Catryna Bilyk (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Health and Ageing, Senator Ludwig. Can the minister outline for the Senate why the government’s plans to ensure that Australians everywhere can access the health care that they need are necessary and how they are an improvement on what has gone before?

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Bilyk for her question regarding the need for accessibility and sustainability in the health care system in Australia. The Rudd government is delivering the reform needed to ensure that Australians can get the health care they need. These reforms are all the more necessary following the callous actions of the current Leader of the Opposition, who as health minister gouged $1 billion out of the public health system and capped GP numbers.

Let me lay out more explicitly a little bit of the groundwork. The Howard government’s 2003 budget papers showed progressive cuts to the projected spending on public hospitals of, first, $109 million, then $172 million, then $265,000 and then $373 million. Further advice from the Department of Health is that the final year of the agreement saw a cut of $497 million. All of those cuts were presided over by the then Minister for Health, the current Leader of the Opposition. The opposition leader lacks credibility on health. He lacks a sense of fairness when it comes to the need to make sure that all Australians, not just those who are rich or well off, can access the health care they need. The 2003-04 budget papers of the Howard government made it absolutely clear. They were making these cuts because they expected fewer people to go into public hospitals after the government drove the private health insurance rebate. The money that the opposition leader ripped out of the hospital system could have funded an extra 1,025 hospital beds or 760 GP training places by 2007-08. (Time expired)

Catryna Bilyk (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Can the minister outline for the Senate the government’s plans to train a record number of doctors. In particular, how would this get more doctors out into the bush communities, which are suffering the worst effects of the nationwide health workforce shortage?

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! When there is silence we will proceed.

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Bilyk for her supplementary question regarding the Rudd government’s record investment in our doctors and specialists. We are providing $632 million to train a record number of doctors over the next 10 years. We will deliver 5,500 new or training general practitioners, 680 medical specialists and 5,400 work experience pre-vocational GP program places. Those opposite are disingenuous when they claim to care about rural and regional areas. When they were in government they ripped $1 billion from the public hospital system and capped GP places. This created a situation where shortages are impacting on 59 per cent of all Australians, in towns across Australia including Ballarat, Dayboro, Coffs Harbour and Yea. (Time expired)

Catryna Bilyk (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I have a further supplementary question for the minister. Can the minister inform the Senate of the government’s actions to support nurses and midwives?

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Bilyk for her second supplementary question about the crucial part of our health workforce reform. The Rudd government’s reforms in this area—recognition of the skills and experience of nurses and midwives—are long overdue. Last year’s budget included an extra $120 million commitment to improve maternity services, to facilitate access to the MBS and PBS for the patients of nurse practitioners and of appropriately qualified and experienced midwives. I am very pleased that the Senate finally passed this legislation this week six months after it passed the House and after two Senate inquiries. It is a shame that the Liberal Party in the Senate could not bring itself to make a clear statement of support for our hard-working nurses. Instead, they were only in a position to not oppose this legislation. Nevertheless, our reforms are a win for the community, which will enjoy the benefit. (Time expired)