Health and the 2005-06 Federal Budget: An Access Economics Analysis Commissioned by the AMA

AMA President, Dr Bill Glasson, said the Access Economics analysis looks behind the headlines to examine total health spending and the forward estimates to provide a more comprehensive picture of where the Government is headed on health policy and funding.

Key observations of the analysis include:

• At a time when the Budget is showing a huge surplus, funding in the key need areas of Indigenous Health and Mental Health remains too low
• The Budget papers are mute on the matter of potential savings from the Fourth Community Pharmacy Agreement
• There were no signs of funding for a long term care scheme to complement the Government's earlier medical indemnity measures
• In keeping with the intentions of the Charter of Budget Honesty, a case can be made for a change in Budget terminology. The term 'savings measures' should be reserved for initiatives that actually reduce the cost of health care to the community (as opposed to the taxpayer). The pharmaceutical price reductions measure would be an example
• The further PBS savings announced in the Budget add up to some $300 million - on the face of it, a substantial amount. But the vague nature of some of the PBS proposals raises doubts as to whether such savings would ever be achieved without having a negative impact on patient access to affordable medicines
• It would be timely for the Government to give some serious consideration to the scope for a single safety net covering both Medicare and the PBS. The current arrangements are complex to administer and complex for patients to negotiate
• DoHA Budget briefing papers continue the very poor practice of claiming 'new money' when ongoing programs are rolled over for another four years. If the money is already in the forward estimates, then it is not even remotely credible to argue that the continuation funding is 'new money'.

The Access Economics analysis can be viewed on the AMA website at