House of Assembly Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3) 51 3 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Question Time Question Time Private Health Insurance Rebate PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE REBATE Mr HAMILTON-SMITH House of Assembly Waite Leader of the Opposition PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE REBATE Mr HAMILTON-SMITH (Waite—Leader of the Opposition) (14:17): My question is to the Premier. Has the government undertaken any proprietary work to assess what new costs and demands would be placed on South Australia's health system by a commonwealth decision to alter the private health insurance rebate, and how will our hospitals cope with extra demand as people move from private health to the public system? Public reports have indicated in recent days that the 30 per cent private health insurance rebate is expected to be means-tested for singles earning more than $74,000 and families with combined incomes of $150,000. The Hon. J.D. HILL House of Assembly Kaurna Minister for Health Minister for the Southern Suburbs Minister Assisting the Premier in the Arts PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE REBATE The Hon. J.D. HILL (Kaurna—Minister for Health, Minister for the Southern Suburbs, Minister Assisting the Premier in the Arts) (14:18): Of course, there have been a number of statements about what might be in the federal budget. I guess we will just have to wait until tonight to see— Members interjecting: The Hon. J.D. HILL House of Assembly The Hon. J.D. HILL: I didn't say where those leaks came from: I said there had been a number of leaks. Mr Pengilly interjecting: The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Order! The Hon. J.D. HILL House of Assembly The Hon. J.D. HILL: We will have to wait to see what is in the budget—but I certainly hope I will be able to catch a train in here one day, member for Finniss. In relation to modelling, I have seen some (I am just trying to recall exactly where I have seen it in the last little while; I am not sure whether it has been a parliamentary briefing note or in a newspaper report) in relation to the impact of a potential reduction in the subsidy to higher income earners' private health insurance. The likely event, of course, is that such a reduction would have very minimal effect on the number of high income people who take out private insurance, particularly if it is backed up by a disincentive against dropping out of private insurance, because I understand that one of the options (and this also was in the media over the last week or so) the federal government is looking at is putting on a higher Medicare rate for those who have a higher income who choose not to have private insurance. So, there is more than one way of getting the desired outcome for those— Members interjecting: The Hon. J.D. HILL House of Assembly The Hon. J.D. HILL: This is not my policy. You asked me a question about the impacts it might have on the state health system. I am trying to explain it to you. If you have objections to it that is fine. I am not arguing whether it is a good or bad thing, I am just telling you what the impacts might be. If the federal government, or any government, were to put in place a policy framework where there would be a disincentive to drop out of private health insurance, the impact would be very minimal. Even if they were to remove just the bonus it is unlikely to reduce the number of people who have private insurance by a huge amount. The final point I would make is that people in the workforce who are on high incomes are likely to have fewer health problems than those who are out of the workforce and retired. The older population is the most likely group in the community to require ongoing health care, and that is the population group that has the lowest rate of private insurance. That is where the great growth in demand is. People in the paid workforce have a lower rate of access to health insurance because of their age and general wellness. So, we do not think it will have a huge impact, but we will wait to see what is in the budget before we make any proper projections.