Mark Butler
Hindmarsh · Australian Labor Party · Australia
“But earlier today we were all in here voting on the latest instalment in the member for Lindsay's ongoing but thus far unsuccessful campaign to rebrand the Liberal Party.”
“I thank the member for Werriwa for her contribution and for her really strong support for everything we're doing to make Medicare stronger and make medicines cheaper. I thank all members for their contributions to the debate on this bill. As the member for Werriwa said, Medicare is the very best of Australia.”
“I thank the member for his question, which is a question I've answered before in this place since the budget. As I've said on a number of occasions publicly and in this chamber, the additional support that over-65s have received since about 2004 for their private health insurance premium is something we did revisit given the significant p…”
“But, under ours, they'll receive an increase of more than 20 per cent, or an additional $160 million in this year alone, which means more doctors, more nurses and better care in Tasmania.”
“Importantly, this bill provides stability so patients can continue to benefit from the outcomes of these programs and strengthened access to primary care.”
“That approach gives providers and the government greater certainty while preserving the flexibility needed to keep program settings up to date as health system needs evolve. Importantly, the bill does not change the underlying policy settings of existing programs.”
The complete record
Every one of 580 lines we hold for Mark Butler, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 12.
“As to amendment (1) of the four amendments moved by the member, around unscheduled reassessments, we have very carefully set out the circumstances where a participant or their nominee or their guardian is able to request a reassessment. We think that covers the circumstances, whether they relate to the person's functional capacity or general circumstances, that would justify an unscheduled reassessment. There is also effectively a safety net of the NDIA chief executive being able to request a reassessment if the CEO or the agency is concerned that a participant might be at risk. We think that that very much deals with the circumstances that are reasonable to ground an unscheduled reassessment, so we won't be supporting these amendments.”
“I'm not sure whether the member was suggesting the government was seeking to demonise this scheme. The government certainly is not seeking to demonise the scheme that, as the builders of the scheme, we're very proud of, and everything we are doing here is directed at securing the future of this scheme for the long term. Members might reasonably disagree on details about that, but, frankly, I quite clearly object to any suggestion that we are demonising a scheme which we see as a proud legacy of the Labor Party and of this parliament. I wholeheartedly reject that. In relation to amendments dealing with support determinations, we don't support the amendments put forward by the member. There are other amendments from the crossbench around support determinations that we will be supporting.”
“On top of that, when tabling any of these types of instruments, particularly category A rules, section 211 of the act requires me, very clearly, to issue a consultation statement that sets out the way in which we have fulfilled that commitment that was made 15 years ago to build, implement and run a scheme that was very much done in partnership with people with disabilities. We're very satisfied with this process, going forward, that already has involved a deep engagement of government with disability representative organisations and that will have the work of the RAC, the reform advisory committee, sitting alongside it. Obviously, as the members both indicated, it would involve engagement from the technical advisory group. We're very satisfied that this work will be done in the way I think the members want to see it done.”
“The reform advisory committee has a key role in advising us about things like this, particularly the functional capacity assessment system, which was also a recommendation of the review way back in 2023. As the member for Kooyong reminds us, that committee does its job frankly and fearlessly. As both members know, and I imagine all members know as well, this particular part of the reform program will be implemented after proper advice and proper consultation—of the type I set out in my Press Club speech—through category A rules that need to be agreed with every state and territory. There are pretty clear processes for not just our government to go through but state and territory governments to also go through with their state or territory based disability representative organisations. These systems are well established.”
“I thank the member for Bradfield and the member for Kooyong for their comments. The NDIS has more significant consultation structures and protocols than any other social program I've dealt with, at least, and so it should. As a minister at the time we were building the NDIS, with mental health and ageing I was involved quite centrally in that design. That government set up this scheme to be very much a scheme based on the philosophy of choice and the philosophy of 'Nothing about us without us', as the member for Kooyong reminded us. There are a number of structures already in place there. The member for Bradfield referred to the NDIS review, which recommended the establishment of deeper consultation structures, and we acted on that.”
“For those reasons—and also in terms of the question of permanence and the question of appropriate treatment, where we will be supporting some other crossbench amendments—we're not supporting the amendments from the member for Fowler.”
“That support needs assessment will look at the person's functional needs and also their environmental circumstances. Their living circumstances, issues of language and cultural factors—the things that the member for Fowler has raised in her amendment—will certainly be factors that are very important in the support needs assessment of individual participants under the new framework planning. But the functional capacity assessment is an objective assessment that looks at a person's functional capacity, and that will be developed over the coming months with the support of the technical advisory group. Those matters that the member for Fowler has raised will be accommodated in the system of support needs assessment.”
“While the government has a lot of sympathy with the spirit in which the member has moved these amendments, we will not be supporting them in the House. Let me say a few words about why. The future of the NDIS is going to rest on two new approaches to eligibility, and a plan setting and plan management. The bill seeks to do what we have been advised to do now for some time, including through the NDIS review, and that is to put in place an objective system of functional capacity assessment to determine eligibility—to move from a diagnosis based system to an objective assessment of someone's functional capacity. That will be an objective test. Once eligible, a person under new framework planning will be subjected to a support needs assessment.”
“That confidence to try something new comes from knowing that these clinics are backed by Medicare—that cornerstone of the world's best health system. They're not just urgent care clinics; they're Medicare urgent care clinics. There's been a bit of chatter recently about older brands getting a bit stale—chatter that happened again this morning, for some reason—and older brands needing a bit of glitter and a bit of pizzazz. Well, I can tell you that the Medicare brand needs no pizzazz. It doesn't need any glitter, because it hasn't changed in 40 years. People still get the same Medicare cards that Bob Hawke was posting out to people in 1984, and people still trust that brand more than ever before because it delivers for them. It delivers real change in their lives.”
“That has already seen about 9,000 patients, and from tomorrow the Erina urgent care clinic will become a permanent feature of our healthcare system, along with the other 136 clinics that we have delivered. As I said, last week, we opened the last of the 137 clinics we committed to delivering before 30 June. It was in Caloundra, in the electorate of Fisher, and, just like the urgent care clinic at Erina, the Liberal Party refused to match our commitment to the urgent care clinic at Caloundra in the member for Fisher's electorate. I say to the member for Fisher in his absence that at least we had his back on the Sunshine Coast. More than 3.2 million Australians have now gone through these new clinics. They're staffed by high-quality doctors and nurses, they're open seven days a week and they're fully bulk-billed.”
“Thank you to the member for Robertson, who is affectionately known as Dr Gordon in his electorate, where he still pulls shifts as an emergency physician at the Wyong hospital. Through that work and his other work as a doctor he is a terrific source of advice to us about our program to strengthen Medicare, and I'm glad to say he's seeing the results in his own electorate. Our record investment in bulk-billing in November last year has already seen the bulk-billing rate climb by more than 10 per cent for people who don't have that concession card—more than 10 per cent in just five months. At around the same time, we opened the urgent care clinic at Erina.”
“That terrific campaign group that came to see us last week and that came to see us at the same time last year is doing everything they can to raise awareness among young Australians—not to look past some symptoms that simply are not normal. But we need to do more. We need to understand what is driving this big increase in diagnosis. We need to help lift the awareness among GPs about this issue and for them to know what to do about it.”
“We talked to that group—and I've talked to others involved in bowel cancer—about ways in which we can lift the awareness of general practitioners, not to simply discount reports from their patients about symptoms that should be investigated and not to simply put it down to something unrelated to bowel cancer. I know that those groups and government are talking to the college of GPs about materials and resources we can give to their GP members, who, as the member knows, really are the front line when young Australians in their 20s, 30s and 40s are going to their GP and asking questions about these symptoms that they're having.”
“One of the clinician researchers that is leading some of that research was part of the delegation last week. I'm not sure whether the member for Mayo managed to talk to him. I think people like that—extraordinarily smart, experienced people—are pretty honest that we just don't know what is driving this big increase in diagnosis rates among younger Australians. I'm not talking about the 45-year-old to 50-year-old cohort, which has been the subject of a NHMRC investigation about whether we should move the bowel cancer screening age from 50 down to 45. The member is talking about people in their 20s and in their 30s. There are a range of hypotheses. Some of them are being tested and probed by the research that we've funded through Cancer Australia. This research is happening in cooperation with clinician researchers right across the world.”
“Thank you to the member for Mayo. I think members right across the chamber, and senators as well, met with younger Australians from their own electorates that came to this building last week to talk about this extraordinary, terrible trend that we're living through now with, as the member said, the largest increase in younger onset bowel cancer we can find anywhere in the world. It's not the only cancer type where we're seeing big rates of increase in younger diagnoses—head and neck is one, and there are a number of others as well—but colorectal or bowel cancer really does stand out. We've provided funding and requested advice from Cancer Australia to start a research program particularly focused on this question. We did that a year or two ago; I can't quite remember when.”
“That, around the country, is seen as a reflection of these new services like 1800MEDICARE and the urgent care clinic network, so the funding that they will receive over the 2026-27 financial year will reflect the quite significant reduction that I understand this service has seen in their after-hours volumes.”
“But I'm convinced that, with the rollout of 1800MEDICARE, which, since January, has responded to 700,000 episodes of service, plus the urgent care clinic network, plus the degree of support that our Bulk Billing Practice Incentive Program has given to communities like the member's, which has seen bulk-billing practices triple since just November last year, we are delivering a much stronger Medicare service now. I think, as I said in my response to the member's letter about that particular after-hours service, the PHN, the primary health network, has provided some funding to that service through the 2026-27 financial year. They have, on my advice, been experiencing quite low service volumes.”
“This has been particularly driven by the explosion of telehealth services. Really, what's happened that is more significant, I think, than the urgent care clinic network rollout, particularly for communities like the member's, is the rollout of 1800MEDICARE, which now gives all Australians 24/7 access to high-quality nurse advice and triage services and, after 6 pm, in that period of time that the after-hours service pre telehealth focused on—from 6 pm to 8 am—free-of-charge, high-quality telehealth services from a GP as well. It's true to say that the urgent care clinic network has also picked up a significant part of what used to be serviced through the after-hours program. It's also true to say that that's not covering every single regional community, as the member knows far better than I do, coming from a city electorate as I do.”
“Thank you to the member for her question. I think she and I have been corresponding about one particular after-hours service—I think it's called Walwa Bush Nursing Centre, or something like that. I responded to the member, I think last week, about this. It is true that we have adjusted the funding that has traditionally been paid to primary health networks to support after-hours services across the country, and let me give a bit of a sense of why. The member says that's apparently because of the rollout of the urgent care clinic network. That is part of the reason, but it is only part of the reason. As the member knows, given how familiar she is with the health area, there has been a bit of a transformation about the way in which people access health, particularly after-hours, since COVID.”
“From the time the Prime Minister and I first announced this, this new urgent care clinic model has been a central part of our plan to strengthen Medicare—delivering more doctors, delivering more bulk-billing, delivering cheaper medicines and delivering urgent care clinics so we can build a healthier Australia.”
“They've already seen more than 3.2 million patients. Now the network is up and fully operating, they'll see about 45,000 people every week, or more than 2.2 million every single year. They're getting high-quality urgent care in their community completely free of charge. Now four in five Australians live within a 20-minute drive of a Medicare urgent care clinic. Really importantly, around half of those patients say they otherwise would have gone to a busy emergency department, so we're also taking pressure off our public hospital systems.”
“She also, as the member knows, managed to take the opportunity to lobby me about some other health funding issues, which just reminds us of the boundless initiative from the south side of Brisbane. I'm also pleased to report that last week the Caloundra urgent care clinic opened in the electorate of Fisher. I see the member for Fisher nodding. I think he's saying thank you; I can't quite hear him. It is No. 137 and the last of the clinics we committed to over the last two elections. In 2022, we promised 50 urgent care clinics and we delivered 87. Last year, we promised another 50, and we've delivered every single one of them by the end of June 2026, as we said we would. We've delivered every single one of them. They're all open. they're all operating seven days a week for extended hours, and, importantly, they're fully bulk-billed.”
“Thank you to the member for Griffith, who has hosted me in Brisbane a couple of times over the last fortnight. We visited the Coorparoo Medicare Urgent Care Clinic the week before last. At the same time, I visited the Carina-Carindale Medicare Urgent Care Clinic, which services the electorate of Bonner. I was back again last week, at the South Brisbane urgent care clinic, with which the member is very, very familiar. That has been established for a while now. It has seen 35,000 patients. The member and I spoke to a couple of patients, Sophie and Tony, who'd been there separately. Sophie is a mum of young children, and she's been there already three times. She told us how grateful she was to have an urgent care service close to her home so she didn't have to go to the local hospital.”
“He's the Leader of the Opposition's handpicked candidate to become president of the South Australian Liberal Party—a nice sidekick to Tony Abbott. Maybe that's why, in the 24 hours since he gave that speech, we've heard absolutely nothing from the Leader of the Opposition—showing again, as we've seen in this debate about multiculturalism, that this man lacks the spine for difficult decisions and real leadership.”
“The Liberal Senator Antic last night, remarkably even for him, described the H5N1 avian flu as 'spin from pharmaceutical companies,' all designed, in his view, to push people into getting a flu shot this winter. All another vast conspiracy—managing in one speech not only to spread dangerous ideas about vaccination but also to minimise and even mock this variant of avian flu and the risk we know it poses to some incredibly important industries in this country. If you don't watch Senate estimates after dark, you might not know who Senator Antic is! But he is one of the most influential members in the opposition—certainly the most influential member in the South Australian Liberal Party. He helped gather the numbers for this guy to roll the former member for Farrer.”
“That's why we've been working so hard over recent years across portfolios, led by Agriculture but including Environment and obviously Health through the CDC, to make sure that we are as prepared as we possibly can be. We are also working, obviously, with states, who have a very important role here as well. Opposition members who've also been watching this unfold across the world have recognised that work, and they've offered their support: the Deputy Leader of the Nationals, who's not here right now; the member for Maranoa; and number of others as well. We thank them for that, because they know how serious this could get. But not everyone has been quite so constructive.”
“Thank you to my fellow South Australian the terrific member for Sturt. As she knows and as I think we all know, for years we've watched the rest of the world grapple with the impact of the H5N1 variant of avian flu. Over those five years, it's hit every continent except ours, devastating wildlife and upending industries, like poultry and cattle in particular, in almost every other country on the planet. As the Minister for Agriculture, who is responsible for the nation's biosecurity, has already told the parliament, it's now been detected here, as we knew it inevitably would be at some point. Now, the numbers are still small and the cases are still confined to migratory birds, but we know from bitter experience overseas just how serious the risks are here.”
“Without this amendment, insurers would have to apply for approval, and the department of health would have to assess and approve applications that would cause unnecessary administrative burden and would not meaningfully address the objects of the bill. These amendments therefore provide that rules may be made to exempt specified changes that reduce or remove treatment cover from being a designated change. Not all insurer requested exemptions will be appropriate. Appropriate exemptions applied through delegated legislation will allow responsive management. I thank the sector for their constructive engagement through this process and commend the amendments to the House. Question agreed to. Bill, as amended, agreed to.”
“New products and price changes still require approval under the new provisions from commencement, ensuring they are included in this year's premium round intended to start mid-September 2026 with a 1 April 2027 effective date. Amendments (5) to (7) also respond to stakeholder feedback. Insurers have argued that changes to treatment cover that arise from decisions of government or other organisations should not be treated as designated changes that require premium approval. This is because not all changes that impact treatment cover are decisions of insurers. Some are decisions of government—for example, changes to the Medicare Benefits Schedule—or of other organisations, for example the schedule of treatments that are published by the Australian Dental Association.”
“The government amendments to the Health Legislation Amendment (Improving Choice and Transparency for Private Health Consumers) Bill 2026 make minor changes to the commencement date and the application of new private health insurance premium requirements to address stakeholder concerns and some implementation risks. The amendments align commencement with the start of the next premium round and give a transition period for private health insurance product changes that require premium approval. This addresses stakeholder concerns around the uncertainty of the eventual date of royal assent and how this would interact with the coming premium round.”
“Operation of first approved application period (6) If the commencement day is a day in the period, for the 2026 calendar year, mentioned in paragraph 66-6(1)(a) of the Private Health Insurance Act 2007 , as inserted by this Schedule, the approved application period for 2026 is taken to: (a) begin on the commencement day; and (b) end at the end of the period of 55 days beginning on 18 September 2026. (7) The approved application period mentioned in subitem (6) does not apply to an application that relates to a designated change that is proposed to be made on or after 2 April 2027 (whether or not the application also relates to a change in premiums). (9) Schedule 2, item 17, page 29 (line 13), omit "Section", substitute "Subject to item 15, section".”
“(4) Sections 66-11 and 66-12 of the Private Health Insurance Act 2007 , as inserted by this Schedule, apply in relation to an application that is made on or after the commencement day. Pending applications for approval (5) If: (a) before the commencement day, a private health insurer applied, under section 66-10 of the old Act, for an approval of a change in premiums; and (b) immediately before the commencement day, the Minister had not decided to either approve or refuse to approve the proposed changed amount or amounts; then: (c) the application lapses at the start of the commencement day; and (d) that section ceases to apply in relation to the application.”
“(2) Section 66-8 of the Private Health Insurance Act 2007 , as inserted by this Schedule, applies in relation to a product subgroup that is first made available on or after the commencement day. (3) Section 66-10 of the Private Health Insurance Act 2007 , as substituted by this Schedule, applies in relation to: (a) a proposed change to the premiums to be charged under one or more product subgroups of a complying health insurance product if an insurer proposes to make the change on or after the commencement day (whether or not the insurer proposes to make a designated change at the same time); and (b) a designated change that an insurer proposes to make to a complying health insurance product on or after 2 April 2027.”
“(8) Schedule 2, items 15 and 16, page 28 (line 8) to page 29 (line 11), omit the items, substitute: 15 Application of amendments Application provisions (1) The amendments of sections 66-1 and 66-5 of the Private Health Insurance Act 2007 made by this Schedule apply on and after the commencement day in relation to: (a) a policy that belongs to a product subgroup that is first made available on or after the commencement day; and (b) a complying health insurance policy that belongs to a product subgroup of a complying health insurance product for which an approval under section 66-10 of the old Act was in effect immediately before the commencement day; and (c) a policy: (i) that belongs to a product subgroup that was first made available before the commencement day; and (ii) for which there was no approval in effect under section 66-10 of the old Act immediately before the commencement day; at and after the earlier of: (iii) the first time, on or after the commencement day, that the premiums charged under the product subgroup change; or (iv) the first time, on or after 2 April 2027, that a designated change is made to the product.”
“(7) Schedule 2, item 8, page 19 (after line 34), at the end of section 66-7, add: (2) The Private Health Insurance (Product Premium) Rules may provide that paragraph (1)(a) does not apply in relation to a change of a kind specified in those Rules for the purposes of this subsection.”
“(4) Schedule 2, item 8, page 19 (after line 13), after subsection 66-6(2), insert: (2A) Without limiting subsection 33(3A) of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901 , a determination under subsection (2) of this section may be expressed to apply in relation to a specified class of application. Such a determination does not affect the operation of paragraph (1)(a) of this section in relation to other classes of application. (5) Schedule 2, item 8, page 19 (line 17), before "A designated change ", insert "(1)". (6) Schedule 2, item 8, page 19 (line 19), before "a change", insert "subject to subsection (2),".”
“I present a supplementary explanatory memorandum to the bill. I seek leave of the House to move government amendments (1) to (9) as circulated together. Leave granted. I move: (1) Clause 2, page 2 (table item 3, column 2), omit "1 April 2026", substitute "18 September 2026". (2) Schedule 2, item 8, page 19 (lines 4 to 7), omit paragraphs 66-6(1)(a) and (b), substitute: (a) if the Minister has not determined a period for a year under subsection (2)—the period of 55 days beginning on the third Friday in September of that year; or (b) if the Minister has determined one or more periods for a year under subsection (2)—that period or those periods. (3) Schedule 2, item 8, page 19 (lines 11 to 13), omit the note.”
“I think we would find value in the member being engaged in that process, as well, so if she's interested I'd be more than happy to continue to engage her with that. But we are not in a position to support the amendments moved by the member for Kooyong.”
“On the utilisation of gap cover arrangements, this bill already addresses this under proposed section 324-5, subsection (2)(e), of the Private Health Insurance Act. On frequency of data updates, we agree that it is important for users to see up-to-date data to help guide their decisions about seeking specialist care. My department intends to make frequent updates and will refresh as regularly as data availability and quality will allow. I again want to thank the member for her support for this government's broad effort to improve choice and transparency for private health consumers. As I said, this is something where we're engaging with a range of stakeholders, including doctor representatives through the AMA and others, to make sure we get this detail right.”
“That includes exploring options that address concerns over the very high fees charged by some specialists. I think the member called them outliers—a description I've used, as well—compared to their peers. We see a slightly different trend out there compared to GPs, where the band of gap fees being charged is relatively consistent across the country, but there really is a wild variability at the edges of fees being charged by non-GP specialists. On upfront fees, we agree that administrative fees, booking fees and split billing does negatively affect patients and also often leads to bill shock. Separate work is underway on this issue to explore options that strengthen informed financial consent for consumers in this respect.”
“I note that the member's proposed amendments support the publication of different types of specific information, including fee ranges, extreme fees, quality metrics, upfront fees and some of the things the member just canvassed in her contribution. I can assure her and other members that my department is engaging with stakeholders on the design and the implementation of the changes that are enabled through this bill. That consultation process, in our view, is the appropriate mechanism to work through the details that the member for Kooyong has canvassed in her amendment. On extreme fees, my department is working with patients, doctors and the private health sector to develop practical reform options that will improve how Australians access, navigate and afford specialist care.”
“I thank the member for Kooyong for her contribution to this debate generally and for her amendments. I know the amendments moved by the member for Kooyong are grounded in a great degree of goodwill, common purpose with the government about what we're seeking to achieve here and deep experience through her time as a paediatric neurologist. We're not supporting these amendments, not because we don't share the intentions of the member for Kooyong but because we have a different approach. What we're seeking to do here is pass legislation that enables us to set up the Medical Costs Finder as a mandatory system, if you like. But, for implementation, the finer detail about how this is designed and populated is to be the subject of ongoing engagement with stakeholders. I think I indicated that a little while ago.”
“When we came to government in 2022, of the thousands and thousands of specialists covered by the Medical Costs Finder, six had uploaded their fees—not 600 or even six per cent, just six of the thousands and thousands covered. Even after the AMA—”
“I want to thank the member for Kooyong for her contributions to this debate in particular and for her commitment to holding specialists to account over the fees that they charge patients. The first part of this bill, not the phoenixing part but the first part around informed consent, is essentially the implementation of an election commitment we made last year. That was to make the Medical Costs Finder effectively mandatory. To his credit, my predecessor Greg Hunt introduced the Medical Costs Finder with the ambition of providing consumers with the information about what medical specialists in their community would charge for particular procedures. He did that on a voluntary basis, expecting that specialists would upload and disclose the fees that they were going to charge.”
“I indicated to them that, if I didn't see a cessation of that practice by the industry itself, we would do exactly what we are doing now, and that is legislate. This will be achieved by requiring ministerial approval not just for proposed premium changes, which happens with the premium round every year—it will also be required when an insurer proposes to open a new product or reduce a certain coverage, benefits or terms and conditions of an existing product. Changes are also being made to formalise and enhance the process for the approval of premiums. The arrangements are substantially aligned with how the annual premium round has been managed over recent years.”
“Without passage of this schedule, we would continue to see many Australians simply not knowing what their private healthcare journey was going to cost until they were in it. Right now, they're unable to easily compare the costs of alternative providers and therefore unable to make an informed choice about their healthcare. Schedule 2 strengthens ministerial oversight of private health insurance premiums, ensuring that consumer interests are better protected. Allowing insurers to close an existing product and open an identical or very similar new product at a higher premium without ministerial scrutiny presents an unacceptable risk to private health insurance customers and needs to be stopped. This practice, commonly known as phoenixing, is something that I warned insurers about over some period of time.”
“I want to thank the member for Dunkley for her contribution and all members for their contributions to the debate on the Health Legislation Amendment (Improving Choice and Transparency for Private Health Consumers) Bill 2026. Schedule 1 of this bill makes important changes to support greater transparency in healthcare pricing, which will help Australians make more informed decisions about their private healthcare choices. It does that by providing consumers with more detailed information on the medical fees that they can expect to be charged and their likely out-of-pocket costs for their private health experience. Currently, consumers have more information about routine goods and services in the community than they do about healthcare choices, choices that can have a profound impact on their quality of life but also on their finances.”
“Although the rebate change is not expected to have a substantial impact on private hospitals, the government does recognise that some private hospitals are experiencing ongoing viability concerns. We are considering a range of reform options identified in consultation with the sector to modernise private health and to better support the public-private health system that has made Australia's health system one of the best in the world. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned.”
“The Australian government has to balance its support for privately insured patients with the funding it provides right across the health, disability and aged care systems. Savings from this rebate change will provide important support for older people through improvements that are absolutely necessary to aged care. This decision reflects responsible budget management in challenging times. The government will invest the $3 billion in estimated savings from this measure in delivering more aged-care beds, more packages, and better care for older Australians. This will enable more people to access aged care, address delayed discharge from hospital and provide dignity and care to older Australians towards the end of their lives. Reinvesting the savings from the rebate in aged care capacity will relieve pressure on the public hospital system.”
“The bill will also make a technical amendment to the Age Discrimination Act 2004, removing a reference to an exemption previously required for the discriminatory operation of those higher rebates for older Australians, protecting the Commonwealth, as they did at the time, from legal action from younger Australians based on the obvious differential treatment based on age. While this will remove the current preferential rebate for older Australians, they will continue to be supported through the rebate of up to 24 per cent off their premiums. They'll be supported through community rating and through indexation of the rebate, which this government reintroduced, of course, after it was frozen under the previous Liberal government. All of this will help keep private health insurance more affordable.”