E&OE TRANSCRIPT PRESS CONFERENCE, ADELAIDE
SENATOR PENNY WONG
LEADER OF THE GOVERNMENT IN THE SENATE
MINISTER FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS
MARK BUTLER MP
MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND AGED CARE
SUBJECTS: Cheaper medicines; US tariffs; Australia’s relationship with Vanuatu; Release of the 2024 Independent Intelligence Review.
LABOR CANDIDATE FOR STURT, CLAIRE CLUTTERHAM: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to Priceline Pharmacy in Norwood Place in the heart of the electorate of Sturt. I'm Claire Clutterham your Labor Candidate for the seat of Sturt at the next federal election. I'm joined this morning by the Minister for Health, Mark Butler, the Foreign Minister, Senator Penny Wong and Senator for South Australia, Senator Marielle Smith.
Now this morning, I was doorknocking in Paradise, and a young lady answered her door, and she said to me, what is Labor doing for health? Firstly, I said, how long have you got but I picked just one. And what we're talking about today is one of the most significant investments in health from the 1st of January 2026 Australians who are paying for medicines on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme will pay a maximum of just $25. This is a cost-of-living measure. This goes towards the household budget, but it also goes towards health outcomes for everyday Australians. I'll throw to the Minister to tell us more about it.
MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND AGED CARE, MARK BUTLER: Thanks so much, Claire. We're so we're so lucky to have Claire Clutterham as our fantastic Candidate in Sturt. In particular, as Health Minister, I know she brings such a deep understanding of health policy. In addition to all of her other broad experience, because she's a board member of the Royal Flying Doctor Service, one of the icons of Australia's healthcare system
Claire and Marielle Smith, who also joins us today and I were only last weekend announcing some more cheaper medicines for women's health; for oral contraception, for endometriosis and for women and families going through IVF. It's part of an ongoing process we have to make medicines cheaper for all Australians. We promised that in the 2022 election and only yesterday, the Prime Minister and I announced the fifth instalment in our cheaper medicines program. The first was in 2022 within months of being elected, we slashed the maximum amount that millions of pensioners would pay for all of their medicines needs in a given year. Since then, pensioners have received an additional 66 million free scripts for their medicines. Only six months after that, we delivered the biggest cut to the price of medicines in the 75-year history of the PBS, slashing the maximum co-payment for general patients from $42.50 down to just $30.
We've also delivered 60 days scripts, something that people have been calling for, for so long. That's already delivered 24 million 60-day scripts. Getting twice the supply of medicines for just the price of a single traditional script. And this year, we froze the price of medicines. There was no increase on the 1st of January 2025 to the price of medicines as there has been for decades. That price freeze is in place for five years for Australia's millions of pensioners and concession card holders.
But yesterday, as Claire just said, the Prime Minister and I announced that we want to deliver even cheaper medicines. We will cut the maximum co-payment to $25 if we're elected, effective from the 1st of January next year. Now, next year without all of those measures I've talked about, the maximum co-payment would have been more than $50 so the co-payment that a Labor Government re-elected would deliver will be half what it otherwise would have been without all of the cheaper medicines measures that I've just talked about. In particular, if it's a medicine that attracts the maximum co-payment, but also is now available on 60-day scripts, then that will be 75 per cent cheaper than it would have been without our measures. A medicine that's priced over $50 would have seen a patient pay $600 next year for a year's worth of medicines. Under Labor, they will pay just $150, three quarters less than would otherwise have been the case.
Now, the beauty of cheaper medicines as a policy, from a health ministers’ perspective, is it’s not just good for your hip pocket, it's also good for health. Because we heard when we came to government, so many Australians were going without scripts that their doctor had said was important for their health because of cost. Cheaper medicines mean it's more likely that patients will be able to fill the scripts that their doctor have said is important for their health. It's all part of our strengthening Medicare agenda; more doctors, more bulk billing, more Urgent Care Clinics, and much cheaper medicines.
There are only two threats to this, of course, the first is Peter Dutton, who is on record and on form as having tried to jack up the price of medicines when he was Health Minister. He said there'd be no cuts to health famously in 2013 and then when he came to government, he tried to abolish bulk billing. He tried to make patients pay to go to the emergency department, and he tried to jack up the price of scripts by up to $5 for every single script. That's Peter Dutton’s record. That's what you can judge him on, not what he says, but what he did as Australia's Health Minister. The second threat, of course, is the US Big Pharma industry that, again, is seeking to place pressure on this quintessentially Australian medicine system that serves Australian patients so well. I know that the Foreign Minister will want to say a few words about that.
FOREIGN MINISTER, PENNY WONG: Thanks very much, Mark. It's great to be here with you, and also with our wonderful Candidate, Claire and also Marielle Smith. As Claire outlined, obviously, the work that Mark, and the Prime Minister, the government has done on health costs recognises both people want a good health system, but also cost of living pressures. He outlined the ways in which we continue to address cost of living pressures and ensure that there are cheaper medicines. Of course, all opposed by Mr Dutton.
But let's turn now to the PBS. Yesterday, the Prime Minister made clear under Labor, the PBS is not up for negotiation, and it's not up for sale. We have always taken that position. Back in 2004 when the US Free Trade Agreement was put into place, it was Labor who forced the Coalition, including Mr Dutton and others, forced them to ensure that the PBS was protected.
Now we see again, the big pharmaceutical companies in the United States again having their sites trained on the Australian PBS. And I repeat, under the Australian Labor government, under the Albanese Labor Government, the PBS is not up for negotiation and is not for sale. What can you say about Mr Dutton? Well, Mr Dutton said yesterday that the best predictor of future behaviour was past behaviour. I think there are two things we know about Mr Dutton. One is he has a record on health costs, and Minister Butler's outlined some of them, this is a bloke who wanted people to pay more to go to the GP. This is a bloke who didn't want more bulk billing and this is a bloke who opposed cheaper medicines.
We also know that the Liberals have a history previously of not doing the right thing when it comes to the PBS with the US, in the context of trade. We know that the Liberals have a history of tapping the mat when it comes to the PBS involving Free Trade Agreements. What I'd say is this, Mr Dutton said a little while ago that there was no question that he would do a deal. No question he would do a deal and get a deal with the Trump Administration. I think the question Australians are entitled to ask is, what would you be prepared to give up Mr Dutton, to get that deal? What would you be prepared to give up? Because we know in the past, your party was prepared to give up on the Australian PBS. Labor will never give up. We will never stop fighting and we will never stop protecting our PBS. Thank you.
JOURNALIST: Can you possibly outline the manner in which listed medications on the PBS are exposed to, any tariff issues dictated in the US? I'm still trying to clear that up.
BUTLER: We only have to go back to 2004 as the Foreign Minister said, when the Howard Government was negotiating the US Free Trade Agreement with the Bush Administration. Big Pharma in the US then was pressing for changes to our PBS arrangements. Changes that, frankly, would allow them to sell medicines to Australian patients at higher prices. It's that simple really, and as Penny said it was only Labor that insisted upon moving legislative amendments in the Parliament in 2004 to protect our price reduction and price negotiation powers that we've had as a central element of the PBS. John Howard resisted that right until the end. Obviously, US Big Pharma also resisted it, and the US administration, at the time, tried to lobby to prevent the Parliament passing those amendments. John Howard resisted until the last minute in the Senate debate, when finally they agreed to the amendments that Labor had insisted upon, not just to the PBS, but also to local content In creative industries. They are on record. They have form on this that when put under pressure by the US administration over this question, very powerful interests in America, Big Pharma there, their record is not a good record. The only reason we had those protections in the Parliament was because Labor in Opposition moved them and insisted upon them as a condition for supporting the US Free Trade Agreement.
JOURNALIST: Minister, it's all well and good having $25 scripts, but how do you account for the thousands of our most vulnerable cancer patients who are spending $7,000 a month for treatment?
BUTLER: I say first of all, since we were elected we've listed more than 300 new medicines on the PBS or expanded existing listings. That has been in many cases, for cancer treatments. These new cancer treatments are coming to market very quickly. They are highly effective. They're very expensive, and of course, taxpayers would want to know they are assessed for efficacy by medicine experts. That's how the PBS has operated. Now I think it's been taking too long to have that assessment undertaken. The gap between being approved by the Therapeutic Goods Administration and actually being available at PBS prices for patients needs to be shorter. That's why we undertook a first in a generation review of our Health Technology Assessment systems. We received more than 50 recommendations last year from that review. They're very wide ranging, frankly, and there are different views in the patient community as well as in industry about which ones should be accepted, which ones should be prioritised. I've asked an implementation group chaired by Professor Andrew Wilson, the former chair of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee, some key patient representatives and obviously key industry representatives, to work through those recommendations and provide us with the clearest advice about how we get that time down to a much more acceptable position.
JOURNALIST: What do you have to say to a woman dying of pancreatic cancer who has racked up a $350,000 medical bill?
BUTLER: I want to get whatever treatment you are currently taking on the PBS as quickly as possible. We have to have it assessed, obviously, for efficacy. But I want to see those medicines that are coming onto the market very, very quickly, right now, extraordinary medicines that, frankly, we wouldn't have imagined 10 or 20 years ago. I want to see them under the PBS as quickly as possible, so you don't have to pay those sorts of money.
JOURNALIST: Is running the head of the PBS a full-time job?
BUTLER: It's long been a position that chairs of the advisory committee, I assume you're asking about the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee, have undertaken that role while holding some other academic positions. That's a matter really managed by the Secretary of the Department, and I know the current Chair of the Advisory Committee and the Departmental Secretary have been working through that issue.
JOURNALIST: Doesn't Australia deserve someone fully dedicated to the role as head of the PBAC?
BUTLER: The job of the Secretary of the Department is to make sure that PBAC is doing its job. I'm confident they are now. I directed them, for example, to undertake an additional meeting, an additional cycle of meetings this year, because there is a much bigger number of applications coming before the advisory committee, because we're living in a turbo charged period of discovery. The number of new therapeutics coming to market is really qualitative, just a step change from what it was 10 or 20 years ago. I've asked them to do more work, to have more meetings, and the advisory committee is performing that expectation.
JOURNALIST: Is PBAC and MSAC adequately resourced to undergo big reform necessary?
BUTLER: I asked the Department to look at that, particularly when there was a question about some applications not being considered by PBAC earlier this year, I've asked for that extra meeting that's been put in place. As to the future, there are recommendations from that Health Technology Assessment Review I’ve talked about, that talk about a more unified pathway for assessment, approval and reimbursement. We may go down that path. There's no question that the type of therapeutics, as well as the number that are coming to market, are quite different to what they might have been 20 years ago. They don't neatly fall into a single category of medicine or diagnostic and such like, they are more hybrid by nature. It may mean that that we have a different system. But at the moment, I'm pretty satisfied that the two advisory committees are doing the job that taxpayers and patients need them to do.
JOURNALIST: Yesterday, the Government announced that it would begin discussions on new Nakamal Agreement with Vanuatu. Does this mean that both countries have now decided not to press ahead with the Ratification Bilateral Security Agreement signed in late 2022?
WONG: As you know, there is a new Government in Vanuatu, and that Government has expressed a desire for a much broader agreement. Obviously, the agreement we signed with an earlier, with the previous government was a more narrowly focused agreement. The new government has rightly outlined that their priorities extend to greater cooperation, for example, on climate and development, on economic and on infrastructure. We're very pleased to work with them on that, and we'll be doing this.
JOURNALIST: So you’re starting anew?
WONG: We'll be building on what we have already got on the table. But I think it is a very sensible thing for the new government to be very clear about wanting a broader agreement, and we're up for a broader agreement. As you would have seen with the arrangements we've entered into, particularly with Vanuatu but also with other countries in the Pacific that we have a very clear understanding, unlike Mr. Dutton of the breadth of interest the Pacific Island countries have. I still get in the Pacific the joke Mr. Dutton, made about “water lapping at the door.” We understand climate is a national security and an economic issue, and we're absolutely up for a discussion with Vanuatu and other partners in the Pacific about border agreements.
JOURNALIST: So do you then spike what was agreed in 2022?
WONG: I’ve answered that in my previous answer.
JOURNALIST: Mr Dutton has promised that undertaken that you'll go to the US should he succeed in the federal election and rather than Indonesia, which might appear to be a break for protocol or traditions. What do you make of that undertaking?
WONG: Yet again, Peter Dutton is lost in our region. Yet again, Peter Dutton is lost in our region. We can see that from what he does when he doesn't visit as opposition leader. He hasn't visited Southeast Asia, he hasn't visited the Pacific. And we saw that in the content of his speech yesterday. He is lost in our region, and at a time where we face challenging circumstances, Australian security and Australian stability requires us to be deeply engaged with a focus on our region. He’s simply not up to the job.
JOURNALIST: The review of Australia's intelligence services has been released by the Federal Government. Does the contents make clear to Australians the sort of risks they're exposed to?
WONG: The Prime Minister released that document, and I want to start by saying what he said, our first priority is keeping Australians safe. Every arm of government, from intelligence, to law enforcement, to defence, to diplomacy, to international health engagement, to our economic engagement, we are all focused on how we ensure Australian security and Australian stability in a turbulent world.
JOURNALIST: Do you think Australians are as aware as they should be at what's out there?
WONG: What I'd say to Australians is, we know this is a challenging world. We have been up front about that, which is why our first priority is to keep Australians safe and secure.
JOURNALIST: I'm advised that population growth is down in Australia, according to ABS figures. Is that incentive for a baby bonus in the Budget?
WONG: I'm not going to be speculating ever on what might or might not be in the Budget, but I suspect you will see on Budget night also the projections around migration. We have been clear about our view on that, and we certainly had a consistent policy position unlike Mr Dutton. Thank you.
MEDIA CONTACT:
Conor Bignell (Wong): 0421 376 237
Lucy Caruso (Butler): 0408 803 428