Health Legislation Amendment (Prescribing of Pharmaceutical Benefits) Bill 2025; Second Reading

Continued the debate

Ruston stated that the opposition supported the bill's principle of expanding nurse prescribing to improve healthcare access, particularly in rural and remote regions. Ruston argued that the government had failed to provide a formal response to the Unleashing the Potential of our Health Workforce Scope of Practice Review, which had been finalised 18 months prior. Ruston claimed that healthcare costs were rising under the current government, with average out-of-pocket GP fees exceeding $50 and PBS investment declining by nearly $200 million in real terms in 2024-25. Ruston moved an amendment requiring the government to give a full reply to the review's recommendations as a matter of priority.

Opposition response

Ruston argued that while the bill was a positive step, the government's approach to scope-of-practice reform was ad hoc and lacked a clear roadmap. Ruston highlighted that Australia was lagging globally, with medicines requiring an average of 566 days to become available through the PBS after registration. Ruston criticised the government for delaying action on the Health Technology Assessment Policy and Methods Review and for failing to address the scope-of-practice review. Ruston maintained that the opposition supported the bill but condemned the broader failure to ensure timely and affordable access to medicines.