Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee, , 9:24:20 to 9:32:40
Officials are questioned about redacted correspondence from the public hospital strategy branch concerning the impact of policy changes on hospital demand and whether advice was sought before or after the announcement.
Topics: Freedom of information, Health, Integrity
Speakers: Senator The Hon Anne Ruston, Mr Ross Hawkins, Ms Sonja Stewart
Um the correspondence that was also provided in that same freedom of information, um, there appears to be quite an amount of information that has been redacted in relation to the modelling or assessment that has been undertaken by the department in relation to the impact on public hospital admissions as a result of these changes. Um the 12th of May there was a request from the public hospital strategy branch, um, and I quote from that saying they were working on all things public hospital funding. Uh, and they said that after the Minister's press club speech, which stated we've started thinking about how PHI rebate changes might affect public hospital demand and the overall cost to the Commonwealth and States for over 65s. Um we assume some people will drop or downgrade hospital cover, and thus this will lead to increased demand in the public sector. We're also keen to get a sense of what demand increase we might expect so we can work out that into our modelling and projections for the next few years. We have a few general and specific questions which we would appreciate anything you might be able to provide on these. How did you estimate how many people might give up their hospital cover as a result of this policy change? We have seen 44,000 in the media. Is this correct? How confident is the team of that estimate? Next question. Do you think this cohort will be representative of the broader 65 plus cohort, or perhaps different, e.g. skewed wealthier, younger, healthier? Then it's redacted. Um we note this report was quoted in the media. Do you turn do your team think this analysis is a valid appropriate redacted? And then the only thing that isn't redacted is um we heard about an impact analysis piece that will come out this week. Is that correct? Yes, the ANI the OIA will publish the impact analysis for the rebate changes tomorrow. We'll send you a copy. So quite clearly there was concern in your department that there the impact on the public hospitals and therefore consequentially on the Commonwealth of these changes. Um you've obviously provided responses to this person who has reached out seeking this information so they're able to model it, but you have redacted it and you've redacted it under Section 47C of the Freedom of Information Act. So I'm keen to give you the opportunity to perhaps give me a justification as to why that information was redacted, or perhaps provide me with that information because I think it is seminal to the implications of a very significant policy decision.
So, Senator, I understand that FOI is actually under review in terms of there's been a review request in relation to that FOI, and that is underway. In terms of how and why things have been redacted, there's a number of reasons why they're being redacted. I don't have the FOI request in front of me, but I think there are a number of clauses that we use from the legislation in terms of the redaction. So that review is underway and that will provide us with the context for that.
So you're not going to provide me with any additional information, you're still going to be able to do that.
So I'm happy to try and answer any specific questions. I don't have the specific FOI or the rationale for each of those individual redactions.
So well, do you think the cohort will be representative of the broader over 65's cohort, or do you think it will be skewed to wealthier, younger, healthier, or perhaps pensioners?
And I don't know how we responded to the specific question.
But I think I don't know either because you redacted it.
So but in sorry, Senator, in terms of the uh reasons why people choose to take out insurance or hold reinsurance, as we've said in many um hearings is that there's a number of factors we take into consideration in terms of people wanting to maintain their their insurance.
So I know that that's been I'd actually like to know what the answer was in here, not some sort of vague extrapolation from you on what you might or might not think it was. The salient point is after the announcement, your public hospital strategy branch reached out for information. This looks like we've got the cart before the horse. I would have thought that it would have made sense to have actually sought this advice before you made the announcement.
So Hawkinson, both those branches that deal with health insurance and this public hospitals work for me. Under budget confidentiality, not always kind of the totality of information is always shared. So I would need to go away and look at the timing of where that document relates to. But there were people from our public hospital team that were involved and where there was conversations with this measure. So sometimes it could be a junior officer is seen something and asked a question that maybe what that email refers to there. But I can tell you because this both those teams work for me.
So I'm keen to understand whether uh any of the was there any modelling to understand that one percent less than one percent, obviously related to the forty-four thousand. That's what it clearly states in here. But then when we get past anything, guess what? It's all redacted. So we've got no idea what this particular branch had to say in relation to the impact following in in subsequent years. So is it possible maybe in that deliberation overnight you could find us some more information on that?
Senator, just to respond to that, as Mr. said, uh, the the individual that looks at FOI has asked for a review. Um, there are a number of documents within that. There are a number of clauses. We take FOI incredibly seriously, Senator. And that needs to be reviewed, both in terms of the totality of the scope of that FOI and the documents included and the redactions. And that review is currently taking place.