PM: I've just had a further meeting with Premier John Brumby of Victoria to discuss the future of the new National Health and Hospitals Network. This has been another strong, positive, substantive discussion. We worked our way through a number of the questions which arise concerning the governance of our system. We're looking forward to meeting again very soon, perhaps as early as tomorrow, to go through further of the funding aspects of the system that we have proposed.
It is important that we, the Australian Government, continue to work closely with all the states and territories, all political parties, to try and bring about better health and better hospitals for working people. That is what the people of Australia are expecting of us, and that is what we must deliver through this reform program. And again I would say very clearly to the nation at large that we want to work positively and constructively with all political leaders - Labor, Liberal, whichever party, Commonwealth and state - in order to bring about this important reform for Australians.
The Australian people have been waiting a long, long time for reform for the health and hospital system. The time for that reform has come now. We have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to get this system right for the future.
This new National Health and Hospitals Network will be the single biggest reform to our system since the introduction of Medicare. Working families know, pensioners know, carers know, that the system is under great stress and that it is at a tipping point, and it's time we all worked together to bring about this important change for the future.
Working families want more hospital beds, more doctors, more nurses, and a system which ends the blame game between the two levels of government. It's time to get on with it.
Over to you, folks.
JOURNALIST: John Brumby said recently that he wasn't sure under your plan where the buck would stop. Did you have any discussions about that and clear that up at all?
PM: Today we worked through a whole range of questions concerning the governance of the system that we have proposed, the continued role of the states and territories, the role of local hospital networks. It was a good and substantive discussion.
Of course, on the question of ultimate funding responsibility, our proposal is this - for the first time in Australia's history, we, the Australian Government, will become the exclusive funders of the primary health care system of Australia. At present, we represent about 60 per cent of that funding, so we would go to 100 per cent funding for that.
Secondly, for the acute hospital system, for the first time in Australia's history we would become the dominant funders of the system, going from 35 per cent funding now for its recurrent costs to 60 per cent of its recurrent costs. But also, importantly, becoming for the first time, also the dominant funders for the capital needs of the system, the equipment needs of the system, as well as the teaching and training costs of the system as well, whereas at present the Australian Government provides zero per cent of those costs.
And, finally, to take on 100 per cent of the responsibility for the funding of the aged care system.
The reason why us, that is, the Australian Government, being the exclusive funders for the primary care system, the dominant funders for the acute hospital system, the exclusive funders for the aged care system, is that, ultimately, we take away any incentive in the system for patients to be shunted from one arm of it to the other. We need to have the best outcome for patients, for people presenting at emergency departments, for people attending their local GPs, et cetera, and that is the reform that we put forward and we're working through with Premier Brumby as we speak.
JOURNALIST: You've described your discussion as good and substantive, but do you feel you've narrowed the gap between both sides' positions? Have moved forward and narrowed the gap at all?
PM: I believe we are moving through the outstanding areas of disagreement one by one. I believe that we are making some progress. Of course, Premier Brumby will speak for himself, as he should. I don't underestimate the problems that we've still got to work our way through, but that's why we'll continue to keep talking, and as I said, with the objective of resuming those discussions as early as tomorrow, or at any case some stage soon.
JOURNALIST: Do you take this morning's Newspoll as an endorsement of a federal takeover of health?
PM: I believe, for me, the important thing is to focus on a positive plan to improve hospital and health services for working families. And again I just call upon all political leaders of whichever level of government to do the same. It's important everyone works together to bring about this reform for the future. I'll leave the analysis of other matters to analysts.
JOURNALIST: (inaudible) criticisms of the hospital plan are about playing to his domestic audience?
PM: Look, the Premier of Victoria, as other premiers, will speak out for their local interests as they understand them. I understand and accept that. My job as Prime Minister is to take this once-in-a-generation opportunity to bring about fundamental changes to the system.
The problem we have, and the problem that's here in Victoria as well, is the system increasingly is at tipping point. That is, you have demand going through the roof for health and hospital services on the one hand, the ability of states and territories to fund the supply necessary to deal with those pressures constrained, and because you've got this gap between the demand on health and hospital services on the one hand and what state and territory governments are capable of funding on the other, the system ends up at tipping point.
That's where we are, and that's why the Australian Government's proposing to become, for the first time, the dominant funders of the health and hospital system. This would be the biggest reform since the introduction of Medicare. I believe the time has come for it.
JOURNALIST: Regarding Stern Hu, (inaudible)
PM: Stern Hu has been convicted of two charges, one of taking bribes and the other of stealing commercial secrets. Australia condemns bribery wherever it occurs.
The trial on the second charge was held in secret, with no media and no Australian officials present for it. This has left, therefore, serious unanswered questions about this conviction. In holding this part of the trial in secret, China, I believe, has missed an opportunity to demonstrate to the world at large transparency that would be consistent with its emerging global role.
The Government, of course, has made strong, high-level and frequent representations on behalf of this individual. We will continue to do so in the future.
Again, I'd reiterate: Australia condemns bribery wherever it occurs. Australia also, however, has reservations about the manner in which the second charge contained within this particular court case has been handled.
JOURNALIST: Maybe the Australian Government should have gone into bat for him earlier, harder?
PM: The Australian Government has made consistent representations on this matter from the beginning, and at the highest levels. As I said, the Australian Government condemns bribery wherever it occurs, but on the second charge here, that part of the trial was held in secret, and I believe the Chinese Government has missed an opportunity to demonstrate to the world how such trials can and should be held with complete public transparency.
JOURNALIST: How much of a strain will this put on Australia's ties with China?
PM: I believe the bilateral relationship will sustain these sorts of pressures. We've had disagreements with our friends in Beijing before. I'm sure we'll have disagreements again. As I said, when it comes to bribery, the Australian Government's position is consistent - we condemn bribery wherever it occurs.
But on the question of the full, transparent and public reporting and access for trials in the Chinese legal system, we believe that transparency is the best way to go, and we believe on this case China has missed an opportunity to demonstrate to the world at large that transparency in its judicial processes is the best way to go.
JOURNALIST: Could it be seen as a failure of diplomacy at all, the fact that (inaudible)
PM: The Chinese legal system has always been vastly different from the Australian legal system. At present in China, I'm advised, we have some tens of Australians who are currently serving various sentences for various offences committed in that country. As I said, the Chinese legal system is vastly different to Australia's.
However, differences in legal system is one thing. Again, I go back to the point about bribery. We condemn bribery wherever it has occurred, but we also believe that legal processes and trials should be held with complete public transparency. And we also reiterate that we believe that China, under these circumstances, has missed an opportunity to demonstrate to the world at large that trials of this nature should be held in public with full representation from diplomatic missions, full presence from those who are supporting those who have been accused.
JOURNALIST: Has Australia had a record-breaking month in terms of boat people arriving?
PM: Can I say that every government, going back about 30 years, I think, each year has been confronted with the challenge of asylum seekers. This government is no different.
The second point I'd make is that there are constantly ebbs and flows in the overall number of people who seek to come to this country, and that is driven, by and large, by international security circumstances. Now, that continues to be the case now, it has been the case in the past under the Howard Government, when many more people had arrived here in the period of the late 90s and the early 2000s, but our challenge as a government is to deal with each of these challenges as they arise.
I repeat what I have said on earlier occasions - if we establish that a person has no credentials as a bona fide asylum seeker, they'll be sent back home. We have sent more than a hundred people back home already and we will continue to do so into the future. That's the way in which the system should operate.
JOURNALIST: There are reports today that you're planning to completely scrap the insulation scheme. Is that the case?
PM: My advice is that we have clearly stated that we plan to bring in a replacement program for the Home Insulation Program. The guidelines for it are currently being developed by the relevant minister, Minister Combet, and by the relevant branches of the industry and the relevant safety authorities. I understand that process is still underway.
JOURNALIST: (inaudible) did you discuss with John Brumby at all the opening of Maribyrnong, or using Maribyrnong detention centre again for asylum seekers?
PM: We had no such discussion on that. We spoke exclusively about health and hospitals this morning.
JOURNALIST: Is that something you'd look at, though?
PM: We have no such plans and all those sorts of questions, detailed questions of that nature, should be addressed to the Immigration Minister.
JOURNALIST: How much are closer, you met with Premier three weeks ago, how much closer are you now to being able to put pen to paper on the deal (inaudible)
PM: Oh, well, it's always a bit of a process, these things. When it comes to negotiating something as big as the biggest shake-up to the health and hospital system since the introduction of Medicare, people are going to have a view. It takes a while.
We began, I think, with a whole series of areas of disagreement. I think we've worked our way through a number of those, but I don't diminish the fact that areas of disagreement remain. But, again, I would emphasise the fact that the Australian people expect all political leaders, at all levels of government, of all political parties, to work together on delivering better health and better hospital services for working families, for pensioners, for carers. That's what they want.
I think the public actually get it. They actually understand that the system is at tipping point. They understand that we need to bring about fundamental reform. We've got to work our way through the detail, of course, but the time for delay, I think, has well and truly passed.
Can I just conclude by some remarks on the economy? When I was here yesterday in Melbourne, I delivered an address outlining the Government's economic policy. I outlined our principles of maintaining macroeconomic stability. I outlined our principles for continued microeconomic reform by boosting productivity growth, and how we've applied those through the varying, various changes in global economic circumstance we've had to contend with - the boom conditions of 07, the bust conditions of 08-09 arising from the global financial crisis, and the slow return to growth around the world which we've seen in recent months.
I'm advised today that my political opponent, Mr Abbott, will be delivering his first address on the economy today. Can I say this - I think the Australian public will ask themselves whether they can trust Mr Abbott on the economy when it took only five weeks to break his first promise on the economy, which was not to introduce any new taxes.
On the Neil Mitchell program he said that the Liberal Party, under his leadership, would not introduce any new taxes. Five weeks later, Mr Abbott brought about his great big new tax to fund his version of a paid parental leave scheme.
That's a pretty big breach of promise within five weeks on something as fundamental as economic policy.
Thanks for your time, folks.