Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 6 Hansard (16 May) . . Page.. 1704 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

Mr Humphries said that there are serious implications for our budget from the federal government, which he described as tough but strong. I do not know what that means. I would agree that the federal government's inaction and lack of responsibility are creating a greater social deficit. That social deficit gives us a problem in the ACT and gives the government a problem. Once again, vulnerable members of our electorate are made more vulnerable by the federal government.

We have to make some hard decisions about how we can step in and ensure that vulnerable people are not left alone. We know from inquiry work that has occurred here that moving more people on to Newstart is creating a serious situation for people who are extremely vulnerable. I have to keep repeating that word, because that is the reality of it. It is hard to understand how the federal government could breach people with a disability for not filling in forms the right way. The very strong picture coming from the community sector involved with people who have a disability is that this is exactly what would happen. The Liberals can protest all they like. I am much more inclined to listen to those people who are living with the everyday reality of the federal government's policies than to listen to the Liberals' political responses.

Mrs Cross said that we have to do these things so that we don't have a huge blowout and because Mr Keating said so. There are other options that can be looked at. The whole question of private health insurance which Mrs Dundas raised is raised by Liberals. A recent proposal from community doctors and nurses outlines an alternative health budget proposal. It calls for the 30 per cent private health insurance rebate to be scrapped and the money reinvested in other areas of the health budget.

Professor Peter Sainsbury, the president of the Public Health Association, said that $2.35 billion is wasted on the private health insurance rebate and that we could spend that money much better. We could improve our public hospitals, Aboriginal health services, aged care services, dental health and the use of medicines, and still have money left over for other initiatives. A 10 per cent increase in funding of our under-resourced public hospitals would cost $650 million and would take the pressure off our overcrowded emergency departments.

Aged care is struggling with inadequate regulation and chronic understaffing. The national secretary of the Australian Nursing Federation said a 10 per cent increase and the aged care budget would cost $300 million and make a very big difference.

An excellent dental health scheme for elderly and disadvantaged people would cost $750 million and would end the ridiculous current situation of more taxpayers' money being spent per person on dental care for the rich than is spent on the elderly and disadvantaged.

The government wants patients, including the poor and sick, to pay out of their own pockets for the blowout in the cost of pharmaceuticals. I guess Liberals understand that people moved from the pension to Newstart will not be as eligible for support as disadvantaged people. The president of the Doctors Reform Society has made the point that $200 million spent to educate doctors about drug prescribing and to reduce their susceptibility to the huge marketing power of the pharmaceutical industry could save hundreds of millions every year and avoid increases in the unfair and regressive patient co-payment.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .