





LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION

TRANSCRIPT OF DOORSTOP - CANBERRA, 13 JANUARY 2003

E & OE - PROOF ONLY



Subjects:   Private Health Insurance, Tax credits, Iraq, North Korea

CREAN:  The increases announced that the Private Health Insurance  industry is seeking today demonstrate, yet again, another broken promise from  the Howard Government. Before the election, in September of the year before  last, John Howard said that the Government’s decision on the Private Health  Rebate would see downward pressure on Private Health Insurance. After the  election, we’ve seen one increase, on average of seven per cent in Private Health  Insurance, and now the industry going for another amount of a similar amount.

This is a Government that has overseen the decline in bulk-billing. It now is  extremely difficult for families to find a doctor that bulk-bills. But in addition, the  Government is allowing enormous increases in Private Health Insurance. This is  not just a broken promise, this is slugging Australian families. Families will be  priced out of health care and that is a tragedy in a country that has prided itself -  with the establishment of Medicare - of being able to provide universal health  coverage for all, regardless of need.

This Government has got its priorities wrong. Its Minister is out there defending  the Private Health Insurance Industry rather than defending Australian families.  She should be saying no to the Private Health Insurance industry, no to further  slugs on Australian families. The Government promised that all decisions on  Private Health Insurance would have to go before the Cabinet. It’s already  broken that promise in that it now allows automatic increases in accordance with  the CPI. But what do we see? The Private Health Insurance industry, not  satisfied with that, is going for double that amount. This is an inappropriate  increase, the Government should step in and stand up for Australian families and  say no to it.

1

JOURNALIST: Doesn’t the Minister have a valid argument when she says  that the funds do require extra revenue to provide a world’s best service to  patients such as drugs and technology and so forth?

CREAN:  We must provide world best services. But you do that by  requiring the efficiencies and savings of the industry that this Government has  not required of the Private Health Sector. This Government has been prepared to  allow the Private Health Insurance industry to simply whack up premiums rather  than look for the obvious savings. And it’s also a Government that’s prepared to  allow gym shoes and golf clubs to be part of what can be claimed on Private  Health Insurance. There are clearly areas in which savings can be achieved and  that’s what the Government should be directing its efforts to and requiring of the  Private Health Insurance industry.

JOURNALIST:  If Health Funds are granted a rise of up to six per cent that  will obviously increase the cost of the thirty per cent Health Rebate to  Government. Is this another reason why the Health Rebate needs to be looked at  and when is Labor going to announce its policy towards that Rebate?

CREAN:  Of course the Private Health Rebate will be an additional cost  on the budget if this decision is allowed through. And it’s another factor that has  to be taken into account. But let’s look at the total gamut of why families are  under pressure with health care costs. The decline in bulk-billing, you can’t get a  bulk-billing doctor in most communities now and that puts up the price for  families. The increase in the price of Private Health Insurance and the increase  the Government still wants to persist with of a thirty per cent increase in the cost  of pharmaceuticals. Now Labor has said we will oppose again that increase by  the Government in the cost of pharmaceuticals. There are other ways in which  the budget can be addressed and I spelled those out in my budget response in  May of last year. The Government still hasn’t come back to us on the information  that we sought. But we have also said that our priority will be to restore bulk-billing in this country. That’s what underpins universal health coverage in this  country and the extent to which that requires us looking at aspects of the Private  Health Rebate, we will. Our priority will be to restore bulk-billing.

JOURNALIST: So are health funds being greedy then? I mean surely if the  Rebate has, and lifetime health cover has encouraged more members, they  should be getting some economies of scale, are they too greedy do you think?

CREAN:  The health funds are greedy and the Government’s letting  them get away with it. It was a disgrace this morning, to hear the Minister for  Health going on as an apologist for the Private Health Insurance industry. Her  responsibility is to stick up for the consumers, to stick up for families. To say as a  Government, `we will not allow excessive increases to go through’, to repeat

2

what they said before the last election and that was that the Private Health  Insurance Rebate would put downward pressure on Private Health Insurance.  The Government simply can’t get away with saying one thing before the election  and allowing the exact opposite to happen after the election. This is a blatant  broken promise, but worse, Australian families are going to have pay higher for  their health costs.

JOURNALIST: Mr Crean, let me ask you about Mr Abbott’s ideas about  working family credits, does it differ from what Labor is proposing in its working  tax credit?

CREAN:  Well, we haven’t seen the detail of Mr Abbott’s and I wait with  interest for it. But I welcome, yet again, Tony Abbott saying he supports tax  credits. But let’s wait and see how long it lasts as a Government position. He  claims that he’s got the Prime Minister’s support for this, for tax credits, but we  haven’t heard that from the Prime Minister. On four previous occasions when  Tony Abbott has ventured into the domain of advocating tax credits he’s been  slapped down by the Prime Minister and the Treasurer. Now Labor has said, we  need to look to tax cuts for working families because the Tony Abbott analysis  shows that working families, low and middle income families are being slugged  with high taxation under this Government, they’re the one’s that need tax relief.  And Labor has identified the need for that relief and has advocated tax credits as  one of the means by which you can give it. So let the Government come out and  embrace Labor’s position, work together to achieve it and do something decent  for working families. We have a Government that on the same day is going to  allow Private Health Insurance to go up and slug working families, a Minister that  says he’s concerned about addressing the tax situation for working families, but  a Government without a plan to do anything about it.

JOURNALIST: …are you saying that Private Health Insurance would be  cheaper under Labor Government than under a Coalition Government?

CREAN:  We said before the last election that we would force the  efficiencies in the private health sector, the efficiencies in terms of the saving  associated with the technologies, we would want to see that reflected in the  premiums. We put out a very clear position on that. The Government,  interestingly, said that its rebate would be the thing that brought down the cost  of Private Health Insurance. But it’s reneged completely on it and allowed  exorbitant increases, increases that aren’t justified, increases that the  Government should oppose.

JOURNALIST: So, on Iraq, Mr Crean, the Prime Minister on Friday gave us a  pretty good feel for the type of commitment that we’d have if we engaged in a  war, that includes a full squadron of F-18s so it’s somewhat larger than

3

Afghanistan. Given how stretched our military resources are, is that the sort of  commitment that Labor could support given it was satisfied with, that it gone  through the UN and all the processes had been done for it?

CREAN:  The commitment that Australia should make should be based  upon a United Nations resolution and discussions by the United Nations and the  allies about what Australia itself can contribute. The Government has had no  discussion with us about the size of commitment. The Government’s deployment  of those troops to the Gulf in the current circumstances is inappropriate. It  should not happen ahead of a decision by the United Nations. And this  Government has got its priorities wrong.

It’s moving down, pre-emptively, the path of engaging war in Iraq when the  diplomatic solution hasn’t been exhausted. And it’s not doing enough to engage  the diplomatic solution in North Korea. It should re-establish the Canberra  Commission - an initiative that Labor implemented in 1995 - to address in the  region, issues of nuclear disarmament and deterrents in terms of the  development of nuclear weapons. It was an initiative that was applauded in the  region. It was an initiative when the Government heard of it - as an Opposition  heard of it - called it a stunt. It received the report when it became the  Government and did nothing about it. But interestingly, countries such as Japan  built off the Canberra Commission and developed their own initiative to try and  address nuclear disarmament and nuclear deterrence in the region.

Australia needs to show that diplomatic leadership and it’s not doing it. And  again, its got its priorities wrong. It’s too keen to rush to war, a war that can be  avoided in Iraq, and it’s not doing enough to prevent the crisis in our region  associated with North Korea when this Government, when Australia in the past  as a Government has been able to demonstrate leadership. It should re-institute  the Canberra Commission.

JOURNALIST: Are you ruling out Labor support for military intervention if it’s  not sanctioned by the UN?

CREAN:  We’re saying that there is no case to support action other  than UN-endorsed action in the current circumstances.

JOURNALIST:  So  when  Kevin Rudd says that this decision on the forward  deployment on Friday has undermined hopes of, or has basically threatened to  undermine the current bipartisan stance on Iraq, can you see a situation where  troops do actually head into Iraq without the support of the Labor Party? …since  the Vietnam War?

4

CREAN:  Well, that depends very much on how the Government  continues to play this. See, the Government wants to have it both ways. It wants  to say it supports a diplomatic solution, but it’s itching for war. Now, I support  the diplomatic solution. I’ve said so consistently since April. I welcome the fact  that the Government still acknowledges and at various stages of the debate,  strongly acknowledges and supports that course of action. But if you support the  diplomatic solution you shouldn’t be doing anything to pre-empt it. You shouldn’t  be in there talking up the war, you shouldn’t be deploying troops in advance of  the United Nations decision. And that’s the criticism….

JOURNALIST: …wrong there as well?

CREAN:  I believe so.



JOURNALIST: You don’t think that…[inaudible]… pressure exerted on Iraq by  showing that the US and its allies are serious about the …

CREAN:  I think that the diplomatic pressure that was the most  significant of the lot was the unanimous decision of the United Nations to send  back in the Weapons Inspectors. There was a lot of speculation at the time that  a new timetable and a seriousness about the effort would not be achieved - it  was and it was achieved unanimously. Now, if the United Nations has got to that  position of strength it’s its hand that needs to be strengthened. But there  shouldn’t be action taken pre-emptively that can undermine it. And I think that  the Prime Minister on Friday who came out to start saying that he supported the  diplomatic resolution should not have gone the next step and indicated that he  will start deploying troops in the region in advance of anything that might  happen. We have to exhaust the diplomatic processes, that’s where the  Australian Government’s efforts should be directed.

And if you just take the comparisons, here’s a Prime Minister with a diplomatic  initiative already in train to try and solve Iraq, who is still prepared to commit up  to 1500 troops. But in relation to North Korea where the diplomatic initiative  from Australia’s point of view hasn’t even been advanced at any great strength -  certainly not at the political level - all the Government does is to send three  diplomats. It’s a complete wrong-headedness in priorities and it’s something that  the Government should reassess.

JOURNALIST: What more could be done on the … [inaudible]?

CREAN:  The re-establishment of the Canberra Commission, the  involvement of the Minister himself. We as a country still have diplomatic  relations with North Korea - we should use that opportunity. We should use it to  get them back into the international cart, to get them to rethink their position in

5

terms of pulling out from the International Atomic Energy Agency, to comply  with commitments in terms of non-development of nuclear weapons. This can  pose the greatest threat to us in the region, and we simply have to make more  efforts, more endeavours, to try and get North Korea to reassess their position.  We won’t do it just through diplomats and bureaucrats. It will only happen if it’s  done at the political level including at the highest political level, and we should  be re-engaging in the way in which we did this issue back in ’95.

JOURNALIST: So Mr Downer and maybe even Mr Howard should go to  Pyongyang?

CREAN:  Exactly, exactly, well Mr Downer initially, but I think that if it  requires political involvement at the highest level, that’s what leadership is  about. That’s what Prime Ministers are elected to do. They are elected to secure  our region and Australia’s interests in that region and so I would urge the  Government to rethink its complacency in relation to North Korea, look at what  initiatives it can take and look at initiatives in the past that have worked, and  look at the role, the key role that Australia can play because of its diplomatic  relations within that country.

JOURNALIST: … problem with the Canberra Commission though is that the  Americans never took it seriously?

CREAN:  Well, I’m not too sure that that’s the case, Dennis. I don’t  think that is. I think the problem with the Canberra Commission was that the  region - and regional players as I say, Japan adopted a continuation of the  Canberra Commission.   The real problem was that when the Howard  Government was elected - because the Canberra Commission was established by  the Keating Government - when the Canberra Commission reported, all the  Government did was to receive the report. It didn’t act further. Other countries  did. And to their credit, they’ve been in there trying to assist the diplomatic  resolution of this issue.

JOURNALIST:  Do you believe that North Korea could pose a direct threat to  Australia with its development of long-range missiles or do you think that the  foreign spokesman may have overstated the threat?

CREAN:  I think that any country that develops a nuclear weaponry and  the capacity to launch it over lengthy distances can clearly pose a threat to us  and to the region. And as we’ve found out recently, if the region is threatened  that can reverberate on us. That’s why we have to take this issue seriously as a  regional issue. And there’s no point in simply waiting for someone else to take  the initiative. Australia has demonstrated in the past, a capacity to punch above  its weight in these areas. It is seen as an honest broker. In part, it’s seen as

6

7

respected for having its alliance with the US but being able to use that alliance to  actually drive some other important diplomatic initiatives. That’s the sort of role I  would like to see Australia playing.



JOURNALIST:  Just on Iraq though, what about the Prime Minister’s  argument that we owe the service men and women the preparation of being in  the Gulf and getting ready for any possible conflict, that you can’t just drop them  in at the drop of a hat?

CREAN:  Well, what the Government also owes its service men and  women is confidence that the Defence budget is being spent wisely.

JOURNALIST:  But, what’s that got to do with deployment?

CREAN:  Well, its got to do everything with it. If in fact money is being  cut back on ammunitions, if in fact helicopters are being ordered that aren’t  going to arrive for a certain length of time - how do you expect people who are  being sent to defend this country, who are not adequately served in terms of  their equipment and their needs to be able to do that task properly? Now I think  there’s a bit of hypocrisy on the part of the Prime Minister in this, that’s what he  alleges is the need for the troops to go. But in relation to the SAS, they have had  training, all three divisions have had training in Afghanistan in terms of type of  warfare that might be involved. Preparation and readiness is not the issue in  relation to them. And we’ve also had vessels in the Gulf that have had people on  them that are trained - that’s not the issue here. The issue here is that he is pre-empting what hopefully can be the diplomatic solution in Iraq. He should be  allowing the United Nations to determine where the countries collectively  proceed in relation to getting Iraq to comply. That’s the course of action that  should be pursued, not talking up the war.

JOURNALIST:  …worry that the Labor Government would scrap the rebate  from covering ancillaries, should they be worried about that? Will you keep it on  ancillaries or would you cut it?



CREAN:  We’ve indicated that we see some very wasteful dimensions of  entitlement to ancillaries that are costing the budget significantly. I’ve indicated  that from our point of view the priority, the first priority has to be the restoration  of bulk-billing in this country and we’ll be looking to ways in which that can be  achieved, including that issue of ancillaries.

(ENDS)

