|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Australia
& South Pacific
A multi billion dollar transfusion to private health insurers
in Australia
By Liz Mantell and Laura Mitchell
4 October 2000
Use
this version to print
An eighteen-month long campaign by the Australian government
has succeeded in pushing millions of people into private health
insurance. The Howard government's Lifetime Health Cover
rebate scheme, which is part of a wider agenda aimed at bolstering
corporate control over health services, will hand billions of
dollars a year to the private health industry.
Since taking office in March 1996 the Liberal government has
worked to reverse what has been, at least nominally, a system
of universal access to public healthcare. The first Australian
public health insurance schemeMedibankwas introduced
in 1975 by the Whitlam Labor government. In 1981, following a
campaign by the private health insurance companies and other vested
interests, the Fraser Liberal government effectively abolished
the government-run insurer. Medicare, introduced by the incoming
Hawke Labor government in 1984 (in a somewhat emasculated version
of its predecessor), has provided free access to public hospital
care and General Practice treatment for layers of the population
that were previously excluded. Medicare won broad public support,
producing a steady decline in private health insurance membership.
In 1983 private coverage stood at 65.8 percent. By March last
year, it had plunged to an all-time low of 30.1 percent. According
to figures released last month by the Private Health Insurance
Administration Council (PHIAC), in the aftermath of the Howard
government's campaign, nearly eight million Australians, or 41.2
percent of the population, are now privately covered.
Lifetime Health Cover was introduced in January
1999 with the federal government offering a 30 percent rebate
on the cost of premiums for those taking out private insurance.
Yet the offer of cheaper premiums did little to induce people
to take out private coverage. In the March quarter of 1999 private
coverage inched up only a fraction to 30.3 percent.
The Howard government responded with an overhaul of the 1953
Health Insurance Act, legislating a system of penalties aimed
at driving the general population out of Medicare. Those failing
to take out private insurance by June 30 2000 would be forced
to pay significantly higher premiums in the future. The public
effectively had a gun held to its head: those who missed the June
30 deadline would face a 2% premium rise on taking out private
insurance for each year after the age of 30. Thus, premiums for
a 40-year-old are now 20 percent higher than prior to the cutoff
point and 40 percent higher for a 50-year-old.
The federal government spent $17 million on a public scare
campaign. Playing on concerns over the rundown state of public
hospitals, one TV commercial featured vanishing public hospital
beds alongside smiling and healthy patients in state-of-the-art
private facilities. The commercials urged viewers to run
for cover. The result was a field day for the big insurers.
Long queues extended outside the offices of Medibank Private,
and other private insurance companies, while call-centres took
on extra staff to deal with a flood of phone calls and credit-card
payments. More than 2.5 million people insured as a result of
the government's scare tactics. One million of these signed-up
in the three months before the June 30 deadline, many taking the
cheapest possible coverage to ensure family members would not
be locked out.
Last year, Howard's rebate scheme saw $1.5 billion of government
finances handed over to the private insurers. This amount will
now climb to more than $2.4 billion a year. According to the Doctors
Reform Society, $1.5 billion would fund more than 15 public hospitals
with 500 beds each, while a recent editorial in the Medical Journal
of Australia estimated that the subsidy to the private insurance
companies is enough to treat 1.5 million more patients in public
hospitals. Stephen Duckett, Professor of Health Policy in the
Faculty of Health Sciences at La Trobe University, declared that
the rebate is effectively a subsidy to the private health
industry and is larger than budgetary assistance for the mining,
manufacturing and primary agricultural production industries combined.
The federal government's drive to lift the numbers of people
who are privately insured is bound up with far-reaching changes
to the health system that have received virtually no public discussion.
The most recent Australian Health Care Agreement, signed between
the federal and state governments in 1998, introduced a new funding
mechanism that effectively penalises public hospitals as private
health insurance grows. Under a so-called clawback
provision of the AHCA, the federal government has established
that once more than 33 percent of the population is privately
insured, tens of millions of dollars will be withdrawn from public
hospitals and handed over to privately run facilities.
For every one percent rise in private health insurance above
33 percent, the federal government has the legal power to deduct
$82 million from the public hospital system. This means that on
the current level of 42 percent private coverage, a massive $738
million can be diverted out of public hospitals.
A spokesperson for Health Minister Wooldridge has denied that
the clawback provision will take this exact form, insisting that
the flow of government funds out of the public hospitals will
only come into effect once public hospital revenue from privately
insured patients exceeds $330 million. In reality, the federal
government, in collaboration with state Labor governments in Victoria,
New South Wales, Tasmania and Queensland, has erected a new funding
mechanism that will expand the private health industry at the
direct expense of the public system.
Since taking office in March 1996 the Howard government has
presided over a significant growth of the private health system
while slashing funds to the public system. In their first two
federal budgets, the Liberals cut $800 million from public health
funding. At the same time, they actively fostered the growth of
the private system, with the first Private Health Insurance Incentives
Scheme taking effect from July I 1997. Under the scheme, $600
million was handed over to the private insurance companies.
Not unexpectedly, the number of private hospitals and clinics
has rapidly increased. According to figures released by the Australian
Bureau of Statistics, the number of freestanding day hospitalsthose
providing day surgery and run by private operatorsincreased
by 63 percent between 1992-93 and 1996-97, from 94 to 153. In
the next year, 1997-98, the number more than doubled to 317.
Between 1997-98 and 1998-99 the number of treatments in private
hospitals rose twice as fast as those in public hospitals. The
number of patient days in the public system dropped by one percent,
rising by the same amount in the private system. Over the same
period the number of private hospital beds increased by more than
one thousand, while dropping in the public hospitals by nearly
two thousand. The outcome of this process has not been better
treatment. A recent survey of General Practitioners found 56 percent
felt it was more difficult than five years ago to get a seriously
ill patient into hospital, while 69 percent said their patients
were being discharged too soon.
Speaking in federal parliament recently, Howard described the
growth of private health insurance as the re-enfranchising
of middle Australia. Yet half the rebate subsidyabout
$1 billiongoes into the pockets of the richest 30 percent
of the population, with only 18 percent going to the poorest 30
percent.
Nearly two thirds of the population have remained with Medicare,
unable to afford private coverage. And large numbers of those
described by Howard as middle Australia rushed into
the private health funds out of fear. They are now obliged to
pay substantial premiums to access health facilities that used
to be freely available.
Moreover, in the wake of the private insurance stampede, thousands
of people have discovered the meaning of fine print agreements
stipulating that they cannot claim on their policies for the first
twelve months. Gap paymentsthe difference between the full
cost of treatment and the portion covered by private health fundswill
also leave policyholders severely out-of-pocket. Then there are
the impending increases in premium costs. Standard and Poors has
predicted that premiums will rise next year by 10 percent.
Not only have the private insurers been guaranteed billions
in government funding via rebates, they are also being given new
powers over health care provision. Under the Health Care Amendment
Act legislated in June, the big funds will be allowed to draw
up lists of preferred doctors to which their members will be directed.
This is a major step toward the US-style managed care system,
under which a handful of corporate giants dictate treatment based
on the defence of their bottom line, limiting the type and quantity
of treatment for each illness. While the major insurers have predictably
denied plans for managed care in Australia, one private insurer,
MBF, faced controversy only last month after revelations that
it was planning to limit the number of treatments available to
sufferers of lymphoedema.
The Howard government's support for the private health industry
has evoked widespread public concern. Recent news polls show 88
percent of the population support Medicare. More than 75 percent
rate the state of the public health system as an issue of major
concern, slightly below education but well above employment and
taxation. Conscious of this sentiment the Liberals have been at
pains to stress they are not about to axe Medicare, while Labor
has hypocritically attacked Howard for killing Medicare by stealth.
In fact, the Australian Labor Party has openly backed the Liberals'
assault on public health. In February, Opposition leader Kim Beazley
declared that a future Labor government would retain the 30 percent
private health insurance rebate, earning the condemnation of doctors
and other public health professionals. Dr Con Costa, National
Vice-President of the Doctors Reform Society, said Beazley's statement
was a clear signal that Labor is abandoning its policy of
support for Medicare.
In August, during the Australian Labor Party's National Conference
in Hobart, Shadow Health Minister Jenny Macklin again forcefully
defended Labor's support for private health rebates. What
we've said is it will stay. That's it as far as we're concerned,
she told the media. The Democrats have also signaled their willingness
to work with privatisation, calling for rebates at the very
least to be means tested.
Two weeks ago the ALP's federal cabinet met in Victoria, with
Beazley reasserting Labor's support for the government rebates.
We will not be interfering with the rebate via means testing,
capping, or any other process, he announced.
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |