Page 1882 - Week 05 - Wednesday, 2 May 2012

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


average waiting time could not be reduced. What I am calling for in part 3(c) of my motion is for the minister to explain what impediments, apart from funding, exist with regard to improving the public dental system so that strategies can be identified to deal with this aspect of services.

Not all parents or healthcare cardholders are aware of the services available to them or make use of them. While I am waiting on answers to a question on notice about the ACT data, I can refer the Assembly to Victoria, where only 14 per cent of people eligible use public dental treatment in any year and the average waiting time is about 17 months.

Despite the availability of public dental programs, people on low incomes, including those eligible for public dentistry, are the least likely to visit the dentist on a regular basis and have the worst dental health outcomes. Evidence shows that people eligible for public health care are more than six times more likely to lose their teeth than those who are not eligible. Adults on low incomes can visit a doctor and use their Medicare card, but the only place they can access dental care is in the private sector.

According to the latest ACT general health survey from the 2010 ACT Chief Health Officer’s report, 44 per cent of people who responded to the survey have delayed using a dentist because they could not afford it. According to national statistics, 33 per cent of all Australians have stated that they cannot afford to go to the dentist or delay going to the dentist because of the cost. I think they are quite extraordinary figures.

The lack of affordable dental services is picked up by the federal health budget elsewhere. The federal government contributes $426 million a year towards dental care for high-income earners via the private health insurance rebate—an extraordinary figure. Untreated dental disease costs Medicare $350 million a year and the hospital system at least $100 million a year. I think those figures are worth keeping in mind when we vote on this motion today on whether or not we should have money in the federal budget, considering it impacts elsewhere in the federal budget.

Part 2 of my motion refers to the National Advisory Council on Dental Health which was established in September last year to provide the commonwealth government with strategic independent advice on dental health issues. The council issued a report in February this year. The key recommendation supported by all members of the council is that a universal dental care scheme should be a long-term goal.

The report states in clear and simple terms that the commonwealth should fund services and that the states and territories should deliver them. This mirrors the recommendation of the Health and Hospital Reform Commission, whose final report states:

We recommend that all Australians should have universal access to preventive and restorative dental care, and dentures, regardless of people’s ability to pay. This should occur through the establishment of the ‘Denticare Australia’ scheme. Under the ‘Denticare Australia’ scheme, people will be able to select between private or public dental health plans. ‘Denticare Australia’ would meet the costs in both cases. The additional costs of Denticare could be funded by an increase in the Medicare Levy of 0.75 per cent of taxable income.


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