SENATOR THE HON KATY GALLAGHER
MINISTER FINANCE
MINISTER FOR WOMEN
MINISTER FOR THE PUBLIC SERVICE
MINISTER FOR GOVERNMENT SERVICES

MARK BUTLER MP
MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND AGED CARE 

E&OE TRANSCRIPT
PRESS CONFERENCE
CANBERRA
WEDNESDAY, 23 APRIL 2025
 
SUBJECTS: Dutton’s cuts; Labor’s plan to open three new fully bulk-billed GP clinics in Canberra; Bulk billing; Flu season; Social security; Tax reform; Respite care; Public service; Federal Election. 

KATY GALLAGHER, MINISTER FOR FINANCE: Well, thanks everyone for coming. It's great to be here with the Minister for Health, Mark Butler, to reinforce some of the commitments that we've made in the last week for local responses to the health pressures we've got here and indeed in general practice and in aged care, but also to talk about what's at risk at this election and to call on Peter Dutton to come clean on how his cuts will affect public services and public service delivery. So, we're standing here in front of the Department of Health. We know Peter Dutton has said he'll cut 41,000 jobs. He said that he'll do it by attrition and he has also said he will not reduce frontline services or national security agencies. So, when you look at the numbers and you work through how departments are staffed in the APS, if you exclude national security agencies and frontline agencies, 41,000 jobs being cut would mean the abolition of about ten entire departments. That would include the department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, Treasury, Finance, Infrastructure, Education, Health. They would all have to go to meet Peter Dutton's 41,000 job cuts. So, I think what I'm trying to say today is it's absolute nonsense that you can cut 41,000 jobs and not affect service delivery. You can't cut 41,000 jobs without affecting frontline services or national security agencies. And we know Peter Dutton last night said that he's going to cut, he just won't tell you until after the election, but it'll be more Howard-style. And the Howard-style cuts, we know what happened where he cut 30,000 jobs, he cut Medicare, he cut essential services. So, Peter Dutton has confirmed he'll take that approach. Jobs will go and services will go as well. And that has a national impact. But obviously, here in Canberra, that would have devastating impacts on our city and our economy and it wouldn't just be in the public service, it would be on every business and every family that lives in the ACT, works in the ACT, would be affected by job cuts of that size. I'll hand over to Mark now to make a few health-related comments.
 
MARK BUTLER, MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND AGED CARE: Thanks, Katy. I want to say a couple of things. First of all, my first opportunity here in Canberra to thank Katy for the work we've been able to do together to build some ways in which we want to lift bulk billing in the ACT and Canberra specifically. The tripling of the bulk billing incentive did stop the free fall of bulk billing right across the country. We have seen a bounce of bulk billing here in Canberra, but the ACT still by a long distance has the lowest rate of bulk billing in the country at about 53 or 54 per cent. Every other jurisdiction in the country is over 70 per cent with some over 80 per cent. So, working with Katy, we've determined what we need to do is introduce some new competition into the Canberra general practice market, which is what Katy announced last week. I'm really looking forward to the opportunity to implement that if we are elected and see some meaningful increase of bulk billing here in Canberra. We know it's just so important in terms of access, affordability, to good healthcare. But I want to back in particular what Katy has said about what is on the line for this election. What came out of last night's debate was just more evidence of Peter Dutton's determination to Americanize Australia's healthcare system. We know he has long been committed to a user pays system of health. We saw that when he was the health minister, making every patient pay every time they went to the GP, making every Australian pay every time they entered the front door of the emergency department. Nothing more significant in terms of evidence of his desire to Americanise our healthcare system. But what we're also seeing in this election campaign is him copying the current American playbook in health, slashing jobs in the Health department behind us. Thousands of public servants here in Canberra and across the country who backed Australians in during the COVID pandemic who are just so important in making sure we have good, up-to-date health programs, that deliver the best health program in the world through Medicare. We've also seen over the last couple of days evidence and a confirmation that the Opposition would abolish the Centre for Disease Control, at a time when we're seeing measles outbreaks, at a time where we have the possibility of a bird flu epidemic across the world. And knowing the recommendations, the clearest possible recommendations of the COVID inquiry, that there should finally be a single centre for disease control here in Australia to coordinate in a transparent way pandemic preparedness and planning. Peter Dutton is determined to Americanise our healthcare system, both in the way in which patients interact with the healthcare system, but also by copying the American DOGE playbook of slashing health jobs and abolishing the Centre for Disease Control.
 
JOURNALIST: More and more GPs are saying that they won't be able to increase billing despite the promised incentive. Do you think the $8.5 billion package will mostly benefit practices that already will bulk bill and won't really help others make the switch?
 
BUTLER: Well, we've designed this very carefully in close consultation with the Finance Minister. But using the earnings calculator that the College of GPs themselves run, we have very good data on exactly what GPs, every single GP in the Medicare system, is charging. And we've designed this program using all of those data points. We've also seen over the last several days, very big GP practice groups confirmed that they will move to a full bulk-billed model after 1 November after our investments. I was in Launceston a couple of days ago at a general practice that said exactly the same thing. They've done their sums and they recognised that they would be better off under the full bulk billing model we've announced over recent weeks. I'll give you a sense of it. What we've done is calculate that 4,800 practices, that's about three quarters of general practices in the country, would be better off financially by moving to a full bulk billing model. A fully bulk billing GP two years ago earned about $280,000 a year after they paid their practice fees, about $280,000 a year according to their own earnings calculator, so, the one used by the College of GPs. After November, that rate will be more than $400,000, a $125,000 increase in the salary of a fully bulk billing GP. Two years ago, they were earning a lot less than a GP who is a mixed billing GP. So, charging gap fees on an average basis. After November, they'll be earning more than a mixed billing GP because of our investments. So, I'm very confident once GPs themselves and general practices more broadly do the sums, do the maths, they'll recognise this is not only in the interest of their patients, which is our primary focus, it's in the interest of their practice as well.
 
JOURNALIST: Should you be making it more enforceable, so GPs can't opt out of doing it, they have to do this model?
 
BUTLER: Well, we don't have the National Health Service. We have a constitutional prohibition against conscripting doctors in this country. That was a product of a long fight in the 1940s where Labor was battling the Liberal party and the doctors, as we've so often done over the course of Australian political history. So, we don't have the legal ability to do that, but we have put in place a payment system that incentivises doctors and practices move into a full bulk billing model. I can't make them do it, I don't have the legal power to make them do it, but I'm confident we have designed this in a way that it's in their interests to do this as well as obviously in the interest of patients.
 
JOURNALIST: Will you be offering any Canberra-centric ideas just to push us over that line?
 
BUTLER: Well, there's something about the Canberra market. Katy might want to add something to this. We haven't seen increases in bulk billing in the ACT that we've seen in other parts of the country, and I think that's a reflection of the undersupply of GPs. That's been an issue here for many years. That's why in close consultation with Katy and the rest of the ACT Labor team, we designed this program to introduce more competition into the market here in Canberra. We will support a group that will put in place three fully bulk billing practices here in Canberra to give Canberrans the option to go and see a fully bulk billing doctor. We'll also support the practice down in Tuggeranong, the name of which escapes me right now -- the Interchange program -- which has been a fully bulk billing program in that part of Canberra in the south, and we want to see that continue. We'll support a new provider taking over that practice, continuing the work, the really good work they've been doing down there.
 
JOURNALIST: Flu season seems like a shocker already. Are we prepared, do we have enough vaccines in Australia?
 
BUTLER: Well, we've got enough vaccines. They were distributed to general practices and pharmacies ready for the beginning of what we think of as flu vaccination season, which is on 1 April. So, they've been available there. I was in my chemist to see whether I could get an appointment over the weekend, they're chock-a-block. I couldn't get in there. I know chock-a-block's a technical term. But they were full with long waiting lists, people getting their flu shot and their COVID shot, often getting them together now, which obviously you can do and I encourage people to do if you meet those eligibility criteria. I really want to encourage in particular people over the age of 6,5 adults who might have compromised immunity, and parents of kids are under five as well, to consider going and getting their free flu shot. You can get it at your general practice, particularly for parents, kids under five. Otherwise, you can also get it at the pharmacy, which is a very convenient way to do that. Again, free of charge.
 
JOURNALIST: With Peter Dutton last night saying no to raising the base rate for welfare recipients, that's Labor's position too. What do you say to the very large number of welfare recipients, voters, about whether they're being left behind or not?
 
GALLAGHER: Well again, I think we saw what Peter would be like as Prime Minister, a very hardline conservative Prime Minister who would take a very hardline view on people who need an extra helping hand. I mean, with the Government that Mark and I have been a party to and ministers in, we have increased JobSeeker by over $200 a fortnight --
 
JOURNALIST: That's indexing keeping up with the cost-of-living --
 
GALLAGHER: No, no it's not. There was an additional increase and indexation arrangements and Commonwealth Rent Assistance and a whole range of other measures, whether it be Medicare, energy bill concessions for concession cardholders, all of that was targeted at those on fixed and low incomes. And they are all measures that Peter Dutton calls wasteful expenditure. The other thing he said last night, and it's being repeated this morning, is that the activity test will be back. Now, that again is targeted to people who might not be in work or who might be needing to look for work. We want to get rid of it so that children actually get their entitlement to subsidised daycare regardless of what their parents are doing. Peter Dutton wants to go back and see early education and care as child-minding and if you don't have another purpose by work or training, then you are to mind your children and they're denied early education and care. That is what we saw last night. That is what is at risk at this election and I think we'll see, not only through not supporting people on income support payments, but also not supporting women who are juggling looking after children and also wanting to get into work or training or indeed just have time for themselves and their children, having access to care. That is on the chopping block as well. But that's exactly the sort of Prime Minister that he would be and that's the risk. And that's why we're out here arguing every single day about Labor's offer and why we can't risk Peter Dutton and his mad scheme around nuclear reactors and the cuts that he would have to impose in order to pay for them.
 
JOURNALIST: So, what will Labor do? Will Labor, in the next term, raise the base rate?
 
GALLAGHER: Well, this is something we look at every single budget. We get a whole range of information. We've got the Economic Inclusion Committee that provides advice to Government, and that is considered in the Budget, and they are big supporters for example of getting rid of the activity test. It's not all about just raising one income payment, although we look at all of them across the board. That's the PM's commitment. He's said it a number of times. And I think when you look at the decisions we've taken, you'll see that that information does support our decisionmaking to increase the payment itself. Look at what we did on single parenting payments, from raising the cutoff from eight to fourteen. Again, that was information that came to us. The activity test, again, I'm just gobsmacked that Peter Dutton would come out and just say, nope, that's back in, we're not going to support that change. Because of what it says to women or what it says about the value of unpaid caring, and what it says about the value of early education and care for children. And we know the children that we need to get into early education and care are the children that might not get the opportunity because the activity test bars them. They're exactly the children we need to get in so that when they start school, they're not behind. And this is exactly the sort of Prime Minister that we would see Peter Dutton be, and it was on show, on full display last night in the debate.
 
JOURNALIST: So, is it fair to say it remains a Labor ambition to raise the rate?
 
GALLAGHER: Well, Karen, I don't know how much clearer I can be. We look at it every single budget and you'll see from the decisions we've taken, where we have room in the budget, where we can find room, we have done that, and it's been increased to payments. Job seekers, single parenting payment, Commonwealth Rent Assistance. A 45 per cent increase in just two budgets hasn't been done before. Because we recognised, particularly when inflation was higher than we'd like, that people on low and fixed incomes were doing it tough. That's why Mark argued for the tripling of the bulk billing rate. That's why we're lowering medicines, and for people on concession cards, why we're fixing it at $7.70 for the next few years. I mean, that's why we're making all these decisions. You can't see one income payment, income support payment in isolation of a whole range of other decisions we've taken. So, I can say, if you put Anthony Albanese and Peter Dutton together to see who's making a better offer to people on fixed and low incomes, it's a very, very clear distinction that it would be Anthony Albanese every single time.
 
JOURNALIST: Serious revenue reform of the federal budget -- why aren't the major parties, including Labor, talking about that?
 
GALLAGHER: Well, I think we are. We're talking about reform in a whole range of areas. And again, look at what we've done. I know it doesn't get a lot of coverage, but look at what we've done with the NDIS and in aged care. Serious structural reform to the Budget to make sure that in the medium term, there is pressure coming off the Budget so we can find room for all those other things people would like. We've got income tax cuts, we've done multinational tax reform, we've reformed the PRRT, we've got a super bill, super tax concessions for high income earners that's stuck in the Senate. I think when you look back and have a look at what we have been able to achieve over the last three years, it's actually a meaningful set of tax reform initiatives, and we are obviously going to the election this time lowering every taxpayer's income tax. And the contrast again there is you'll have Peter Dutton as Prime Minister, whose first bill into the Parliament would be to raise every taxpayer's income tax.
 
JOURNALIST: Couldn't Australians be earning more money through the PRRT?
 
GALLAGHER: Well we've made those reforms that we got through, and that ensures that we are getting more income and that income is coming in earlier, and that's important. It's been an important fiscal improvement for the Budget. They are the changes that we made and after some argument in the Senate, as I'm sure you all watched, we managed to get that through.
 
JOURNALIST: The Prime Minister said he wouldn't form a coalition with the Greens. Why is the party so against this when it's something that you yourself have worked in at an ACT Government level?
 
GALLAGHER: Well, the PM's been very clear and he couldn't have been clearer last night. We're campaigning for majority government. If you want a Labor government, if you don't want to risk a Peter Dutton government, you need to vote Labor. We are not -- and the PM has made it clear -- we are not going to do any negotiations or deals with the Greens.
 
JOURNALIST: Senator Gallagher, the Burrangiri respite facility, the asset management plan for 2023 estimated it would cost around $900,000 to maintain Burrangiri at its existing level of functional operation. But this morning on local radio, John Lyons from the Save the Burrangiri Action Group said you had told them it would cost $12 million to upgrade Burrangiri to the current standards. What is that figure based on and why is it so different to the one in the asset management plan?
 
GALLAGHER: Look, that's the advice that we have from the ACT Government. This is a facility that is owned and operated by the ACT Government. They tender that service out to the Salvos to operate the actual service delivery, but the facility itself is owned and operated by the ACT Government. The decision to close it is a decision of the ACT Government. I've been talking with them because I have met families who use Burrangiri and who are really worried about what that closure means, particularly for their loved ones and accessing respite care. I've raised it with the Minister for Health and the Minister for Aged Care, and we have been able to secure $10 million to make sure that we are at least maintaining the respite care beds in the ACT as soon as the election's over. And if we are fortunate enough to win, we would put that out to tender and see what the market, what providers, could provide. It may include the opportunity to have those beds open relatively quickly or it may include a longer time to build a new facility. But the Commonwealth is trying to respond to a decision that the ACT Government has taken, that I know many don't agree with and particularly those that use Burrangiri. I'll be meeting with some of the representatives of Burrangiri tomorrow to talk through any other support they're seeking from the Commonwealth. But I think the commitment that we've got on the table, which is to make sure we can continue those respite care beds, is really important.
 
JOURNALIST: 10,000 Canberrans have already had their vote. Are you concerned you spent too much time down on the campaign trail and not here in Canberra on the ground talking to constituents?
 
GALLAGHER: Look, I've managed. I think Mark's in the same boat. We've been on and off and around Australia. I mean, we have national jobs as well as local jobs, but I think we've managed to find time to be here and to make sure that we are resolving issues like Burrangiri and representing the ACT's interest. But we don't take anything for granted. I need to work as hard as anybody to win the support of the Canberra community, and of course not helped by the fact that the Greens and David Pocock have decided not to preference Labor in any way, meaning that really it's going to be, if you want me returned to the Senate, you have to vote one Labor.
 
JOURNALIST: Should you have worked harder, maybe, to get some deals with them to get those preference deals flowing?
 
GALLAGHER: Oh, I think there was a lot of negotiations between relevant candidates. Look, they've made a decision. I think they need to explain why they think Peter Dutton or the Liberal Party would be a better offer for the city of Canberra. I mean, I'm astounded that with Peter Dutton basically threatening to decimate our city, that you wouldn't have other candidates saying that you shouldn't vote Liberal at this campaign. Unfortunately, the Greens, for the first time in my memory of a political campaign have put Labor number five on the ballot. It's really rather extraordinary. But anyway, that's for them to explain and for Senator Pocock to explain why he thinks a Peter Dutton government would be okay for Canberra, because it clearly won't be.
 
JOURNALIST: Back to Burrangiri, Dr Lyons also mentioned [INDISTINCT]. Health Minister Rachel Stephen-Smith had said she's open to that, but it wouldn't be a straightforward process because of Commonwealth Grant rules. The facility and service would need to achieve Commonwealth accreditation. As far as you're aware, does that add a significant cost?
 
GALLAGHER: Look, in my discussions with the Minister for Health here locally, she said she's open to discussions with the Commonwealth. Burrangiri has been a little bit unusual in that it has sat outside of the Commonwealth regulatory arrangements, so it's not accredited through the Commonwealth system, and so it would have to come in and meet those standards. If you refurbish the facility, I would imagine that that would meet those requirements, but the refurbishment has to happen. My understanding is at the moment it wouldn't meet standards, which is what Rachel Stephen-Smith has told me why they need to close it, because the facility needs such significant upgrades. But we are open to working with the ACT Government. At the end of the day, I want an outcome for the families that use Burrangiri. Mark, thankfully, has supported some extra investment going in, so that $10 million is on the table. But at the end of the day, I want to make sure that that family, where their loved one, where their spouse requires respite care, that they feel that they have a service to offer that. I've met with families, I understand how difficult this is. It's come out of left field for us. We weren't aware that Burrangiri was going to be closing and so we are responding as quickly as we can.
 
JOURNALIST: One of the things that the Prime Minister mentioned in the last debate was talking about public service numbers in relation to population growth, which I think has been a really constant dimension of this debate. You yourself said that in terms of the per capita relationship, the public service has grown quite modestly compared to 30 years ago. I'm wondering as a matter of principle, do you think the public service should grow with population, or are you looking to make it more efficient so that it can deliver the same services?
 
GALLAGHER: Well, I think it's a bit of both. And we've tried to bring rational arguments around the public service. We've got Peter Dutton who wants to politicise it and savage it and use it when he wanders around the country to beat Canberra and to put the boot into our city, and we get the politics of that outside Canberra are pretty easy, and so that's why he does that. We've tried to make it clear that we have worked through what we think the public service resourcing needs to be. I drew to people's attention that every time people say, oh, it needs to go back to what it was, that it is actually smaller per capita than it was in 2006. And that is despite having programs like the NDIS that didn't exist before to run, like a climate change department dealing with the effects of climate change and energy policy, like the submarine authority or the AUKUS arrangement. Didn't exist before. Need public servants to manage and administer those programs. So, yes, it's a question of -- you would expect the public service would grow as the population increases, but it's not just a one-to-one. I think the other area is making sure you are driving efficiencies, making sure you are using technology in a way that assists the public service to deliver better services. But for the Prime Minister, and he's made this clear to me, at the end of the day, it's about the outcomes. What is the staffing we need, the resourcing level to make sure that if you're a veteran, you get your claim processed. If you're a pensioner and you have a problem with Centrelink, that you can be seen or call them up and get it dealt with. If you're waiting on a Medicare rebate, that it's processed within a couple of days. If we're building submarines, that we've got the workforce there ready to build and operate them. That's what the Prime Minister's position is. And our job is to make sure that we are resourcing the public service properly. And that's why I get so frustrated by this ridiculous notion that you can cut 41,000 jobs, but you can exempt national security and you can exempt frontline operators from any of those cuts. You simply can't do it.
 
JOURNALIST: I guess the thing that I'm trying to understand is that -- okay, let's go back a couple of decades and think about the Howard public service cuts. I mean, Labor at the time said that they were catastrophe and I think a lot of people in the public service felt that it was a catastrophe. I think numerous reports since then have shown that that was the beginning of a chain of public service under-resourcing that's continued. But if your level of your public service headcount is now lower per capita than it was then, why is that now okay?
 
GALLAGHER: Well, I think because we are using technology and we are driving efficiencies. When you look at the way the public service ran, even if you look at your stationary systems, there's savings there, because the nature of work is changing. And so, like I said, it's not a one-for-one, just because your population grows, you have to add a certain number of public servants. But I think we have to be realistic that if you are adding new functions and the work and the outcomes that we are seeking to deliver is basically A or B, then you need to resource that to deliver those outcomes. And this nonsense that you just sack 41,000 jobs and you can still deliver that is just crazy. And the frustration I have is that he keeps saying it, but he's not explaining how he would do it. And then he's telling people, I don't worry about that, we'll tell you after the election. And we know what happened last time. They just employed contractors and consultants and Labour hire workers. Because the reality is when you put those two together, you had a bigger public service and a more expensive public service.
 
JOURNALIST: Peter Dutton's indicated that he'd like to see a role for Mike Pezzullo in Australia's future. Would he have to part -- given the legislation your Government's passed over the last three years in terms of public service reform, would he actually have to pass legislation to rehire Mike Pezzullo as a public servant given the sanctions against him?
 
GALLAGHER: Look, I think it's up for Mr Dutton to explain why he thinks bringing back a secretary that had such serious Code of Conduct violations found by an independent assessment is a good thing. I think the public service and the reforms that we've put in place have been to ensure that public servants have the values and the laws around them to ensure that they have the highest ethical standards available. But it's really a matter for Mr Dutton. I mean, on one hand he wants to sack 41,000, on the other he wants to employ one secretary, and that secretary has left the public service based on some pretty serious Code of Conduct findings.
 
JOURNALIST: There's been criticisms of a lack of ambition in what Labor is offering for this term. There's been a few things kicked into the next term, whether it's environmental reforms or not talking about Indigenous Affairs. What do you say about the issue of mandate and taking voters along for the ride?
 
BUTLER: Well, I don't think Katy or I or certainly the Prime Minister would accept that there's not been ambition in our Government. I mean, we've had to deal with a range of pressures, some of them external to Australia. Obviously, the cost-of-living pressures that have swept the entire globe, but the legacy of the pandemic, but also a legacy of ten years of cuts and neglect to important services like Medicare and many others. But at the same time that we've dealt with those pressures, led particularly by Katy and the Treasurer, we also have seen ambition. We're rebuilding Medicare, we're reforming Medicare. I mean, the announcement this morning of Peter Dutton's determination to reinstate the activity test just sets back some very ambitious reform that will take some time that the Prime Minister has made clear is a really important priority for him in terms of universal early childhood education and care. I mean, this takes the idea of our ECEC system back to the 1980s, completely neglecting the idea that the first five years are so critical to early childhood education. So, we do have ambition. We want to see a Medicare that's fit for the next 40 years, not just dealing with the affordability crisis that we've inherited from the former government, but rebuilding Medicare around the patient profile of today, which is very different for the 1980s, but once the generation former amateur wells landed in cooperation with the opposition, it must be said, is critical to making sure that we have an aged care system that is fit for purpose for a much larger older population. That universal childcare, making sure the NDIS is sustainable, a proud Labor reform as well. I just don't accept that there's not ambition in this government. We are very ambitious for Australia's future. That's why the Prime Minister is so focused on building that future.

ENDS