This week in Parliament Labor will gain another double dissolution trigger, as the Coalition has vowed to stop changes to the threshold for the private health insurance rebate. Labor will be keen to draw a parallel between this move and Abbott’s tenure as Health Minister, arguing that less money will be available for public hospitals. The ALP will also no doubt utilise Barnaby Joyce’s previous equivocal comments on the measure to ram home the point about fiscal indiscipline from the opposition.
Kevin Rudd’s health policy is likely to be the centrepiece of the government’s plan for re-election.
Meanwhile, writing at The Age, Kenneth Davidson provides a very good argument for not subsidising the private health insurers at all.
Abbott’s scattershot approach will get him come campaign time, he will be a man “who doesn’t stand for anything”
I criticise Rudd, but you can’t say he’s inconsistent, and I think the public really values that.
Yep – the fact remains Abbott is dangerously incoherent on several key policy issues. Even by his own admission. This message about him will firm as the election approaches.
His guerilla tactics are semi-effective at the moment, sniping at the officers with highly mobile forces, but once he’s drawn onto the open ground of a campaign Government forces will wallop him from pillar to post.
Bring it on!
Abbot takes a stand, then moves to another position and takes a stand there and so on..
Even as someone who benefits from this policy, it’s a bad policy, it always was, and the sooner it goes, the better. Everyone I talk to seems to like Rudd’s approach of leaving the election as late as possible (and resents the expense of early elections and by-elections) but I think the closer to November it gets, the more likely Rudd is to use that trigger.
Russell @ 4 Surely you know by now that Abbott is a kama sutra politician, open exploring the potential of any position.
You would be surprised by the number of people in the Liberal Party machinery in Victoria who have a firm ‘user pays’ ideology for health care, and pointing to individuals dying early of cancer or needing increased care for dementia doesn’t alter their view that each family is responsible for their own. Probably they would demand to talk to your health insurer before deciding what treatment will be made available after your car accident.
I was converted to public health care when my friend had a serious car accident. I started toting up the costs and its obvious that its beyond most families wherewithal.
If we really want a ‘user pays’ health system then euthanasia and less intervention will have to be the order of the day
The reintroduction of this legislation reminds me of an interview conducted by Ross Childs(?) on the ABC Midday News with the newly elected (and still) President of the AMA at the time of the Bill’s first introduction. When questioned he said the AMA had no ideological/philosophical objections to the legislation but had strong reservations about the Governments ability to deal with the unforseen consequences they felt would inevitably occur. However if the Govt. could convince them on this he said he could see no reason for the bill not to pass. I sat there in anticipation of the next question ie. “does this signal a new approach to that of the ever-combative past president? (sorry forgot her name!!)” or even better “does this mean you think the Coalition should pass the bill in the Senate?”. Instead all she did was snear that “.. but you still think that many people could be worse off under this legislation”. A slightly bemused AMA president simply reiterated his previous points at which point the interview ended…what is the point??
I’m also wondering if during this debate the public (esp. mass media tabloid) will be reminded of Abbott’s performance as Health Minister during the 2004 Federal election when he swore blind that the Medicare safety net threshold would not be lifted, despite the evidence of massive budgetary overuns, and then only weeks after the election the Howard Govt. lifted the rebate. The near silence on this Abbott history is in stark contrast to the Julia Gillard Medicare Gold constant drumbeat.
Can anybody tell me any promises that this Rudd Labor government have kept? The list of broken promises just never seems to end. From health to border protection to the private health rebate to economic conservatism to helping aboriginals to renewable energy projects. The list of broken promises just never seems to end. Of all the billions of dollars which has been borrowed and spent, how much was spent on vital infrastructure? This government are a joke. What happened to good men like Kim Beazley who had a plan and a direction for Australia? The ALP need to change their leader to someone else or they will sink at the next election. Chris Evans seems like a man with a backbone and some common sense who speaks facts and leaves out the crap. Rudd must go and if he’s the leader at the next election, I’m backing Abbott. At least he is consistent and will answer a question directly.
Julia – I’m disappointed in your decision.
A vote for Tony Abbott is a vote for Amercian style health systems and destruction of Pharmaceutical Benefits Payments System.
So what if I have to pay $42.50 a month for a drug. Just pray you don’t have to pay for the cost of your anti cancer drug. Think $2000 per dose, or $20000 per year for drugs to keep breast cancer at bay.
I am unhappy with Rudd’s lack of action, especially his broken superannuation promises.
Julia, think of them as non-core promises.
Julia @9, Abbott has had more positions on climate change over the past year than is believable, from “climate change is absolute crap” all the way through to “I’m willing to spend $3.2 billion in bribes on it”.
I don’t think Rudd is beyond criticism, and I think you’re right – there are a number of areas in which his government hasn’t delivered in the past few years. On the other hand, we have had a global financial crisis to deal with, and major projects like the broadband network and the reform of the health system are in train. The Kyoto Protocol was ratified, an apology was made to the stolen generations, and Education Revolution initiatives are ongoing. They haven’t been helped by the Senate – if the Opposition wasn’t being unrelentingly obstructionist in the Senate, obviously the government would have achieved a lot more.
I think they deserve another three years.
Julia – or perhaps I should say John – ratifying kyoto, the apology, homeless improvements, NBN, health reform, rolling back workchoices. I could go on, but I suspect it would be wasted.
Thanks for the list patrickg. All these people who prattle on about Abbot being a consistent straight talking politician have very short term memories. As I recall he was a key minister in one of the most deceitful and dishonest governments in Australia’s history.
Julia,
According to Promise Watch, the Government has kept 81 promises, broken 6 and have 161 remaining. Some of the definitions of a promise are a bit OTT, but for a Government with a hostile senate and the GFC it is a pretty impressive effort.
So I guess your impression of non-stop broken promises is due to your own myopia.
I think Julia is today’s Young Liberal comment-bot:
http://larvatusprodeo.net/2010/02/20/if-it-werent-for-the-union/#comment-859354
As was the comment from ‘Sam’ agreeing with ‘Julia’, which I’ve just deleted!
I am alive today because I get an anti-cancer drug every three months on the PBS. Under Tony’s private scheme I would be dead as it would cost me $1004 every three months, which I would not be able to afford. (Or it might be $4001. I don’t have an empty box to check) Just bringing you Liberal Party clone commenters back to everybody’s everyday reality.
Billie”7,
“If we really want a ‘user pays’ health system then euthanasia and less intervention will have to be the order of the day”, along with assisted suicides.
That is a very far sighted, to the point, and on the money observation there, Billie. Hearing comment coming from the US about health care of the aging population particularly as the baby boomers flood past the retirement point all health care systems are going to be stretched, but private health care only works for the working, healthy or rich. Everyone else should ponder their choice of death. The massive number of people who have had their health care options wiped out with business failures is reality that the US’s republicans choose to shut out. Our Coalition is similarly blind to reality.
second last line…”Howard Govt. lifted the rebate” should read “threshold”.
billie @7,
I agree,the argument for some Liberals is not about the ‘best’ system that produces optimum health outcomes.They reject government intervention on ideological grounds,the fact that ‘socialised’ medicine produces better overall levels of public health is irrelevant.
Patricia WA @6,
Perhaps Abbot will publish a manual.
Managed care. If Abbott gets in it is coming to a hospital/health insurer near you. As social policies go, for absolute brutality, the only equivalent to the private insurance managed care system of the US of which I can think is the way that the Chinese state used to (still does?) execute some offenders and then send a bill for the bullet to the family.
Roxon announced today +5% increases in health insurance premiums.
She wants to reduce the quantity of people who will take out health insurance. This can only lead to greater rises in premiums than otherwise would be the case.
Good work Roxon. Keep it up.
Razor @ 23, for once I agree with you. We need to get the spivs and coin-clippers out of the Health
IndustrySystem.Oh. You were being sarcastic.