After guaranteeing that other health services would not be cut to fund the pledge, the opposition has identified $6bn in yearly public servant cuts to fund the proposition.
The Liberal party has promised to match – and better – Labor’s $8.5 billion plan to boost bulk billing but remains tightlipped about exactly how the money will be spent.
Yesterday, just half a day after Labor announced an $8.5 billion plan to revamp Medicare bulk billing, opposition leader Peter Dutton promised to match the investment “dollar-for-dollar”.
Announcing the “historic $9 billion investment into Medicare”, Mr Dutton said “Labor’s bulk-billing crisis” had forced 1.5 million Australians to avoid seeing a doctor in 2023-34.
The investment includes the already announced $500 million to restore Medicare funding for mental health services.
Mr Dutton made no attempt to outline how the scheme would be funded in Sunday’s announcement but touted the party’s “sound and prudent economic management”.
“Only the Coalition can guarantee a strong economy to deliver better healthcare,” he said.
Speaking in Brisbane today, however, Mr Dutton said public service cuts would fund the pledge.
“The government’s put on an additional 36,000 public servants,” he said.
“We will reduce that number and the savings there will be about $6 billion a year. That’s the advice that we have. So $24 billion of savings over the four-year forward estimates period.
Related
“This policy is $9 billion over that forward estimate period, so there’s obviously a much bigger save that we have identified.
“The $9 billion – not only is it accounted for, but we have got a productivity gain, because I just don’t think more and more layers of approval and bureaucratic process out of Canberra is helping anyone.”
When asked to rule out cuts to health in other areas to pay for the proposition at a doorstop on Sunday, Mr Dutton initially sidestepped the question, then said, “we’re not cutting health, we’ve been very clear about that”.
“You just need to have a look at our track record and that is that we invested more into hospitals, we support legislation that the government’s put forward in this term of Parliament, which provides an underpinning of support to the NDIS and funds into those two important areas,” he said.
It is unclear whether public servants who work in the health sector, say for the NDIS, were included in the opposition’s savings calculation.
Labor’s plan promises that nine out of 10 GP appointments will eventually be bulk billed.
It will expand eligibility for the bulk-billing incentive rebate from 1 November, introduce a new 12.5% loading rebate for bulk-billing practices and expand the GP trainee program and nurse scholarships for the locally trained workforce.
According to the ABC, government sources say the “majority” of the cost was factored into the December mid-year budget.
Mr Dutton’s office did not reply to Health Service Daily’s questions by publication deadline on how their $9 billion would be spent.
The opposition leader said the party was “not supporting spending which is inflationary in the environment”.
“It’s a big amount of money but we have identified the offset, the savings. Labor hasn’t done that.”
Mr Dutton said parliament should return as scheduled at the end of March and could use the bipartisan support to “pass legislation to guarantee this funding in relation to Medicare”.
“The onus is on the prime minister to make sure the Parliament sits – as scheduled – and we can legislate to provide a guarantee around this funding, which is important for general practice, and that is something we would support, and we’re happy to sit down and help draft the legislation with the government, but it should be enshrined in legislation before the Parliament prorogues, and we’re very happy to support that.”
Greens leader Adam Bandt – who has been pushing the “GP for free” pledge since October last year – called on Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to recall Parliament this week during Estimates to legislate policy before the election, to ensure it is “Dutton-proofed and not held ransom to the outcome of the election”.
