Take two aspirins and call for more reform

Some may still say this proposal strikes at the universal provision offered by Medicare. But is the current system so attractive after all? Its funding levy hits the lowest paid the hardest: while leaving your health care to be provided for entirely by the public sector means that you are allowing a bureaucrat to place you on a public waiting list; to determine when you will be admitted into a facility; if you will have a procedure cancelled; and, if it is not cancelled, to have it conducted by a doctor selected by the state.

It may be that none of these factors will have any impact on the outcome of your procedure. Also, some of us may not be in a financial position to make such choices.

Nothing in what either Kevin Cox or I are proposing should therefore diminish the acknowledged vital role of public health care. However, just as superannuation cannot and will not ever entirely remove the need for some government-funded pensions, public health care is already stretched and is unlikely to be able to cover all Australians’ health needs in the time and manner we demand.

Individual health savings accounts will give consumers greater ownership, autonomy and choice in how they manage their health and that of their family, while also providing scope for government to more effectively apply scarce public health dollars.