Home Subscribe Print Edition Advertise National Editions Other Languages
Features

Advertisement

Printer version | E-Mail article | Give feedback

Surcharge Changes Spell Disaster for Public Health, Says AMA

AAP
May 10, 2008

Medicare changes mean a potential windfall of up to $1,500 for more than one million Australians who do not have private health insurance. (The Epoch Times)
Medicare changes mean a potential windfall of up to $1,500 for more than one million Australians who do not have private health insurance. (The Epoch Times)


MELBOURNE—Doubling the Medicare surcharge's income threshold would spell disaster for the public health system as more people opted out of private cover, Australia's peak medical body says.

In a blunt warning to the federal government ahead of the budget on Tuesday, the Australian Medical Association (AMA) said softening the surcharge rules would set the states up for failure in tackling the healthcare crisis.

"The public system is already on its knees, any increasing burden by this initiative would put the stresses even greater than they already are," AMA president Dr Rosanna Capolingua told AAP.

"You'd have to wonder if you're setting up the states to fail as far as them being able to deliver across the public health care sector."

Under the changes, the income threshold for singles paying the Medicare surcharge will double from $50,000 a year to $100,000.

For couples, the one per cent surcharge will kick in at $150,000.

The changes mean a potential windfall of up to $1,500 for more than one million Australians earning above the current thresholds who do not have private health insurance.

Dr Capolingua said if there was "no carrot" in taking up health insurance, higher income earners would stay in the public system, which was already crippled by long waiting lists.

"This change is a signal to say to people you don't have to take out private cover if you're earning up to $100,000.

"If we have a shift, then those who are really struggling and can't afford (cover) are actually more compromised because the public system isn't able to look after them clinically and appropriately."

Dr Capolingua said she would be "very surprised" if the government went ahead with the changes, knowing they were a disincentive for private cover.

Asked if the AMA would accept a more modest threshold rise, Dr Capolingua said that would have to be considered against economic forces.

Share article:

Advertisement