MEDICARE BIDDING WAR
The weekend has come and gone, and predictions that Anthony Albanese was going to call a federal election ended up being unfounded.
Instead, the prime minister made one of his biggest pre-election announcements of the faux campaign so far: an $8.5 billion investment in Medicare designed to dramatically increase rates of bulk billing.
Labor, calling the investment the biggest since Medicare’s inception, says its announcement means that nine out of 10 GP visits will be free out-of-pocket by 2030, equalling an extra 18 million bulk-billing visits a year nationally. The money will also go towards funding 400 nursing scholarships and 2,000 new GP trainees a year by 2028, reports the ABC.
“I want every Australian to know they only need their Medicare card, not their credit card, to receive the healthcare they need,” Albanese said.
However, the PM barely had time to bask in the glow of the announcement before he was unceremoniously knocked from the top of the news; less than 24 hours later, Opposition Leader Peter Dutton said the Coalition would match the pledge “dollar-for-dollar”.
“An elected Dutton Coalition government will invest a historic $9 billion into Medicare to fix Labor’s healthcare crisis and ensure all Australians have timely and affordable access to a doctor,” Dutton said in a statement — the extra half a billion a “previously announced Coalition commitment of $500 million for mental health support”, Guardian Australia reports.
It looks like we have a good old-fashioned Medicare bidding war on our hands, and by gosh it’s been a while!
Most appear to be pretty happy with the announcement, with The Conversation running a helpful piece on the declining rates of bulk billing in Australia and how the extra cash for Medicare purports to fix the issue.
But there will always be haters: The Australian says the bipartisan investment commitment is “destined to be added to the nation’s credit card bill”, calling Dutton’s race to match the commitment “hardly convincing”.
“The fact is, Dutton’s policies are a world away from his rhetoric on budget discipline and it would take some brave announcements to bridge this gap by the election,” writes Greg Brown. “Dutton talks about fiscal prudence, but has yet to provide a credible economic pathway for a new government.”
The AFR says the announcement appears to be an attempt by Labor to revive the 2016 and 2022 “Mediscare” campaigns, “which stoked fears of cuts to the service and privatisation of healthcare”.
“Even Tony Abbott promised ‘no cuts to health’. But every time they get into government, their attacks on Medicare are always the same. The Liberals have changed what they say — but they will never change who they are,” Albanese said.
The Medicare announcement comes at a grim moment for the Labor incumbents, with a new Resolve poll showing core support for Labor has dropped to just 25%. As my colleague Rich James would say, “all polls are to be treated with scepticism”, but it’s hard to imagine that the warning bells aren’t being sounded at Labor HQ.
In a modicum of good news for both parties, Resolve director Jim Reed has weighed in on Clive Palmer’s new venture “Trumpet of Patriots”:
“I see nothing in the results or comments to suggest Clive Palmer’s party has made even the slightest dent yet,” he said.
“This suggests that copying Donald Trump will not work here despite Palmer being the closest thing we have to him.”
We can only hope.
CONSERVATIVES STORM AHEAD IN GERMANY
In international news, the conservative CDU/CSU party seems destined to win the German election, with the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) expected to secure a record 20% of the vote, putting it in second place.
Friedrich Merz, leader of the Christian Democratic Union, is set to become Germany’s next chancellor. The BBC, which says Merz has “never come across as exhilarating”, points out that he has previously broken with convention by relying on AfD to secure the passage of a vote.
“A marked moment of political severance came at the end of January, when Friedrich Merz pushed through a non-binding motion on tougher immigration rules, by relying on votes from the far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD),” the broadcaster reports.
“He insisted there had been no direct collaboration with the AfD, but his move led to mass protests and was twice condemned by none other than [Angela] Merkel herself.”
The Guardian says Merz has a few important issues in his “in tray”, including “relations with the US under Donald Trump, fixing the economy, Ukraine, responding to the rapid rise of the far right, and dealing with the shadow of Angela Merkel.” Berlin correspondent Kate Connolly points out that Merz has “never been a government minister”, and now faces the “complex reality” of governing.
“During the campaign, his decision to win a vote in Parliament by relying on far-right support proved a historic and highly controversial turning point, even if he has since insisted he would never break Germany’s ‘firewall’ (‘brandmauer’) by going into coalition government with the anti-immigration Alternative für Deutschland,” she writes.
The Age points out that, following the 16-year stewardship of Merkel, “Germans are more pessimistic about their living standards now than at any time since the financial crisis in 2008.” It appears as though any quick fixes to this issue are unlikely to eventuate as Merz seems destined to spend months in a caretaker role while he sorts out a coalition.
“Those negotiations are certain to be tricky after a campaign that exposed sharp divisions over migration and how to deal with the AfD in a country where far-right politics carry a particularly strong stigma due to the country’s Nazi past,” The Age writes.
AfD’s anti-immigration rhetoric has long been a point of contention within Germany, though an anti-migrant sentiment does appear to have grown over recent months following the party’s politicisation of attacks committed by asylum seekers, writes the ABC.
ON A LIGHTER NOTE…
What even is art?
It’s a question that has plagued aficionados and philistines alike, particularly since the advent of postmodernism and the ability for… let’s say, a banana duct-taped to a wall to be sold for $9.57 million (although, that money really just entitled the buyer to duct-tape their own banana to a wall and call it the same artwork, which personally I feel like I could have done for free in my kitchen).
Thankfully, a German court has added its voice to the debate, refusing the status of “art” to sandal makers Birkenstock and their iconic shoe. The company claimed their footwear should be considered art — which would provide it unique protections under German law — in an effort to stop copycat versions from being made and sold. This assertion was refused by the judge, who said the shoes were clearly a practical design item.
The court ruled that for the shoes to be art, “a degree of design must be achieved that shows individuality”. Birkenstock wearers will no doubt be incensed at that direct attack on their unique personalities.
Say What?
I’m sending messages to any foreign nation … if you are a foreign intelligence service and you have an interest in targeting AUKUS in particular or anything else for that matter, we are watching, we will find you and when we see you, we will deal with you.
Mike Burgess
The ASIO boss made the comment during a 60 Minutes interview with Nick McKenzie, following an increase in China-Australia tensions after the Chinese recently conducted live-fire exercises in the Tasman Sea.
CRIKEY RECAP
The biggest target among rival tech companies through the consultation has been YouTube. It’s been quite a rollercoaster ride for the video platform. First, it was included in the ban announced in early November. Then, it was officially excluded as one of the apps that has a “significant purpose to enable young people to get the education and health support they need”, Communications Minister Michelle Rowland said two weeks later. Now, YouTube’s carve-out is no longer linked to exemptions for apps that have a primary health or education purpose. Instead, YouTube has the only platform-specific exemption.
The stated reason for this preferential treatment: “[YouTube] is an important source of education and informational content … This contrasts substantially with other content streaming services, which are predominantly used by young people to view short-form entertainment content,” the discussion paper says (the source for this claim? A paper about consultations conducted for the eSafety commissioner in 2021, before YouTube Shorts was even released in Australia).
This abandonment of an ally and upending of largely bipartisan foreign policy has, according to The New York Times, elicited some (extremely quiet) consternation from Trump’s fellow Republicans: “While some Republicans have expressed dismay at Trump’s moves and statements, there has been no concerted effort to challenge him from GOP leaders or senators who play pivotal roles in overseeing military and foreign policy in Congress.” Of course, if they were worried about Ukraine, Republicans could have done more to prevent Tulsi Gabbard from being confirmed as national intelligence head, given her stated views on Russia.
Anne Applebaum writes in The Atlantic that all this represents the “end of the postwar world”, a final collapse of the eight-decade consensus on “alliances with other democracies [that] have been the bedrock of American foreign policy, trade policy, and cultural influence. American investments in allies’ security helped keep the peace in formerly unstable parts of the world, allowing democratic societies from Germany to Japan to prosper, by preventing predatory autocracies from destroying them. We prospered too. Thanks to its allies, the US obtained unprecedented political and economic influence in Europe and Asia, and unprecedented power everywhere else.”
North Korea has again lashed out at the AUKUS defence pact, saying the deal with the US and UK is a “threat to regional peace”.
Pyongyang’s latest missive was aimed at the US, which it warned should be wary of consequences for so-called nuclear alliances, including the US’ defence collaboration with South Korea and Japan. But Australia is watching North Korea’s movements as well, calling out the country in last year’s National Defence Strategy paper for “[continuing] its destabilising behaviours, including its nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs … and threatening the Republic of Korea and the broader region”.
Elsewhere in the same paper, in what may have been a reference to North Korea’s development of intercontinental ballistic missiles, the Albanese government noted that Australia could no longer rely on “one of [its] long-standing advantages — geography”, due to the threats of “new long-range missiles, space and cyber-attacks, disinformation, supply chain disruptions and the erosion of global rules and norms”.
READ ALL ABOUT IT
Zelensky willing to give up presidency in exchange for NATO membership (BBC)
In Trump’s alternate reality, lies and distortions drive change (The New York Times) ($)
How to lose an Oscar in 10 days (The Atlantic)
Israel tanks roll into West Bank as Palestinians told not to return (Al Jazeera)
Australian Defence Force officer stripped of security clearance over loyalty to Israel (Guardian Australia)
Scam Factories: The inside story of South-East Asia’s fraud compounds (The Conversation)
THE COMMENTARIAT
Don’t hurry to the polls, prime minister, it looks grim — David Crowe (The Sydney Morning Herald): Anthony Albanese is using the power of his office to dominate a fake election campaign before the real one begins — but all the gains are going to Peter Dutton.
The prime minister has made a rational decision to use the advantage of incumbency for as long as he can, most starkly with his $8.5 billion pledge for Medicare on Sunday.
But the latest Resolve Political Monitor is a shocker for Labor and shows that its policy assaults have not been enough to turn the tables on the opposition leader.
Nobody in the government should want to race to polling day on these numbers, so there is a good case for Albanese to aim for an election in May.
Labor’s new Medicare policy could have been an election trap but the Coalition said ‘me too’ — Patricia Karvelas (ABC): After three years of complaining about what the Coalition has painted as Labor’s reckless spending, that fiscal discipline was out the door yesterday in favour of political safety.
The Liberals — spotting a giant trap being elaborately set for them before polling day — sidestepped it by promising to “me too” the Labor policy.
Peter Dutton knows Labor wants the election campaign to be a referendum on health and Medicare. He was not going to help Labor by opposing their big free-doctor spend even though it breaks with the concept he has pushed of needing to put a break on government spending.