Mr ROBB (4:38 PM) —This afternoon I would like to highlight the importance for the 20,000 Australians aged over 65 in my electorate and the more than one million Australians over 65 nationally of the government's promise to increase the private health rebate from 30 to 35 per cent for those aged 65 to 69 and to 40 per cent for people over 70. The higher rebate will be available for hospital cover, ancillary cover and combined cover and, importantly, will take effect from 1 April 2005. On a typical policy for couples or families, this rebate increase will reduce premiums by about $100 to $200 a year over and above the existing 30 per cent rebate.

I think it is critical that older Australians have the opportunity for choice and peace of mind when things go wrong, and this added assistance gives them choice of doctor and choice of hospital. Many of these older Australians have had private health insurance for most of their adult lives. They have contributed during their younger years while enjoying good health, and it is really our responsibility to provide them with insurance cover at an affordable price when they reach their older years.

This initiative for older Australians builds on the federal government's 30 per cent rebate, which has proved to be a very effective policy. In all, the rebate has made it possible for more than 8.6 million Australians to keep or to take up hospital insurance. Many of those are on lower or fixed incomes. Many are pensioners or self-funded retirees. They do not want their health choices to be determined by a bureaucrat as would happen under Medicare Gold, the alternative Labor proposition. They want to exercise choice. The rebate makes this possible and the higher rebate for seniors will make it even more possible for around one million Australians.

The success of this policy is borne out by the fact that the premium cost to consumers is around three per cent of average weekly earnings. This is back to being equivalent to the cost to consumers that we saw in 1990. It has been a highly successful policy, it has been taken up by many and the rebate undoubtedly has taken pressure off public hospitals and made public hospitals available to many uninsured Australians. We are now seeing from 50 to 80 per cent of chemotherapy, surgery for malignant breast conditions, hip replacements, same-day mental health treatments and cataract operations being conducted in private hospitals. It has been a massive success.

It is important also to compare this with the alternative. We saw today in the Financial Review that the Leader of the Opposition said, amongst other things:

He said it somewhat defensively. Of course it is being described as Whitlamism because it is pure Whitlamism. Medicare Gold is unfunded and would be a massive burden on future budgets. It is not thought through; it is unworkable; it is reckless; it is Big Brotherish—big government. We will find bureaucrats making decisions on behalf of Australians rather than Australians exercising their own choice. It is patronising in that it says people could not or should not be allowed to make a choice of doctor or hospital—some greater authority will make it for them—and it is pure Whitlamism because it is a con: it suggests that we can have something for nothing. Price something at nothing and the demand will increase dramatically. Then we will see increased waiting lists. It will be self-defeating and hugely costly to the budget—it is a joke.

On this matter, the real difference between the parties is that the Liberal Party has faith in people making the best decisions about running their own lives. For all their rhetoric about opportunity, the Labor Party do not. In the end, the Labor Party think that government knows best, they believe in the nanny state and they do not trust people to make sensible choices about their lives, including their health care.