Private Health Insurance Amendment (Modernising the Private Health Insurance Rebate) Bill 2026
Dr RYAN (Kooyong) (17:38): I move the amendment as circulated in my name: (1) Schedule 1, items 1 to 4 (lines 4 to 20), omit the items, substitute: 1 Paragraphs 22-15(1)(a) to (c) Repeal the paragraphs, substitute: (a) in respect of any days in the premium period to which neither of paragraphs (b) or (c) of this subsection apply—30% of the amount of the premium, or of the amount in respect of a premium, paid or payable in respect of those days; and (b) 35% of the amount of the premium, or of the amount in respect of a premium, paid or payable in respect of days in the premium period on which: (i) at least one person insured under the policy was aged 65 years or over; and (ii) no person insured under the policy was aged 70 years or over; and (iii) age pension was payable under Part 2.2 of the Social Security Act 1991 to at least one person insured under the policy; and (c) 40% of the amount of the premium, or of the amount in respect of a premium, paid or payable in respect of days in the premium period on which: (i) at least one person insured under the policy was aged 70 years or over; and (ii) age pension was payable under Part 2.2 of the Social Security Act 1991 to at least one person insured under the policy.
I commissioned an analysis from the Parliamentary Budget Office based on the exact parameters contained in this bill. That analysis shows that about half of the $3 billion in savings under this legislation will come from pensioners. This bill would remove more than $1.5 billion in support from aged pensioners, from people who have worked, who have paid their taxes and raised families, who have contributed to this country for decades.
They've made their private insurance contribution for decades in good faith, to have the certainty of being able to retire with that insurance, that back-up, that assurance. This legislation doesn't modernise the private health insurance system. It doesn't even equitably improve settings for retirees.
But it does gut financial support for aged pensioners. This legislation punches down on older Australians. The government has claimed that it can't possibly find savings elsewhere in the budget.
It couldn't possibly tax oil or gas properly. It couldn't possibly cut the $11 billion a year in the diesel fuel rebate, 90 per cent of which goes to multinational miners, iron ore and coal. It couldn't possibly reconsider the conditions of the $368 billion that we've sunk into the AUKUS agreement.
No, this government prefers to find savings in the pockets of over a million pensioners. These are people who are living on a fixed income and who are already making sacrifices to maintain their health cover because that is important to them. Under this legislation, over 200,000 older Australians are projected to drop gold tier cover, with age pensioners being those most likely to downgrade.
Fewer private health members and fewer gold tier members will destabilise the risk pool. It will increase the cost of premiums for everyone left with private health. According to this government, 44,000 Australians are likely to drop their private health cover.
Private Healthcare Australia projects that over 50 per cent of them will be aged pensioners. A further 30 per cent will be earning less than $55,000 a year. That means that pensioners and low-income Australians will make up over 80 per cent of the individuals forced to drop their cover because of this measure.
Private health insurance premiums are set to grow 17 per cent in the years to 2030. That is faster than inflation. When Labor means tested the private health insurance rebate in 2012, it stood proudly with pensioners.
Tanya Plibersek was minister for health then. Of Labor's decision to means test the rebate in 2012, she said that self-funded retirees and a lot of pensioners were the ones targeted to ensure they would get support. In the lead-up to the election last year, the Minister for Health and Ageing said that Labor's cost-of-living relief applies very much to pensioners, but he's moved to cut $1.5 billion from their healthcare support.
Labor backbenchers know that this policy is anti-Labor, and that's why only 12 per cent of government members in this House have spoken in defence of this legislation. I'm glad to see that so many non-government members have risen to oppose this bill. Of the more than 160 submissions to the Senate inquiry on this bill, over 95 per cent were in opposition to it.
The amendment that I have circulated carves out age-pension recipients. It would help them preserve their ability to afford private insurance in their dignified retirement. The amendment secures $1.5 billion in healthcare support for pensioners.
I commend the amendment to the House. The SPEAKER: The question is that the amendment moved by the honourable member for Kooyong be agreed to.