Coleman Jonathan: Affordable Healthcare Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeColeman Jonathan: Affordable Healthcare Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 11 November 2015. Volume:710;Page:7955. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN (Minister of Health): You would have to say the title of this bill is actually a bit of a misnomer. I mean it should really be called the “Unaffordable Healthcare Bill” because actually there has been no mention in the arguments around this about how much this would all cost. What Mr Peters does not tell you is that this would actually cost an extra $150 million. That is the conservative estimate. Mr Peters had the chance to put his argument but he did not put up any figures. The fact is that to give this subsidy for SuperGold cardholders it would actually cost far more than the cost of providing their elective surgery. That is the bottom line with it.So you have got to look at what your policy settings are and at what you are trying to achieve overall and if you are trying to provide more elective surgery to more people of whatever age group the current policy settings of this Government are exactly the right ones. I can tell you what if you look at the results we have delivered. So we are delivering an extra 50000 operations per year an extra 60000 first surgical assessments and an extra 60000 first medical specialist assessments. So Mr Peters what the member needs to do is to go and look very clearly at what he is trying to achieve. If he wants to provide more elective surgery at a better price for more people he should back the current Government’s policy.It was very interesting actually to see Mrs King get up and try to make out that she thinks this policy is a good idea. She was talking extensively about rebates for SuperGold cardholders and how it made sense to provide a rebate. Well that is in direct contrast to what she said when she was the Minister of Health back in 2004. When she was asked about this during question time she said “I think that probably is a question for the Minister of Finance but I know of no work he is doing to subsidise medical insurance for people over 65 mainly I would think because it does not work …”. So Mrs King when she was Minister of Health did not think this was a sound policy. She did not think it would work but she has had some sort of road to Damascus experience. Either that or she was just making up her arguments on the spot to suit the politics of the day. But Mrs King you cannot say one thing on the record when you are Minister—you cannot say—Hon Annette King: I can say what I like. At least I’m believable.Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: No you are not believable. That is the problem for Mrs King. She is no longer believable. She is full of bluster. This is classic Annette King bluster because she forgets—it is laid down in the Hansard. She did not think this is a good thing to do when she was the Minister but now today when she can score a couple of cheap political hits she thinks it is a very good idea. But actually she knows that the finances around this do not stack up.I just endorse Mr Bishop’s point there about New Zealand First and basically the divisions that this bill has caused in its caucus.Denis O’Rourke: What a load of nonsense.Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: And old “Two Letterboxes” over there—Mr O’Rourke—will be resigning from the New Zealand First caucus if this goes through. So secretly he will be praying that this bill is defeated at first reading tonight—as of course it will be—because he would have to stick to his word and say that yes he would be resigning. He called this bill racist and discriminatory because it was going to make parent category migrants hold health insurance for 10 years. As we all know in this House that is unworkable dog whistle politics. That would not work. It would completely alienate the votes of our hard-working ethnic communities. It would be completely unfair. I actually do not even think that Mr Peters who is a very fair man agrees with it himself but he knows it is a great chance to get up score a few dirty little rabbit punches at the bottom of the ruck and try to appeal to the “Grey Party” crowd.This bill really does show the difference in health care policy approaches between the National-led Government and our opponents in Labour who frankly have no policy. Their only answer around health care is to say that they will provide more money but what they do not say tonight is that this will cost an extra $150 million. I know Grant Robertson is committed to running surpluses; Mrs King as deputy leader obviously agrees with that.This is the “Unaffordable Healthcare Bill”. It is good to see the Greens in a rare flash of common sense no doubt guided by the sound economic credentials of their new leader saying: “Look this is crazy stuff. We cannot go with people on this.” So we do not commend this bill to the House. Frankly it is a load of rubbish. It is the “Unaffordable Healthcare Bill”.