labor government to properly consult with relevant stakeholders. This is a well-entrenched theme of Labor. They don't properly consult with people who'll be most impacted by their policies, they don't do adequate modelling, and they continue to ram policy through this place without properly considering the implications. Any consultation that is performed by this government seems to be merely a political exercise. Their focus continues to be on the headline, never on the detail.

We also note the concerns, raised by industry bodies through the submission process, relating to the removal of the requirement for the Chief Executive Medicare to consult with stakeholder groups prior to issuing a notice to produce documents. Not only has the government failed to ensure there is thorough consultation on this bill; the changes contained in this bill also reduce consultation. As expressed by the Australian College of Rural and Remote medicine:

Whilst removing input from the relevant professional body may well streamline the process, this is potentially detrimental to the practitioner who is required to produce documents under this section and is not in keeping with the recommendations from the Review.

The coalition will not stand in the way of good policy, but upholding adequate consultation in this area is critical to protecting the integrity and viability of Medicare and our world-class healthcare system.

Once again, the coalition will support this bill and the proposed changes, in the interests of increasing transparency of the Professional Services Review scheme; however, we put on record our concerns about the removal of consultation and engagement with stakeholders.