Page 3286 - Week 12 - Thursday, 19 November 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR LAMONT: Michael, I am glad you ask. If you remember, before the last Victorian election Mr Kennett said, as far as industrial relations are concerned, "We are caring, considerate people; after the election, there will be a few changes". What has happened? He walked in, cut them off at the legs, dragged them out, and took everything from them. That is exactly the same as the Opposition's policy in regard to Medicare. They will stand up and make pious statements. They will make the sort of spurious comments that have been made by Mrs Carnell this afternoon about the direction in which people should be going. The reality of it is that, if - and that is a very long shot - these people ever get into government in this country, they will take care of their mates.
Mr De Domenico: Not like you people!
MR LAMONT: They will abolish the health care system. They will abolish Medicare. We will end up exactly the same as New Zealand. We have two things across the other side of this chamber, two simple philosophies - - -
Mr Cornwell: Tell us about Western Australia. What about South Australia?
Ms Follett: On a point of order, Madam Speaker: Can we hear the speaker, please.
MADAM SPEAKER: Yes, I was about to remind members of the standing orders. Mr De Domenico, I am in the process of reminding you that there is a standing order requiring you not to interrupt. Please continue, Mr Lamont.
MR LAMONT: What we have here is a group of people who have adopted the Jeff Kennett approach and the George Bush approach - Jeff Kennett and George Bush, two good conservatives. What we see in the "frightpack" package, which is designed for Australia's health care under a possible Liberal government, is exactly what exists in the United States. That is an absolutely outrageous position.
Medicare is not perfect, but it is good enough. It has a 70 per cent approval rating amongst Australians, and it is about time the Liberal Party recognised that. It is simply the best means for delivering health care. Since 1984, Medicare has succeeded in delivering universal health care while keeping the lid on the national health budget to around 8 per cent of GDP. Compare that to the United States, which the Liberals want us to emulate. It spends more that 12 per cent of its GDP on health care and, even so, some 37 million Americans have no health cover whatsoever. It must pain the Liberals immensely to see that the new US administration is looking at a Labor Medicare-type solution to its current problems. If our health costs go up to 12 per cent of GDP, that will be another $16 billion on the health care bill in this country, and this will go into the pockets of some of the more highly paid doctors.
Federal Labor is offering $1.6 billion over the next six years to boost public hospitals. The "frightpack" policy is to cut $1.3 billion annually and divert it to private health insurance. That is a reduction over six years of $8 billion. The Liberal policy, with a two-page reference in the whole of the Fightback document, should hardly be dignified by the title. It is not a health care policy at all. From 1993-94 the Medicare agreement will ensure improved access by
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .