Larissa Waters (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Women and Minister for Finance, Minister Gallagher. I was pleased to see that the Greens-initiated Senate inquiries and the persistent pressure from women across Australia have finally led to the government listing more modern contraceptive pills and some menopausal hormone therapies on the PBS. The Greens have already announced costed policies that would completely remove the financial burden for women and make all contraceptives free, like they are in France, Ireland and Sweden. We've announced costed policies to make all MHT free, like it is in parts of Canada; it's heavily subsidised in the UK. Why do Australian women still have to pay for the cost of existing? Why won't the Albanese government make contraceptives and MHT free?

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Waters for the question, and I would like to acknowledge her longstanding work in this area. She has been a strong advocate for improving women's health in this country, and I do acknowledge that. In government, obviously, there is no shortage of ideas or policies that would warrant the attention of government. What we've done with this is consult with women about the areas that they think that the government should invest further in. We've balanced that up with a whole range of other things that the budget has to accommodate, and we have found that these measures—listing of the new oral contraceptives, listing of additional hormone replacement therapies and doing those from 1 March, plus increasing the rebates for insertion of IUD and birth control implants—are saving, again, hundreds of dollars for women with regard to these costs. We've also got a new Medicare rebate of $110 for GP menopause health assessments, which will, I think, encourage GPs to bulk-bill those longer sessions with women. Also—I should have said before—there will be two national trials into how pharmacists can provide straightforward UTI care for people on concession cards, and some other measures that I've already announced.

This is a big package for women's health. While we have costed it, we have also funded it. We're in a position in government to make that change. We've found half a billion dollars that will make women's health care cheaper. It will provide better care and ensure that there are more choices available for women in this country, and we are very proud of this policy.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Waters, first supplementary?

Larissa Waters (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The weekend's announcement, sadly, did nothing to address the affordability and accessibility of surgical abortions. There are still abortion deserts right across the country, especially in rural and regional areas. Women are travelling hundreds of kilometres and paying thousands to get this time-bound health care. It should be provided in public hospitals. Will the Albanese government return to its 2019 policy that demanded hospitals provide abortions as a condition of receiving Commonwealth funding?

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Waters for her question. Part of the work that we have done, which is in the area of responsibility we have, is in ensuring that non-surgical medical abortions are available through the dispensing of MS-2 Step. We have seen, since some of those restrictions on health professionals have been removed, significantly improved access for women to non-surgical medical abortions. Obviously, our increased investment in this area in the women's health package, including with encouraging long-acting contraceptive devices, is aimed at ensuring that more women get the protection they need for themselves, so that we're reducing the number of women who would have to seek an abortion.

On the hospital point: we've taken the view that the states run the hospitals and we need to fund the hospitals properly. (Time expired)

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Waters, second supplementary?

Larissa Waters (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister, you say that providing surgical abortions in hospitals is up to states and territories, but Minister Butler recently demanded that the Queensland government not pause the prescription of puberty blockers for children and that it conduct a review into gender care. Why won't the Albanese government do the same and intervene to demand access to surgical abortion in public hospitals?

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think those are two different things. Minister Butler has asked the NHMRC to consider national guidelines in relation to puberty blockers. Hospitals already provide access to surgical termination of pregnancy where they have the workforce and the skill to be able to provide it. We do not operate the hospitals. We do not dictate where workforce for those hospitals goes or the range of services that they provide. There are many services in this country in smaller hospitals that aren't able to provide a full suite of services. That is the reality of operating 700 hospitals across a very, very big country. For example, here in the ACT most abortions are performed by a clinic where they are free for women—and there are a range of different alternatives around the country. But our position has been to fund the hospitals properly, and then the hospital operators are in the best position to determine what services they provide. (Time expired)