Private Health Insurance Amendment (Modernising the Private Health Insurance Rebate) Bill 2026
Mr VIOLI (Casey) (16:40): When you're in government and you make budgets, it's about making choices. This government made two significant choices when it came to older Australians and veterans in the last budget. They made the big decision to just not honour their word at all and completely mislead the Australian people when they broke their word on their tax changes.
But when it came to the savings, they decided they were going to bank $734 million from our veterans in the first three years and just over $320 million every year thereafter—a billion dollars in savings from our veterans for their budget bottom line. That was choice 1 by this government and this Treasurer. Choice 2 by this government and this Treasurer was to punish older Australians over 65 by taking away their private health rebate in this budget—another saving at the expense of older Australians.
If you happen to be a veteran with medical issues who will likely exceed the $5,000 cap, and you're over 65 with private health insurance, you have well and truly been sold out by this government—and that is many in my community that have been sold out and thrown under the bus by this government. It is about choices. What are the other decisions that this government have decided to make when it comes to budgets?
These are the contrasts with throwing veterans under the bus and throwing older Australians under the bus. The Minister for Climate Change and Energy was up today, talking about his Cheaper Home Batteries Program. It's been very successful, and there's been a big uptake, but it's also blown out significantly.
I was talking to someone that took up the home battery program. They said to me: 'Yes, of course I'm going to take it up. I got a $40,000 battery and solar into my place.
Between the government handout at a federal level and the government handout at a state level, I had to pay $20,000—got half of it off. How good's that? How lucky am I?' I said, 'Okay, fair enough.' Then I asked them a question: 'So, for that $20,000, did you have to take out a loan?
Did you have to go onto a payment plan?' 'No, I had the cash in the bank. I was going to do it anyway, but of course I'm not going to say no to an extra $20,000 and get my money back.' That's just one example. There was $150 million wasted on a conference/holiday for the part-time COP president, part-time minister for energy to go to Fiji with no-one else turning up, and $300 million given to the NAB—a bank that delivered over $4 billion in profits.
They were given $300 million of taxpayer money—your money—at the expense of veterans and older Australians so they could subsidise green loans for those that wanted to buy EVs; I kid you not. This government is telling you: 'If you're a bank making billions of dollars, if you're on over $250,000 a year and you can afford to pay $20,000 to get a battery, we'll give you money.
If you want to go on a holiday with Minister Bowen to Fiji, we'll spend $150 million on it. But if you're an older Australian with private health insurance, we'll take away that support for you.' That is the reality and the choices of this government. Now, you'll hear those opposite—and we should be worried, Member for Forrest, because we've heard it twice today; we heard it with veterans this morning and we've heard it now with this private rebate, about misinformation and being misled, which makes me very confident that we made the right decision not to give the Minister for Communications the ability to determine what harm is on social media.
Those opposite will talk about misinformation and say, 'This isn't true.' The only problem with is the fact that the minister stands here at question time—and the member for Brisbane just contradicted herself and talked about how that money that they're saving will be moved into aged care. She can't have it both ways either. Either older Australians over 65 aren't going to lose money, and there's no savings, or, if they are going to make money and they are going to have savings, it's going to aged care.
It is a complete contradiction, because those savings that you are talking about going to aged care have to come from somewhere, and they are coming from those older Australians over 65. So let's see if the next speaker talks about misinformation and facts not being out there. But then we get this argument about age.
If you're over 65 and you're on a pension, you're on a fixed income. You have no ability to earn more money or to take up a part-time job because, if you take up a part-time job, it will impact your pension. So you don't have that ability.
You're on a fixed income. If you're someone on 35 or 40, you have that ability to pick up an extra job if your expenses go up. You also have the ability to earn more money above inflation, if you're lucky enough to get a pay rise.
There's more flexibility for those at a younger age. But then we hear the member for Brisbane and those opposite talk about how it's fairness. The reality is, if you're 35 or 40, you're not saving any money from this.
If you are 35 or 40, let's be really clear: your private health insurance costs do not go down. This is a cynical attempt by this government and those opposite to pit younger Australians against older Australians, because younger Australians do not benefit from older Australians losing this rebate and paying more. Let me share a couple of the words of some of my community.
An 82-year-old age pensioner told me: 'I thought I was doing the sensible thing by having private health cover for many years.' Now she will have to cancel her coverage completely. That is the reality. Another constituent implored the Albanese government to 'stop attacking the older generation'.
These are two members of my community. The member for Fisher tried to table today a petition signed by over 10,000 people, saying they were going to be impacted. The government wouldn't accept that petition.
They denied leave for the member for Fisher because they didn't want the voice of those 10,000 Australians heard in parliament—in the place of democracy. The minister denied their voice in this House because this government are clearly embarrassed by these decisions. We talk about the younger generation and this intergenerational warfare that this government is stoking.
The reality is that these changes won't save someone who's 35 or 40 any money, but it will hurt them, and it'll hurt all Australians. If you were thinking that you would not be impacted by these changes, you would be wrong. What this government are doing is something that they like to do so often, and it's called cost-shifting.
They are moving the health cost from the federal government, through providing the rebate, to the public system, which is conveniently paid for by state governments. That's what is going to happen. There's lots of modelling out there.
Lots of people are saying that they're going to drop their private health insurance, and they will have to rely on the public system, which will put more pressure on the public system than it can afford. As a Victorian under the Andrews-Allan-Carroll Labor government, our health system is broken. The last thing it can afford is more people needing more demands and moving from the private sector to the public sector.
But don't take my word for it. Even the Victorian Labor government and the South Australian Labor government in Minister Butler's own home state joined the Labor governments of New South Wales and the coalition governments of Queensland and Tasmania in opposing these changes. All state premiers are telling this government that this cost-shifting will overwhelm their hospitals at a time when hospitals are already overwhelmed, delivering a worse outcome for the Australian people.
Then we see today in the Australian an article talking about Minister Butler's advice to those that need hearing aids and processors from Deaf Australia. Minister Butler in December wrote to the Deafness Forum of Australia. The minister said: Many private health insurance policies include CI processors under their policies, and I trust that older Australians that undergo CI surgery would consider this avenue of support where possible.
Well, doesn't that sum up this government and this minister? On one hand, he's saying: 'No, we're not going to help Deaf Australia with their CI processors. You're on your own.
Use your private health insurance.' Months later, this minister is saying: 'No, we're going to take that away from you as well. We're going to take that rebate away from you.' It shows the callousness and the inconsistencies of this government. They're not prepared to put the health of older Australians first.
They are making these choices, as I said, to cut the rebate for anyone over 65 at a time when they can least afford it. If you're an older Australian under this government, you have seen your energy bills skyrocket despite this government promising to reduce power bills by $275 once they were elected in 2022. They promised that. 'My word is my bond.
I've done the modelling.' The Prime Minister promised 97 times to reduce your power bills by 2025. You've lived with double-digit growth as an older Australian, as every Australian has. Inflation is out of control under this government.
The price of everything at the supermarket is going up. Every Australian has spent 4½ years struggling to keep their heads above water. In fact, just two weeks ago, I was at a local food bank, talking to them about their challenges.
They were talking about the growth they have seen in their products. It's not growth that you want when you're a food bank providing for Australians. They have a range of people coming in.
They have older Australians on the pension, over-65s on a fixed income who will be impacted by these changes, who come in for food so they can make the dollars last. They have families on two incomes, dual-income families, that they themselves in their own words described as 'the working poor' needing food from their organisation. It has never been tougher than it is now under this government.
And what does this government choose to do? It made a choice. It made a choice in the budget by the Treasurer, the Prime Minister and the Minister for Health backed in and supported by everyone on the front bench in the cabinet and every backbencher to punish older Australians, punish our most vulnerable—those on a fixed income looking to retire and make the dollars count.
The backbenchers of the Labor government have created a little bit of a habit recently. Some of them will publicly speak out. Many of them will sit there quietly, background journalists, and talk to others about how they're unhappy with this train wreck budget from this Treasurer and the lack of leadership from this Prime Minister.
We saw it at their national conference, where dissent was not allowed. They follow the orders of the Prime Minister, but it's the Australian people and their constituents that pay the price. It's those that are over 65 that are paying the price.
It is veterans in this country that are paying the price. But again and again we're going to hear speech after speech regurgitating the Minister for Health's talking points. They're not listening to their communities.
You can spin, you can spin and you can spin, but it eventually catches up with you. We've seen that with the Treasurer of this country—4½ years of spin has caught up with the Treasurer. It would be a little bit humorous to watch the pain he was in, except we on this side know that—while he's feeling political pain for his ambitions—it's our communities and those that are most vulnerable that are feeling the economic pain every day because of a treasurer, a minister for health and a prime minister who don't understand their struggles, have no ability to fix the economic challenges we face and choose to punish older Australians for their failures.