February 26, 2012

Experts want all Australian children to receive free dental care.



EVERY Australian child and millions of low-income earners would get basic dental services up to a capped amount each year, in a dramatic reform to end the poverty trap of chronic dental ill health.   

But more complex procedures, such as crowns and implants, would not be covered by the scheme, which would cost $10 billion over the first four years, according to a confidential report on the proposal due to be released tomorrow.

The Sunday Age has learnt that expert advisers want dental care for children and the poor as the first step towards a universal dental scheme.   


One option is to introduce a Medicare-style system which would give patients a rebate for some services by dentists in private practice. It would be capped at a yearly limit and cover basic treatments such as a clean and scale, fillings and X-rays. But more expensive services - such as crowns and implants - would only be covered in ''exceptional circumstances'' to keep costs under control.

Another option is to expand public dental schemes run by the states, although there are limited numbers of dentists willing to work in public practice.

A hybrid of the two models could also be adopted.

The experts also propose a move to break open the closed shop of dentistry by letting lesser-paid dental hygienists and oral therapists do more of the traditional work of dentists, such as fillings.   

With Labor desperate to deliver a surplus in 2012-13, the expert panel, which the Greens demanded in return for supporting the Gillard government, suggested a modest injection of just $343 million to state dental schemes in the first year, with heftier spending to follow.   

Adding every child to state dental schemes would come at a price tag of $2.4 billion over four years, and cost $717 million a year when fully operational.

Giving children a capped benefit with private practice dentists would cost $2.9 billion in the first four years, then $900 million a year thereafter.

Giving adults with concession cards a capped benefit is tipped to cost $7.1 billion in the first four years, and $2.6 billion a year later.

Extending access to people with a chronic disease would take the cost to $8.3 billion, and including the next tier of lower-income earners would price the scheme at $11.4 billion for the first four years.

Health Minister Tanya Plibersek has been careful not to commit Labor to extra spending, but flagged better dental care as a priority.

The Greens dental spokesman, Victorian senator Richard Di Natale, has repeatedly urged Labor to embrace a fully universal dental scheme.   

Opposition Leader Tony Abbott has suggested Medicare-funded dental care would be a long-term ''aspiration'' in government, but only once the budget was back in strong surplus.   


Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/national/health/dental-plan-to-aid-children-and-lowincome-earners-20120225-1tva5.html#ixzz1nQf0hBPc

Why should one group of people get something for free when others have to pay??

No.
If you want something, you pay for it.

That goes for everyone, no matter what you earn.

tonegunman1 wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 8:00am:


Yes don't ever call a 'levy' a tax.

It's a 'levy'...

Very very different you know.....

perceptions_now wrote on Feb 26^th, 2012 at 8:52am:



I'll pick an example each from my two nationalities PN -

1) In the 1980s Mrs Thatcher said she would not raise income tax (I think it was the '83/84 election). She didn't. But she increased the "National Insurance Levy" which is a direct % of your gross salary.
So she kept her word but we still had less in net pay......
Dodgy that was margaret....

2) Petrol excise in Australia. Apparently this excise is supposed to pay for the upkeep of the roads. Now given Australia's excise is over FIVE TIMES higher than the United States petrol excise I ask you - does Australia have the best roads in the world???
Also if its just for upkeep of roads - why does it go into Government General Revenue???
Again - the people being dudded by a tax when they call it something else.
In fact Australia could reduce its petrol excise tomorrow if it were just about roads and you'd pay 88c per liter like I do....


Dodgy Governments and their tax which is not a tax.