THE review of Medicare services is not before time.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The Medicare services and benefits call on the federal budget has grown by almost 90 per cent, to $29.5 billion in the past decade.
This is on top of a 65 per cent increase in the pharmaceutical benefits scheme, to $12.4 billion over the same period.
Federal Health Minister Sussan Ley says most of the 5700 items on the Medicare Benefits Schedule have not been reviewed for more than 30 years.
The AMA is critical of a perceived slur on doctors, but as a financial and functioning beneficiary of the system the medical profession will provide a valuable contribution if it is able to show how each of the 5700 Medicare items are necessary. On this score doctors are critical to the effectiveness of the review.
Rising health costs far exceed the inflation rate. Bureaucrats refer to "health inflation" because this monster has a mind and appetite of its own. A decade ago health sapped the federal budget of $37.5 billion a year, but now it is almost $70 billion and will rise to $77 billion within two years.
So wouldn't it make sense to review Medicare items at least once a decade, let alone once every 30 years as is currently the case.
Why is it not good medical and financial management to abolish ineffective Medicare items and reinvest the money in the health system? Perhaps even introduce new items that are effective.
Labor health spokeswoman Catherine King says the government's review is code for health cuts. She can do better than that. Better that Ms King lends her expertise to the review, to highlight what she regards as waste and what is effective medicine.
Rather than one-line slogans, a political party will attract more listeners when it actually engages on policy debate. That's what politics is supposed to be about.