Countering the Medi-scare

The re-elected Turnbull government will almost certainly shy away from discussion of health reform, given the narrow election result and the apparent success of the Labor Party’s ‘Medi-scare’ tactic.

With another election on the horizon, short-term electoral necessity means the government will seek to neutralise health as a political issue — as in the days of the Howard government and its “Medicare’s best friend” slogan.

But countering the Medi-scare needs to be accomplished in a way that maintains the Liberal Party’s commitment to its core principles.

It is important, therefore, that the Prime Minister doesn’t go overboard with his rhetoric, and rule out potential changes. Rather than tie his (and his successors’) hands in this large and ever-more expensive area of government responsibility, he should instead try to re-boot the national discussion about health reform on better terms.

This requires finding a way to detoxify the idea of changes to the health system by likening this to an area of public policy — namely school education — where Australians are entirely comfortable with the choice-based policy approach of the Coalition.

This delicate task begins by stating, and repeating again and again, the bleeding obvious: there will be no major changes to Medicare unless those changes win the support of the Australian people at an election.

To this message it should be added that the government is politically realistic, and understands that many people in middle Australia, and many natural Coalition supporters, like Medicare.

Nevertheless, the ‘universalism’ rhetoric of lobbyists for the public system should not be endorsed; to avoid committing the Coalition to Medicare being for everyone forever and locking every Australian into a compulsory public system.

Instead, the Prime Minister should change the conservation by stating he understands that people feel they pay enough tax and Medicare is one of the ways they get some of their hard-earned back.

He should humbly remind the electorate that the government recognises this is why the GP co-payment ‘tax’ was a failure. But he should also remind them that — while respecting the public support for Medicare — the Liberal Party has always believed in individual choice.

Hence, just as the Coalition supports those Australian families who choose to send their children to non-government schools, the same principles are already applied to health through the support given to the 45% of Australians who are covered by private health insurance.

The Prime Minister needs to signal that because the Coalition believes in choice, it understands that many Australians will always want to choose Medicare, and will always respect support that choice. Medicare will always be there for those who want it; and ordinary Australians will be in the driver’s seat.

But the takeaway message needs to be more nuanced than this if the health debate is to advance beyond duelling scare and counter-scare campaigns.

The Prime Minister also needs to be make it clear that the Coalition remains open to the idea of giving people greater choice and potential private alternatives to the public system, and supporting those decisions just as in education, subject to the will of the Australian people.

Jeremy Sammut is a Senior Research Fellow and the Director of Health Innovations Program at The Centre for Independent Studies. His latest report is Medi-Value: Health Insurance and Service Innovation in Australia—Implications for the Future of Medicare