News

NewsThe Health Minister has heard you, loud and clear
The Health Minister has heard you, loud and clear

The Health Minister has heard you, loud and clear

Tags: Cost of Living Insurance
Last updated by John Mangos on

John MangosCall it a rite of passage or a coming of age, but the FiftyUp Club has reached a significant milestone.

We sat down with the Federal Health Minister, Peter Dutton, to deliver your message in Canberra this week … and he listened.

The Minister warmly welcomed me and my FiftyUp Club Colleague Jess Lindell into his office and he treated your submission with respect.

Together we went through your overwhelming response to the Federal Budget and called on the Minister to reduce the impact of co-payments on Australians aged over 50, particularly for pensioners on fixed incomes.

We also asked the Minister to strengthen the disclosure requirements of private health insurers, so that we can see premium increases by age brackets in the annual round of price rises. The full submission is available here.

The Club talked. He listened.

Then he promised to review your submission more closely and provide us all with a formal reply.

But barely hours after our cordial and respectful talks, the Minister went public to talk compromise with regard to the $7 co-payment proposal.

He repeated in public what he had earlier told us in private – that is, he is prepared to compromise on the co-payment.

This is what Seven News Canberra Political Editor Mark Riley put to air that night, with the Minister saying: “If people have sensible suggestions to make, we’re happy to consider those”.

Thank you Minister.

That was precisely what we had just done.

Riley’s story also quoted the FiftyUp Club’s 11,000-member submission.

Riley called it a “pragmatic retreat from a hardline budget”, and he is right.

I reckon Mr Dutton took on board the 11,000 voices of our 91,000 members in our health care costs survey.

Yes, he does comprehend that more than two-thirds of us FiftyUps believe the system is unsustainable and are prepared to contribute a small amount to our own health care costs if it helps balance the Federal Budget.

But he listened when we showed him that 30% of you say GP co-payments would force you to avoid the doctor when sick, or go to hospital instead.

And 40% say co-payments and Health Insurance prices are likely to change how you vote at the next election.  Ouch, by any party’s language.

Thank you members for your feedback, and thank you Minister for your time and your offer to respond formally.

We know the structure of the Senate complicates the equation going forward. But new Senators must know it is we FiftyUps who pay the bills.

FiftyUps, we are the voice.

Originally posted on .

Join the conversation

FiftyUp Club
The Health Minister has heard you, loud and clear

Share your views with other members. 

Want to leave a comment? or .
Read our moderation policy here.
Stephen
Stephen from QLD commented:

I am one of the few who actually has no problem with the $7 co payment. And John from QLD I totally agree regarding a comfortable retirement, however we face a unprecedented increase in retirees due to the baby boomers. And yes we have all worked hard and paid our taxes and we should receive some benefits. A study of the baby boomers and their effect on the world economy is astounding, even in our last days we see the effects with increased in retirement villages, cruise ships, botox and related cosmetic, funeral, and the list goes on. Its interesting reading if you trace us baby boomers back. Now we are all retiring we find the government trying to afford to pay us a pension, and all the other benefits that go along with retirement. Personally I cant see myself retiring because I don't have a large super payout. I have and I suppose others have seen that the health system is abused by certain members of the community, Often I have been in a waiting room with folk with a headache or just a cold. Amazingly mostly young people and unfortunately unemployed. Paying what equates to the price of 2 take away coffees is a fair price to pay if it helps pay for what is an ever increasing health budget. I am in finance and I suppose I look at debt and interest payments and costs more so than most. The baby boomer generation had a huge impact in Australia's and Western economies and now we are all retiring. What is the answer, how do governments afford us. An interesting article more or less gives us a background on what is going on. http://www.wesleymission.org.au/publications/ageing/impact.htm 

ANNETTE
ANNETTE from NSW replied to Stephen:

I like your comments Stephen, you are right, we have worked all our lives and still working, good luck all you baby boomers out there. Congratulations John with your meeting with the minister. I already pay $37 to my doctor everytime I go. 

Someone
Someone from QLD replied to Stephen:

re ' ... have seen that the health system is abused by certain members of the community, Often I have been in a waiting room with folk with a headache or just a cold. Amazingly mostly young people and unfortunately unemployed. ... ' Sorry Stephen, but if you make comments like this you need to back them up with facts. Sitting in a doctor's waiting room observing people and making assumptions about their diagnoses, age and employment status has less value than hearsay. Peddling personal assumptions like this infers you may be attempting to influence readers regarding the proposed co-payment. I notice you also provided a link to a private health provider. 

Stephen
Stephen from QLD commented:

Unfortunately anonymous who will not be named I can back this up with many instances where I have been in a waiting rooms and the obscene language and comments made by persons. My wife was a doctors receptionist for over 10 years until recently and she can back up any comments I have made, she worked in a bulk billing surgery You don't have to be a rocket scientist to work out what is going on. I have also received the same comments from other acquaintances who say similar . if anything is for nothing it is often abused, anonymous you are naïve if you think otherwise. As far as me attempting to influence readers about the co-payment, I am merely stating it is a good idea and will help pay for what is and increasingly costly health system, $7 is not a lot to pay if you call that influencing others then so be it. This is a democracy we can state our opinions. As for the link, if you took the trouble to read it you would notice it refers to the baby boomer population and the increasing strains on the health system that governments face. And where will the money come from to pay for it. We are also an obese nation one of the highest per capita in the western world and this will again add more strain. Money doesn't grow on tree anonymous we need to pay for it somehow and $7 (2 cups of coffee) is reasonable. 

Cris
Cris from QLD replied to Stephen:

IN RESPONSE TO 'Stephen from QLD: Thank you for your response. There are better ways to save the health budget than gouging the chronically ill, low-income earners and families. 

Stephen
Stephen from QLD replied to Cris:

Hi Cris, I do agree, however I am classed as a low income earner, and yet I don't have an issue with $7 co payment. If it means one less visit to the local café then so be it. I think the point I was making was that our health system is about to and is being burdened now with the large influx of elderly (baby boomers) and the large increase in obesity over recent history, the latter can be addressed by government possibly advertising a more healthy lifestyle. However the huge increase over the past couple of decades of take away fast food and similar has a lot to answer for. Once again it is the choice of the individual as to what they consume and its consequences. And therefore our health system is put under additional pressure because of this. As for the health budget you mentioned there are other ways to save, please enlighten us as to what you have in mind. I did say at the beginning I agreed with you , that is the chronically ill should not be penalised, and I believe the Gov. had some provisions for that. A lot of folk do not use the bulk billing facility as mentioned in some of these comments and actually pay $37.00 over and above their insured amount. Maybe our doctors are charging too much?? Our health Budget Cris for 2011-2012 was $140.2 billion that equates to $6,095 per individual and rising dramatically that's 9.5%GDP. That figure has rapidly increased this last decade and is increasing more so with what I have mentioned above. What would you suggest Cris. 

Cris
Cris from QLD replied to Stephen:

Not much space (or formatting) here to craft a comprehensive response, but I'll give it a shot: PART 1/2: Do you any business person or individual who presently spends $140,200,000,000 per annum without knowing exactly what they're getting in return for this huge annual investment? Australia needs to think differently about our annual health spend. We need to think of every dollar as an investment in improving the health outcomes of all Australians. Nothing will change until that happens. When we're ready to acknowledge the purpose of our spend/investment is to improve health outcomes, we can then very clearly see that the health spend measures we presently rely on (such as numbers of GP visits, hospital beds, numbers of injections, numbers of procedures, etc) are totally inadequate and misleading as measures of health outcomes against our investment. ----- You asked what I'd suggest as an alternative? ----- eHealth records presently collect data on health services and procedures, but patients can only make unstructured diary notations within their own eHealth records. I suggest patients be given capacity to self-report their health status / outcomes in structured ways within their own eHealth records. As the numbers of comprehensive patient case study profiles grow, we'll then be able to better qualify and quantify health outcomes, research and analyse aggregate de-identified data in various ways and apply learnings... with particular emphasis on improving the health outcomes of all Australians. Savings would follow from... shortening the path to improved health, refined preventive health measures, less adverse outcomes, less unnecessary hospitalisations, higher levels of productivity, etc, etc. 

Cris
Cris from QLD replied to Cris:

PART 2/2: This current budget environment has been singularly focussed on affordability. IF we adopt the suggested 'affordability' path, it will set a precedent for year-on-year health spending cuts until we end up with a US style health system. My suggestion requires minor adaptation to our current eHealth set-up for year-on-year gains. Bottom line... budget cuts and co-payments are singularly concerned with 'affordability'... where my suggestion is concerned with 'sustainability'. 

Stephen
Stephen from QLD replied to Cris:

Hi Cris, I understand where you are coming from, however we are still missing the initial comment I made in the first post. And that is how do we afford the baby boomers and to a lesser extent the obesity crisis . And that I have no problems contributing a $7 co payments. Yes I agree with some sort of health initiative Cris and people eating healthier but you have to be very careful here with discrimination issues freedom of choice etc. If an individual chooses to eat unhealthily it is their right, however if they then become a burden on the health system because of this then what do we do? As you said being able to keep accurate health records on each individual is a great idea, and maybe some incentives would help. But this will not happen over night we still have the baby boomers of which I am one. The trouble is Cris the baby boomers are also a large portion of the employed who will move to pensions(not me cant afford it) and pose more budgetary problems for any government. Our biggest issue is that governments no matter what persuasion have not prepared for this anomaly and now all of a sudden it is real and we have to come up with answers. I still have no problem with a $7 co payment. Appreciate the discussion though Cris...all the best mate, we need more discussion on the subject maybe. :) 

Cris
Cris from QLD replied to Stephen:

We'll all need the health system at some point, Stephen. If the system were to begin discriminating against human risk factors... a very slippery slope indeed... where would it end... anyone who drives a car (statistically, a very dangerous activity), children who ride bicycles, skydiving, or in the not too distant future... everyone's family genetic history? I believe in altruistic 'incentive', i.e.; Australians contributing information to the data pool in the best interests of improving health outcomes for all Australians. As for baby boomers costing more... well, the govt should be aiming to keep them healthier and in their own homes for longer... and what I've suggested would provide multiple flow-on benefits that would also help with that. Win, win. 

Elaine
Elaine from QLD commented:

Well done on meeting with the minister, John - but does no one remember that we already pay a Medicare levy on our taxes? This idea that health care is free is a nonsense. Personally, the $7 co-payment wouldn't bother me at the moment, but if they bring it in, there is nothing surer than that it will go up and up and up. It has to be scrapped, along with many of the other measures they want to bring in. 

Margaret
Margaret from QLD commented:

Many thanks to John & Jill - our elected Minister listened!! Hope we will see action & soon. I do believe many of our current decision makers of today fail to understand that our age group (70+ ) had little or no opportunity to really consider superannuation when in the workforce. Certainly, those working in a trade & more particularly women - married or not - were not considered by the larger employers (non-govt. excepted) worthy of super. Keep it up! Margaret De Araugo Qld 

Vaughan
Vaughan from QLD commented:

Don't trust anything the Minister says. It is only because of the Senate that any flexibility is surfacing. 

Peter
Peter from QLD commented:

Personally I'm not much fazed by the introduction of a $7 co-payment as I've never seen a doctor yet that bulk bills anyway. But for those in need it should be scrapped. However, my main worries are with the Government's proposed changes to the pension, the account based pension criteria and increasing the retirement age to 70! Not sure if many have understood what a double edged sword this is. For example: I am 67 and my wife is 63. Therefore we cannot get a full pension for ANOTHER TWO YEARS! until she is 65 and I am 69! It's usual for the husband to be some years older than his wife and since some former government pathetically increased the retirement age of women to 65 that means the government avoids paying the full pension for several years over the 65 mark. Imagine if/when the age is increased to 70! Perhaps politicians could be given any lifelong payment only when they reach the retirement age.It would be good if they were subject to the same rules we are subject to. 

Greg
Greg from QLD commented:

Thanks John for your diligence re this matter 

Christine
Christine from QLD commented:

We can only hope that he will indeed listen and act on what came out of the meeting with John early this week. Thanks fellow fifty-up club members for using our voice to hopefully make a change 

Someone
Someone from QLD commented:

re ' ... We also asked the Minister ... see premium increases by age brackets in the annual round of price rises. ... ' I can't speak for others, but I was very clear in my survey response with my commentary: The health insurance industry should remain subject to the 'community rating principle' so that health insurance premiums remain equitably pooled, as they should be (where effectively... the well subsidize the unwell, the young subsidize the old). IF the 'community rating' principle were removed, private health insurers would be free to 'risk adjust' individual premiums based on individual circumstances (age, risky activities, pre-existing conditions, and in the not too distant future, family genetics). Asking for a price differential for fifty up members for their health insurance premiums is therefore, proposing a very slippery slope on behalf of all your members that can only be detrimental to all your members. A better-informed understanding of the implications of what is being or has been proposed is imperative for both the club and its members, or in other words, before surveying members the club should ensure they're fully informed on the topic so they're aware of the potential consequences of their responses. 

Jean
Jean from QLD commented:

I'll believe it when I see it. Politicians are notorious for promising everything and delivering nothing. 

John
John from QLD commented:

Well done. It is just a pity the government doesn't seem to comprehend that for the past 30+ years of our lives we have worked within a system that "promised" a comfortable retirement life that was affordable and sustainable and a recognition of a life well spent helping to make this country prosper. Alas, now it seems it is more of - keep going ol' timer we'll get a bit more out of you yet. It is time that promises past are honoured with the passage of time. 

Comment Guidelines