Sam Dastyari (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Tax and Superannuation Laws Amendment (Medicare Levy and Medicare Levy Surcharge) Bill 2016 on behalf of the opposition. I commence my remarks by saying that Labor supports the bill. Labor welcomes the indexation of income thresholds below which Australians do not pay the Medicare levy or Medicare levy surcharge. This means that lower income Australians will not be subject to the levy. This bill increases the Medicare levy low-income threshold for a number of different people. It increases the Medicare levy low-income threshold for individuals and families along with the dependent child/student component of the family threshold in line with movements in the consumer price index. It also increases the Medicare levy low-income threshold for single taxpayers and families eligible for the seniors and pensioners tax offset in line with movements in the consumer price index so they do not have a Medicare levy liability where they do not have a an income tax liability. The bill also increases the Medicare levy surcharge low-income threshold in line with movements in the CPI. These measures apply to the 2015-16 income year and later income years.

Like last year Labor will support this bill and, like last year, Labor will ironically applauded the Turnbull government for this all too rare example of decency amidst the unfairness and focus of looking after vested interests and big banks. This is a regular process that ensures that the most vulnerable Australians are not disadvantaged while maintaining their access to Medicare, our world-class universal health system. Nevertheless, we find this bill to be another reminder of the Abbott-Turnbull government's attacks on Medicare—of their GP tax, their $650 million cut to Medicare payments for pathology and diagnostic imaging and now their plan to axe the Child Dental Benefits Schedule.

This measure will provide a small amount of tax relief for some less well-off taxpayers, but let's be clear: this government is still taking in more taxes that Labor did in government. They talk about bringing down taxes but in fact the tax to GDP ratio is rising under this government. If the Treasurer's latest thought bubble is to be believed a small tax cut might be in order for those earning above $80,000. But that is cold comfort for 75 per cent of Australians, who earn under $80,000 annually.

Labor notes that since 2013 the living standards of Australians have been declining. A better measure of living standards and GDP is something the boffins call 'real net national disposable income per capita'. That measure is down four per cent in two years, leading to some commentators to describe the decline in living standards as an 'income recession'. This is particularly alarming, given the longer-run context: over the past generation earnings have risen three times as fast for the top 10th of workers as for the bottom 10th. The top one per cent share has doubled, as has the number of private helicopters. The number of private jets has tripled, and yet one in five families say they cannot afford a week's holiday away from home.

Labor understands the need to raise living standards, which is why the Australian people can trust us to stay focused on addressing inequality. This is reflected in the important social policy report by my colleague, the shadow minister for families and payments, Ms Macklin, Growing together, which shows a path towards a more egalitarian nation, and the commitment by the shadow minister for employment, Mr O'Connor, to defend penalty rates, minimum wages and the role of unions.

Labor's commitment to the fair go is reflected in our new tranche of multinational tax avoidance measures, demonstrating that it is Labor that continues to lead in making sure the tax affairs of multinationals are transparent. In fact, during this election term, Bill Shorten's Labor team has released over 70 practical policies in education, health, tax, housing affordability, climate change, infrastructure start-ups, innovation, marriage equality, domestic violence, the sharing economy, competition policy and more.

So while Labor supports this technical annual measure, we note the Liberal's history of Medicare, from Fraser to Turnbull. Australians know that if they want a party that gets tough on multinationals to vote Labor. If they want a party that gets tough on Medicare then vote Liberal.

On 1 February this year, Medicare celebrated its 32nd birthday. Although this bill is a tax bill which is dealing with the essential taxation arrangements which underpin and fund Medicare, at the heart of this is Medicare, which is a critical social innovation. That social innovation was directed at ensuring that Australia was different to many other countries around the world, where wealth inequality has a direct trajectory to health inequality. The reason it is different was the genius of Labor prime ministers Whitlam and Hawke, who put in place a system whereby we could fund a person's access to primary care in the general taxation system by establishing an additional levy upon wages, which at that point in time was around one per cent of wages, ensuring that through a progressive taxation scheme we could fund the primary and associated care needs of this country. Of course, it has expanded over the years, but at the heart of that social innovation was a scheme which meant access to a GP and other parts of the primary healthcare system was available for all Australians.

This bill is necessary to ensure that the income thresholds continue to represent that progressive idea behind the scheme—to ensure that we continue to adjust them, as the member for Fraser has outlined, so that they cut in at exactly the right level. This bill is technical. It indexes the income thresholds below which Australians do not pay the Medicare levy or the Medicare levy surcharge. We have dealt with similar measures in previous years. This is a regular process that ensures the most vulnerable Australians and those from the lowest end of the income scale are not disadvantaged, while maintaining their access to Medicare. Labor therefore supports the measure.

The bill is a reminder to millions—maybe, even to every Australian—about how important Medicare is to them. It is a devastating reminder to all Australians about the shameful record that this government has when it comes to Medicare. Unfortunately, the progressive measures in indexing the Medicare levy and the Medicare levy surcharge are well and truly outweighed when it comes to the rest of the government's record on Medicare over the last 2½ years. We have lived through the Abbott-Turnbull government's attempts to dismantle Medicare and to introduce a GP tax—Mach 1, 2 and 3—and now the GP tax through the back door, being the freezing of Medicare rebates.

When we consider the importance associated with this bill we must also consider the things that are not in this bill and the other damage the government is doing through its regressive Medicare changes. I would like to talk a little bit about pathology, because any of the thousands of Australians who have needed a pathology test at one of the 5,000 collection centres around the country recently would have noticed the warnings that are being issued by the pathology sector. The pathology sector is not known for its radicalism. Pathologists are not known as radical supporters, and particularly not for this side of parliament. So to walk into a pathology collection service, or indeed many of the GP services around the country, and to see warning signs posted and petitions on the counter warning about the egregious cuts that are being made by this government and are about to be implemented on 1 July this year—the reduction in Medicare bulk-billing arrangements—means people are quite rightly shocked. People all over Australia came to us as senators and asked us to explain what was going on from 1 July this year and why there was a threat they would no longer be bulk-billed for their pathology tests. Liesel Wett, the Chief Executive Officer of Pathology Australia, has said:

These unfair cuts would see patients having to pay for services from July this year.

She has pointed out, as constituent after constituent has pointed out to the opposition, that, if they have to pay the full up-front fee, they simply do not have those blood tests. For many people, not having a blood test may not be a critical threat to their health and wellbeing, but, for any of the thousands of electors in my home state who are suffering from diabetes, having a regular blood test is absolutely critical. If laboratories decide they have to implement this co-payment, we will see patients forgoing having their blood tests, and people's illnesses will get worse. If a person is undergoing a course of chemotherapy, they will be regularly required to have blood tests as part of their post-treatment care. It is these people who are going to be the most affected by these changes. If someone is undergoing a course of chemotherapy then chances are they have had to leave work and their income has been severely affected by that illness, so it is hitting them at the most vulnerable time in their lives. I cannot see why this government is putting these changes in place. Constituent after constituent has said to the opposition, 'This is a threat to us.' It is going to impact on them.

I have spoken on the importance of considering the equity measures contained within this bill, which adjusts the threshold, the point at which Medicare rebates cut in against the iniquitous measures that have been visited upon Australian people as a result of this government's attacks on the Medicare rebates for pathology, along with the attacks this government has made in relation to the Child Dental Benefit Scheme. Despite what has been said by the Minister for Health, the fact is that this government is slashing $1 billion from dental care in this country. It is a figure which has been confirmed by the minister herself. On ABC News Online on 23 April, a spokesman for Ms Ley confirmed the $1 billion cut. The government is abolishing Labor's Medicare-based dental scheme for children under the age of 18.

It is a surprise to all of us on this side of the house that we have not seen members on the other side of the chamber come up and apologise for the cuts and problems that are visited by their government upon the people within their home states. The opposition has been looking at the figures. During question time in the other place yesterday, the minister said that a million children—that is right: one million children—have enjoyed the benefits of Labor's child benefit scheme, and a million children will no longer have the benefits of that scheme, because the government has closed it down.

The opposition has had a look around the country to see where children have been relying on this means-tested, tightly targeted scheme, which is benefiting kids, many of whom would probably never have been to a dentist before in their lives. Take, for example, the postcode 2250, a postcode which takes in the electorates of the members for both Robertson and Dobell. The opposition found that 31,309 children had accessed the dental benefits scheme over the years of its existence in this postcode within the electorates of Robertson and Dobell. I am not surprised that we have not seen the members for either Robertson or Dobell say anything about the operation of this scheme, because we know that, in closing down the Child Dental Benefit Scheme, somewhere in the order of 31,000 children are going to be forced to join the public dental scheme, a scheme which has, at the moment, somewhere in the order of 12,000 children already waiting in New South Wales to access public dental care.

We looked at the figures for postcode 2259, which falls exclusively within the electorate of Dobell and where 29,657 dental services have been accessed over the life of the scheme. The member for Dobell has not had a peep to say about her government closing down the scheme. All I can say to the electorate of Dobell is that it is a good job we have a great candidate in the form of Emma McBride, who is campaigning very tough and very hard in the seat to ensure that she becomes the next member for Dobell. I am confident that Emma McBride has the interests of those 29,000 children who have been accessing the Child Dental Benefit Scheme in her heart as she approaches the task of election campaigning.

In the electorate of Page, where there are around 28,500 children who have accessed the Child Dental Benefit Scheme, the opposition went looking around to see whether the current member for Page has had anything to say about this. He has absolutely nothing to say about the fact that this government has closed down this scheme. This is a surprise because, if anyone thinks of the impact of closing down the benefit, it is going to fall more harshly upon people in regional Australia. It is in regional Australia where Labor's scheme provided up to $1,000 over a two-year period to access the services of a private dentist. It is precisely in regional Australia where these services are needed the most, because it is a lot harder for people in these areas to access the public schemes, which are so heavily oversubscribed. It is a good job that we have a great candidate in Janelle Saffin, who knows the electorate well. She is a fierce campaigner for regional Australia and regional health who will be standing up for the children in that electorate as well.

The member for Gilmore had a bit to say before question time in the other place about the benefits of the government's new scheme for people in her electorate. She said it was going to be a huge help for the people in the electorate of Gilmore. If this is a huge help, I would hate to see what would be there if there was a problem for the people of New South Wales and Gilmore. The waiting lists in New South Wales are so long and so great that Premier Mike Baird has refused to even issue average waiting times. In other states around Australia waiting times are published by the public dental scheme so that people know when they enrol or make an appointment how long it will be before they have access to the public scheme. With over 116,000 adults—that is, adults alone—and 12,000 children on the list in New South Wales in those electorates that I mentioned earlier, they are going to be behind a lot of people in a very long queue for access to the public scheme.

There are $1 billion worth of cuts for the scheme opened up to everybody. There are over 116,000 adults and 12,000 kids on the scheme in New South Wales, and those in the coalition think that this is absolutely beautiful. It is a good thing that we have great candidates in places like Gilmore, Dobell and Robertson putting the health interests of people in regional Australia first.

There it is: a government that introduces measures which adjust the threshold at which the Medicare rebate kicks in, a provision which Labor supports. We support it wholeheartedly, but it has to be viewed against all of the other egregious changes that have been made, from the GP tax proposals, the GP tax by stealth, the changes to pathology bulk billing and the changes to the dental benefits scheme. We are well and truly in a deficit when it comes to health and health care under this Turnbull government.

Helen Polley (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Tax and Superannuation Laws Amendment (Medicare Levy and Medicare Levy Surcharge) Bill 2016. Labor welcomes the indexation of the income thresholds below which Australians do not pay the Medicare levy or the Medicare levy surcharge. This is a regular process that ensures that the most vulnerable Australians are not disadvantaged, while maintaining their access to Medicare. While Labor can support this bill we remain determined to ensure that we will always oppose the Turnbull government's broader and disastrous attacks on Australia's health care system, such as Malcolm Turnbull keeping Tony Abbott's $57 billion cuts to hospitals—

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Polley, I would ask you to refer to the Prime Minister by his appropriate title.

Helen Polley (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

while adding a further $2.1 billion in cuts of his own. These dreadful cuts will put enormous pressure on our public hospitals, which are already struggling to cope with the budget cuts. You simply cannot rip $60 billion out of our healthcare system without expecting consequences. Cuts like this lead to poorer health outcomes and poorer patient care and services. The effects of these cuts will be particularly felt in hospital emergency departments, where overcrowding and waiting times have already gone beyond mere inconvenience and become downright dangerous.

This is vividly illustrated by an example from my home state of Tasmania, where earlier this year a 95-year-old woman was left lying on the waiting room floor of the Royal Hobart Hospital emergency department for hours while she waited to be seen by clinical staff. This is totally unacceptable—to be 95 years of age and to be treated with such disdain and lack of respect. The pressure that is now placed on those who work in our emergency departments puts them almost at cracking point. Another incident saw an elderly Tasmanian man wait two days for surgery after a severe fall. This is simply unacceptable. The people of Tasmania and the people of Australia deserve so much more.

Unfortunately, given Tasmania's healthcare system, we will be $2.7 billion worse off over the next decade. It looks like things will only get worse.

The government used smoke and mirrors the other week to axe Labor's successful child dental benefits scheme. We know those on the other side are very good when it comes to using smoke and mirrors. But it is the children of Australia who will always depend on Labor, whether it is for dental services or health services in general. Labor's dental benefits scheme had helped a million Australian kids get their teeth fixed over the last two years. Many of these children have come from families that previously had been unable to afford proper dental care. This is a scheme that was under attack from the Liberals the moment it commenced, despite the fact that a review published by the government's own Department of Health hailed the scheme as a success.

Now Australians are going to be denied access to affordable dental care. Under the government's new scheme, children will only receive dental assistance if they attend already-crowded public dental clinics with very, very long waiting lists. In Tasmania, the wait to attend one of these clinics is nearly three years—and those on that side are obviously saying that that is acceptable. Well, it is not acceptable at all. It is outrageous and it shows just how out of touch with Australian families this government is.

This cut comes on top of a long line of other attacks on dental health programs by the Liberals. Let us recap those: $390 million cut from adult public dental services; worsening dental waiting lists across Australia; $225 million cut from Labor's program to build dental clinics in regional Australia and in nursing homes; and $125.6 million already cut from the Child Dental Benefits Schedule.

Despite dropping its original proposal for a compulsory $7 tax on all GP visits, we have Mr Turnbull continuing Mr Tony Abbott's $2-billion four-year freeze on Medicare rebates for GP visits, which will drive down bulk billing and make it more expensive to see your doctor. This is already having impacts right around the country, but, again, it is having very detrimental impacts in my home state of Tasmania. One GP was forced to introduce a $30 charge for hundreds of patients who were previously bulk-billed.

The Liberal government—and it really does not matter whether it was under Mr Abbott when he was leading or it is under Mr Turnbull—have only ever seen health as a means to budget savings, and that is by cutting health. It is in their DNA. It is who they are. The government's Medicare rebate freeze has imposed an upfront charge for patients and is destroying Medicare's universal health care, which is exactly what this Liberal government and those before it have always intended.

As a result, public hospitals are being overwhelmed and are not coping with the influx of patients trying to dodge the cost of seeing a GP by going to the emergency department, exacerbating the overcrowding catastrophes that I mentioned earlier. This is yet another example proving that Medicare would never be safe under a Liberal Turnbull government.

Australians are rightly very suspicious about this government's motivations when it comes to slugging taxpayers every time that they go to visit their GP. They are very sceptical about this government. It does not matter where you go in my home state, and I am sure it is the same right across this great country: Australian voters out there know that they cannot trust the Turnbull government when it comes to health or education. Just on the eve of the last election, you will recall—I know my colleagues on this side do—that the then Leader of the Opposition, Mr Abbott, gave a commitment to the Australian people—on the eve of the election—that there would be no cuts to health, there would be no cuts to education and pensions would not be touched. And we know that he lied to the Australian community. For the last three years, we have seen nothing except cuts when it comes to health and education. They try to use smoke and mirrors to cover themselves, but we know—whether it is in health and education or in my own area of responsibility, aged care—that they are a government that is unfair on those people who are most vulnerable in our communities.

The countdown is on to the budget tonight. That will be delivered on behalf of the government by the Treasurer, obviously. We know that they are going to have to put some sweeteners in there, because we are having the budget brought down tonight and it will probably be Friday or Saturday that the election will be called, so of course we know that the government will try and use smoke and mirrors and a few lollies to con the people of Australia again that they are worth supporting. Well, I think they have gone a step too far when it comes to the savage cuts that they have made while in government to health, to education and to a whole raft of other areas—whether it is your kids trying to get to see a dentist or you waiting to see your GP.

As to pathology: as Senator Dastyari so eloquently explained, the pathology sector in this country is not naturally a constituency that would normally support this side of the chamber, but they have been out campaigning against this government because they know that, every day, when people come in to their laboratories, all those tests that are done are essential. So whether the tests are for people with diabetes or those having cancer treatments or those who need to have their blood tested every month or fortnight, or whether it is women having a Pap smear or a mammogram, Australian families are going to have to pay more money. There will be cases as there are in my home state, where I have spoken to people over the last few months who have said, 'Helen, we just won't be able to meet those up-front fees. We don't have in our family budget the ability to put up $400 or $500 for a scan and then wait for the rebate.' This is going to mean further hardship for too many Australians.

Labor fears that these cuts will see patients who are being treated for cancer and other serious conditions forced, as I said, to fork out thousands of dollars up-front to pay for scans and tests that were previously bulk-billed. Patients diagnosed with melanomas who were previously bulk-billed will now face up-front costs of $1,500 and still be left out of pocket with costs of up to $400 after receiving their Medicare rebate. A patient suspected of having breast cancer will face up-front costs of $554 for mammograms and ultrasounds and be left $300 out of pocket, even after receiving their Medicare rebates. Those opposite, on the government benches, obviously are not concerned about these families. There will be situations where mothers will make the decision that their children's dental visit is more important than them having their Pap smear or their mammogram. That is how serious is this issue confronting the Australian people. These $650 million dollar cuts will add an extra financial burden for these individuals and their families to deal with. This will prove particularly detrimental for low-income Australians, who simply will not be able to afford to pay these additional costs. In Tasmania, I know of many families in difficult financial times who will struggle to fork out $300 to $400 to help a seriously ill family member. Labor believes that these essential treatments should be accessible to all Australians, not just those with a big enough bank balance or credit card to pay for them. Your access to good-quality health care, which we provide in this country, should not be determined by the size of your credit card or your bank balance. That is the difference between those on the government benches and those of us in opposition.

While we can support this bill today, we remain sceptical of the Liberal government, who seem to only ever see health as a source of budget cuts. The Liberal government's overall record on health is abysmal and appalling. In addition to the disastrous cuts to health that I detailed earlier, the Turnbull government have gutted crucial health workforce training programs by $595 million. They ripped another $146 million out of prevention and e-health programs. They continued Tony Abbott's $267 million attack on the Medicare safety nets. These are serious amounts of money that will have a real impact on Australian families.

Mr Malcom Turnbull took the prime ministership promising new leadership. When he knifed Mr Tony Abbott in the back, he promised that his government would be a government of the 21st century. He said that his ministry would focus on the challenges of the future, but I say—and the Australian people are telling me when I travel around Australia and in my home state—that he has not delivered. It is very typical of this Prime Minister. When he was the Leader of the Opposition in the past, he promised so much but failed to deliver. He cannot even bring his own caucus together—he has breakouts. Labor have a very united caucus and a very united team going to the election. We have 60 days until people will vote. The Australian people will pass judgement on who they believe will provide the greatest security going forward and the world's very best health and education. We know that, on those two fronts alone, this government does not even get into the ballpark. The Australian community were conned at the last election. I believe they are much wiser now. They are far more cynical about a government that says one thing today and does something completely different tomorrow.

One of the things the government have been really good at is grabbing these thought bubbles as they float past. We know that most of the thought bubbles that the Prime Minister has grabbed and thrown out there to the Australian community have not even lasted 24 hours. They have hit the deck—just like bubbles do when children are blowing bubbles, they float around and then, finally, they hit the ground and are gone.

The government are renowned, as I said earlier, for targeting those who can least afford it, to make cuts to the budget. They target the sick, they target the most vulnerable and they will do the same in the budget that will be delivered tonight—just as they did in 2014. There was an outrageous attack on those who could least afford it in 2014; it was no better in 2015. But now, to bring all that together, we have in Mr Turnbull a Prime Minister who is hell-bent on continuing the savage cuts and the attacks on the Australian community's most vulnerable. I have no doubt whatsoever that the budget tonight will reaffirm our concerns about who will be looked after in this budget. We know it will be the top end of town. The top earners in this country will be the ones getting a tax cut. Yes, the government will give something to small business and throw a bit of confetti here and there, hoping that, once again, they can pull the wool over the eyes of the Australian people. I have more faith in the Australian people. I have faith in the Tasmanian people that they will see the government and their policies for what they are. They are unfair. They reflect a government who are arrogant and out of touch. I think the Australian people will see through their lack of policy detail.

Before the last election, we saw so many promises made that have been broken over the last three years. In contrast to that, you have to look at what the Labor opposition, under Mr Bill Shorten, has already put out in the public arena. Over 100 policies have been put out and costed. That is the contrast between the Liberal government and the Labor opposition. We are serious about bringing stability to this country, beginning with economic development. We are going to invest in infrastructure for the future. We also know that one lever for growing the economy is investment in education.

Speaking again about my home state of Tasmania, I want to place on record one of the most significant amounts of money that has been promised by any opposition. The Leader of the Opposition, Bill Shorten, has promised to invest $150 million into the economy of Launceston and the surrounding areas by committing—along with the state government, local government and the University of Tasmania—to fund a new campus in Launceston and one on the north-west coast, in Burnie. That will be an outstanding contribution. But what do we hear from those opposite? What do we hear from Andrew Nikolic, the federal member for Bass? We hear: 'We have to take time to consider everything before we make a commitment.' The reality is that government members and senators have been briefed on every occasion, along with the Labor opposition senators and Ms Julie Collins, the member for Franklin. We in the opposition, who have nowhere near the sorts of resources available to us that those in government do, have said that this is an economic driver that Tasmania needs badly because we need to open up opportunities for young Tasmanians to go to university, to have the option of doing a university degree. Not only is the university going to be supported by Labor; so will our TAFEs. We believe in investing in our universities, TAFEs and schools because they are the economic drivers we need to deliver better outcomes, not only for Tasmania but for the country.

I will come back to the Tax and Superannuation Laws Amendment (Medicare Levy and Medicare Levy Surcharge) Bill. The Turnbull government's disastrous cuts to health prove yet again that when it comes to health the Liberals cannot be trusted. We know that when it comes to good health the Australian community will only ever be well served by a Labor government. I commend this piece of legislation to the Senate but I remind the government that we will be watching the budget tonight to see whether or not the leopard is able to change its spots.

Matthew Canavan (Queensland, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As is customary, I thank all the senators who have contributed to this debate, as misguided and off topic some of those contributions have been. We had Senator Polley talk about the budget tonight but barely mention the economy, which is a central part, I am sure, of the budget. You would understand, Mr Acting Deputy President, why they would not want to talk about the economy on a day when once again they have been found out: they cannot add up. They struggle to add up, the Labor Party, and tonight they will be shown up again.

This bill relates to our tax system, which will also be a central element of the budget tonight. It is an important update to that system. The Tax and Superannuation Laws Amendment (Medicare Levy and Medicare Levy Surcharge) Bill 2016 amends the Medicare Levy Act 1986 to increase the Medicare levy low-income thresholds for singles, families, seniors and pensioners, in line with increases in the consumer price index. This will ensure that the low-income thresholds keep pace with increases in the cost of living. The amendments to the Medicare levy low-income thresholds apply to the 2015-16 year of income and to future income years. Full details of the measures in the bill are available in the explanatory memorandum. I commend this bill to the Senate.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.