The 2026 federal budget will be handed down on Tuesday 12 May, but not many in the health sector are holding their breath.
The number one ask across all GP advocacy organisations this year is that the government funds longer consultations – an ambition unlikely to be fulfilled in what treasurer Jim Chalmers has called a budget of “more restraint”.
In a whole-of-profession shows of unity, ACRRM, RACGP, AMA federal, RDAA, General Practice Supervision Australia, General Practice Registrars Australia and the Australian Indigenous Doctors’ Association have put out a joint pre-budget statement calling for three key reforms.
But is there much hope?
Treasurer Jim Chalmers has already foreshadowed a frugal budget, saying last week that there will be “more savings and more restraint”.
In her Friday message to members, AMA president Dr Danielle McMullen sought to temper expectations.
“Times are tight and we aren’t expecting any surprise goodies on Tuesday,” she wrote.
“The budget will fall short on the broad reforms our system so desperately needs.
“But we will keep up the fight for all our asks, including better support for longer GP consultations, coordinated team care, meaningful private hospital reform, chronic disease prevention with a tax on sugar-sweetened drinks, and strategic health workforce planning and delivery.”
Reform #1: Higher rebates for longer consults
At the top of the list for the seven peaks is supporting patient access to longer consultations for chronic and complex care.
To be fair, this has been near the top of the list for the RACGP, AMA and ACRRM for several years running.
“Supporting patients to spend adequate time with their GP improves continuity, strengthens coordination of care across service providers, reduces avoidable hospital use and enhances productivity gains,” the joint statement read.
“The Budget must prioritise patient access to longer consultations as a system-wide reform that enables general practitioners and rural generalists to spend the time needed, rather than relying on alternative models that fragment care, undermine continuity and patient safety.”
While all seven peaks may agree on the overall goal of higher rebates for longer appointments, there hasn’t always been agreement on what exactly that should look like.
The RACGP has long advocated for a targeted investment, which would see a 40% increase to all Medicare rebates for Level C and Level D consultations.
It estimates that this would cost the government between $3.2 and $4.7 million over four years, subject to patient demand.
AMA federal proposes moving to a seven-tier consultation item structure which would more evenly distribute rebates so that longer consults were not disincentivised.
This solution comes in at about $4.9 million over four years, making it a little more expensive than the one put forward by the RACGP.
Reform #2: workforce, workforce, workforce
All peaks called for new retention strategies that addressed GP supervisor workload, practice viability and practical support for registrars.
Again, while there was agreement on the desired outcome, different groups have come up with their own idea for how it should be achieved.
Related
The RACGP’s individual budget submission called for increased supervisor payments through the existing National Consistent Payment framework, but for GP training term one supervisors only.
This costs out to around $40 million over four years.
This differs from the Rural Doctors Association of Australia’s submission, which identified the same issue but instead presented a cost-neutral solution by suggesting the government consolidate GP supervisor payments and reinvest $42 million allocated to the now-defunct Workforce Prioritisation and Placement services.
“RDAA recommends consolidation of supervisor payments into a simplified, transparent framework, alongside additional investment to recognise clinical supervision time,” its submission read.
“Introducing a supervision-linked MBS mechanism or dual-claim flag would fairly remunerate supervisors while maintaining audit integrity.”
While GP Supervision Australia itself did not publicly release an individual pre-budget submission, it has specifically called for clinical supervision to be better recognised and resourced.
Reform #3: Culturally safe care
The final item on the joint statement is funding for tools that measure inclusion and culturally safe practice across primary care settings.
This was not something which was specifically addressed in the individual RACGP, AMA federal, ACRRM or RDAA submissions.
GPRA, GPSA and AIDA did not publish pre-budget submissions this year.
The ACRRM submission does note that it is already meeting the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander performance indicator included in the GP training grant, and the RDAA mentioned that MBS and PBS recognition of rural generalist advance skills would benefit doctors working in Indigenous health.
