Transcript - Two Chrisses - ABC 891 - 17 May 2010

SUBJECTS: Mental Health funding cuts; Adelaide Oval redevelopment; Federal Seat of Adelaide campaign; Birthday Cards

Matthew Abraham: Now Christopher Pyne, on a current news story, and we're normally a little bit more discursive in C1 and C2, but this is relevant because in the Howard Government this plan that has now been scrapped in the budget to provide Medicare rebates to social workers and occupational therapists; many of them are operating out of GP's rooms now, and psychologists. That was your baby, and is now out with the dishwater.

Christopher Pyne: It is, and the reason we did it, and I did it; I was the Parliamentary Secretary for Health, but I had responsibility for Mental Health, and we had a very big package of about one point nine billion dollars in about 2006. In the 2005 budget, but most of the things were implemented in 2006 and one of them was to extend Medicare to a range of professional people to look after people with mental illness, because the situation before that was if you could get into see a psychiatrist, good luck to you, because there aren't nearly enough psychiatrists. And once you could do that, that was great, but it was tough to see a psychiatrist regularly, and if you went to see the psychologist or the social worker or the occupational therapist you had to pay yourself.

So what would happen was psychiatrists would say, "I've seen you as often as I really can and I think you're probably alright on your own. If you take these drugs etc, you'll probably be alright." And so someone would say, "Right, I'll go off on my own." Then they'd go and see their social worker or their psychologist or whatever and after one or two visits they wouldn't be able to afford to go anymore. So this was really a social justice measure as much as anything, because it meant that people with a mental illness could actually see a psychologist 12 times a year, or a social worker or an occupational therapist. There were different payments for each person of course. They weren't all being paid the same in terms of Medicare rebate. And that would mean a person with a mental illness or depression or anxiety on a scale of seriousness would keep seeing a professional person on a regular basis. And the impact of that on society of course is that if you're living in a street or a community or a neighbourhood where there are people with mental illness; one of the great complaints MPs get is there's people in the community without support. Maybe they used to be institutionalised in the 60s, but now they're out without support. So these people would then be getting support, getting constant attention and they didn't have to pay for it which meant they keep going back.

Abraham: But has it been killed by its own success? In other words, has it proved a lot more expensive than you would have otherwise budgeted for? Because GPs are now saying, you beauty, I don't have to spend an hour and a half listening to this sob story, I can refer it to a social worker.

Pyne: I think what's been proved....

Chris Schacht: Mr Abraham's very sympathetic today; give them a belting and throw them out the door.

Abraham: The second thing is you've got a lot of social workers thinking, "Hello, I'm going to get a guaranteed income stream here with the Medicare rebate, thank you very much. Even if I'm bulk billing I'll set up my little business in the GPs rooms or next door to it." "Bob's your uncle." Was it going out of control in terms of costs?

Pyne: I don't think it's out of control, Matthew. I think what's proven is there was an enormous need. I think what's been proven is there was a huge demand because there is an enormous need. Mental illness is....

Abraham: Did it cost you more than you thought it would?

Pyne: It did cost more than we thought it would. And I think that's because there are so many people who do need a bit of assistance, whether it's a lot of assistance or a little bit of assistance. I don't understand why mental illness is always regarded as an optional extra; why mental illness issues are always pushed to the side of a budget like aged care when there are so many important aspects to mental illness. I mean if you have untreated mental illness in the community it has so many impacts on the local community. More than half the people in jail are people with mental illness, and it's because they don't get the support they need in the community. And here's the Government making it harder.

Abraham: This is something we will pick up with Nicola Roxon.

Schacht: I just think you've got to ask Nicola Roxon to come on and explain.

Abraham: We've done that.

Schacht: Ok, I think that's great. I mean, I don't know the details like Chris does. We all understand there are not enough psychiatrists or even psychologists or trained people to handle that range of things. I agree with what you just said about is this a good little earner where some people say, "I've now got a guaranteed income." Finally on the budget....

David Bevan: Budget? We are talking about people who are helping others.

Schacht: I know. I can just imagine what happened in the budget PRC discussion, which Christopher's been through and I've been through even as a non-cabinet minister. The Finance Department says, "Hang on. You've got a program here. You predicted it was going to cost this much and in a year it's gone over by whatever the percentage is." Unless you can find savings elsewhere in your portfolio, they're going to argue it should be cut or reduced. That is just a fact of life. I don't have all the details. I'd be a mug if I tried to discuss this with Chris, but I think if you get Nicola Roxon-remembering in the health budget that saved one and a half billion dollars by changing the pharmaceuticals scheme which has already got chemists and pharmacists....

Pyne: This is a classic case though of where things play into each other. The Government now has a.....

Schacht: But you wanted even bigger cuts....

Recording interrupted.

Pyne: the Government says, "We're going to have to make some cuts to the mental health budget." Now if they didn't have to pay four point seven billion dollars in interest repayments, they might have some money for mental health.

Schacht: If they didn't have the stimulus package that put us into deficit we would have had another 300 thousand unemployed here in Australia which would have cost us billions more in unemployment benefits.

Pyne: (inaudible)

Abraham: Chris Pyne, which school in your electorate would you have not given a School hall or a building project to?

Pyne: Well, we have promised that all the schools halls will be delivered.

Abraham: No, no, no. You're complaining here about the deficit that's been run up. Most of that's been run up in the....

Pyne: We wouldn't have given away $900 cheques to everybody.

Abraham: No, no, no.

Pyne: I won't name a school because we've promised to give the schools their halls to fulfil the commitment.

Abraham: So you would not have cut that project?

Pyne: We've announced that we won't be cutting that program.

Abraham: But you're bitching about it.

Pyne: We are bitching about that fact that it has not delivered value for money. This is a classic case. This is like someone who turns up to pay the wedding planner and the wedding planner says, "oh this is 100 grand (dollars)," and the father says, "It was only 25 thousand dollars that you quoted me for," and the wedding planner says, "What are you complaining about? You had a good time." It's common sense out there. It's common sense. Sure, people want resource centres, libraries, classrooms and school halls, but they don't want to be ripped off.

Schacht: But you won't stop it and you won't name any in your electorate where there's been a problem.

Pyne: There are three schools in my electorate that have complained about problems, but they also said, "I don't want to be a target for the Department of Education," which has happened in other states. And I respect that, and so should you quite frankly.

Schacht: Tell them to go and see the Auditor General with that information because he can treat them in confidence. That's the Auditor General's power.

Abraham: Now, we did put a call into Nicola Roxon to have first say on this, I might say Reagan's been chasing this down for us since Friday afternoon. So the opportunity has been there.

Pyne: She's hiding.

Abraham: She's travelling today.

Schacht: Is Mark Butler, the Member for Port Adelaide a Parliamentary Secretary....

Pyne: He's the Parliamentary Secretary for Health.

Abraham: Yeah, but Nicola Roxon is Mental Health. Ok, anyway we'll go Mark Butler.

Schacht: Do you think it's an area he might have more information than certainly I've got?

Abraham: I think he's a mate of yours.

Schacht: I'm a member of the Labor Party and I support his election.

Pyne: Not all members of the Labor Party are your mates.

Schacht: Just like half the Liberal Party aren't your mates either.

Abraham: Some of them, Chris Schacht, don't want you on the program.

Pyne: Michael Atkinson

Schacht: By the way I went to the ABC with Mark Scott, the Press Club, and I got up and I asked a question as a member of the AJA, Journalists Union.....

Abraham: You don't have to be a member to ask a question by the way...

Schacht: And I thanked for the hearings at the Senate Estimates last year or the year before of defending the independent programming of 891.

Bevan: Chris Schacht, we were asking Kevin Foley, the State Treasurer last week to explain to us how much money they're going to put into the rebuild of the Adelaide Oval Stadium, and he didn't know the value of SACA's debt. And eventually he said there might be several options and we might end up paying 450 million dollars more to the redevelopment. Now, you're a member of SACA, and SANFL. What do you think is going on?

Schacht: First of all, as a member of SACA; I went to the last annual general meeting of SACA last year. I was the only one present, out of the 70 or 80 people there that asked the question about the debt.

Pyne: You always have to ask a question don't you?

Schacht: Of course. It's just what I'm like. 50 per cent say fine, 50 per cent say idiot shut up.

Pyne: At SACA it might be a bit more than 50 per cent.

Schacht: Of course. With all due respect to all the members, I'm sitting there at over 60 years of age and I thought I was in the youth movement.

Pyne: Young SACA.

Schacht: Mr McLachlan explained SACA at a minimum has borrowed $60 million to build the Western Stand. And there is no income idea of where the increased income is coming from other than jacking up the membership. And he admitted it cost him an extra 10 million dollars to preserve the brick arches at the back of the new Western Stand. 10 million would pay for a lot of other things.

Pyne: But if you don't have the arches where are people going to perambulate.

Schacht: I know, and the old Adelaide Club members in their top hats and bustle dresses would still feel out of it if they couldn't perambulate down under the arches. But, $60 million...

Pyne: I didn't see too many bustle dresses there.

Schacht: They showed a photograph of the meeting before with people in top hats and bustle dresses....

Pyne: But that wasn't in 2008.

Abraham: No, that was in 2007.

Schacht: All I want to say is it was clear to me and other people when I asked the question; can SACA pay and service the debt, some people say it's 90 million, without either jacking up the membership fee or getting someone else to put a contribution in. I suspect that SACA is in a position now that it desperately needs the new program so that some way or other they don't have to get lumbered with the debt.

What I have to say as a taxpayer; I'm not overly impressed that SACA should be able to palm off its debt because they made the decision to build the Western Stand, which increases the seating by three to four thousand, mainly for the members. And remember, Adelaide Oval is on land owned by the State Government, delegated to the City Council. It's leased. It is public land. My real view is; and Kevin Foley, I agree with about 80 per cent of what the State Government is doing with Adelaide Oval, except they should put a roof over it; do a proper job and set up a statutory independent authority to manage it and run it. Do not let SACA or SANFL between them manage the new Adelaide Oval. They will send it broke or do something stupid.

Abraham: Tell us what you really think.

Schacht: That's my polite reply.

Bevan: Because you're worried about the amount of debt.

Schacht: Well, you cannot walk away from the fact that there is a heap of debt.

Bevan: Why should taxpayers have to pay for it?

Schacht: I agree, but this is the real problem SACA's put itself into. I don't know whether Mr McLachlan can come on air and explain how this 60 million or 90 million can be serviced. I suspect SACA will have to give up whatever negotiating position to the State Government or to SANFL just to get the football there so we can help pay off their debt if the Government won't pay it. And my view is, and I'm a SACA member; I think it's a bit rough.

Abraham: Kevin Foley said they will pay off the debt.

Schacht: The next thing is, they're asking the Federal Government now, in case we win the soccer for a Federal Government prop-up. Will the Federal Government put money in to pay of SACA's debt?

Bevan: The scenario you're painting is that SACA gets itself into a heap of debt. It then hopes that the State Government will bail it out in the mix of this 450 million dollar upgrade. The State Government hopes that it will be bailed out by our World Cup bid, which will bring federal money in. That's summing up what you've just put to us.

Pyne: It all sounds like it's on the never, never. I think there are a couple of issues about this.

Schacht: Like the old Liberal establishment.

Pyne: Number one there's-well it's a little unfair that you get your radio program every Monday to pursue this relentless campaign against the leadership of the SACA, but we'll put that to one side.

Schacht: I like Ian Mclachlan. He was a great cricketer.

Pyne: It sounds like you like him.

Schacht: We always have an argument. We're friendly.

Abraham: It's not personal. I don't think Chris Schacht's lampooning his personal integrity.

Schacht: I asked the questions at the AGM, that I think are relevant, that I think any member....

Pyne: But then you get to ask them on air over and over again.

Schacht: (inaudible)

Pyne: I'm not here to defend the SACA. I'm a member of SACA too, but I think SACA should....

Schacht: (inaudible)

Abraham: Now, Chris Pyne, the pre-selections....

Pyne: Can I just talk very quickly on the oval.

Abraham: Oh, sorry.

Pyne: A couple of things that worry me about this whole business and has worried me from the beginning. Somebody wrote a very clever article in the Sunday Mail this weekend about how Kevin Foley didn't seem to be across the detail of too many things and doesn't seem to care very much about it actually.

Abraham: I love that guy's stuff.

Pyne: He's a very good writer. The suggestion was Kevin Foley is having a bit of insouciance about detail.

Abraham: Insouciance? Spell that one.

Schacht: Did you learn that word at St Ignatius in year 12?

Pyne: Insouciance is a very good word. It suggests a certain lack of interest, a certain casualness about detail, which for the State Treasurer I think is a concern. And again on this oval, it seems to be the same; you ask Kevin Foley some questions about the detail and he doesn't seem to be very interested. Is that because the State election is over? Is that because he's not going to be facing another election in four years? Is he going to be retiring? What exactly is going on?

But the second thing I'm concerned about is that story this morning that the Crows meeting with the State Government about how all this is going to interact financially. I was always very doubtful that this deal would ever get off the ground. It was a good election ploy from the Labor Party, but quite frankly the public don't know....

Abraham: And I think that it's accepted that the Liberal Party's plan was wildly ambitious and wouldn't have got off the ground either.

Pyne: I think the Liberal Party plan would have got off the ground because it was at a green fields site. It didn't involve bringing together SANFL, SACA and the State Government. And the story this morning from Michelangelo Rucci and from the way you covered it this morning, it's clear that you've covered it this morning it's clear that the wheels are falling off this deal.

Abraham: Insouciance; carefree; a cheerful feeling you have when nothing is troubling you.

Pyne: Nothing troubles Kevin Foley because he's won his election. He's on his way out.

Abraham: Nonchalance.

Schacht: Well I thought last week when he was on your program he handled them very well. It's a difficult position in which he's negotiating with two or three organisations, which would rather hit each other with iron bars.

Abraham: But does the State Government get to the point where it would be happy to walk away from this? And I'm not saying deliberately, but he would have done everything in camp....

Bevan: The Victoria Park Grandstand.

Abraham: The Premier; there's other ways that he could spend that 450 million dollars.

Schacht: It may be in the end to say, "it's too much, a bridge to far," whatever you want to say. Long term, if Adelaide and South Australia wants to be a player in big international sport in a range of things; entertainment; whatever at an international level, we have to do something about have one high quality international.....

Abraham: That's what John Olson said about the wine centre. We had to have an international wine centre.

Pyne: This wouldn't be the first time that an enormous promise by the Rann/Foley Government went the way of the Dodo not long after the election victory.

Bevan: Now, here's a question for you. This will get us onto pre-selections and we've only got five minutes until the half past ten news. Kate Ellis is the Minister for Sports. She's been off this weekend to Zurich trying to help clinch the World Cup.....

Pyne: There's not many Adelaide votes in Zurich.

Bevan: That's my point. She's also the member for Adelaide. How hard will this be to play this one for her, Chris Schacht, because there might be some people in her electorate who aren't that keen on seeing the parklands dug up to put a car park in?

Schacht: Well, she has all of the Adelaide CBD and North Adelaide. The area around Adelaide Oval is all in her electorate. I have to say if those people on high incomes living around Adelaide Oval in rich houses etc don't like it she has large areas north of Regency Road, it's a big electorate....

Abraham: Didn't Jane Lomax-Smith have that in her electorate, or not?

Schacht: No she didn't. The State seat; is she'd had Kilburn in Adelaide she'd still be the member. She's got Kilburn and all of those areas in Adelaide. The point I make, irrespective of the particular seat; there are six Labor held seats in South Australia. Only one of theme is safe and that's Port Adelaide. The other five are seats that in the last two elections Labor has won off the Liberal Party. Therefore I treat them all as marginals.

Pyne: Labor has won "from" the Liberal party.

Schacht: From the Liberal Party, yeah, sorry.

Abraham: (inaudible)

Schacht: Toffy Liberal, Toffy Liberal.

Pyne: I can't help it.

Schacht: No, no. He worries about a split infinitive here and there. I'm just trying to get the message out to the working voters of Kilburn. But all I want to say is, irrespective of this issue, Labor has five seats-and I've said this since the last election-that are all marginal in South Australia, and could all be lost by Labor if the circumstances are right. And I think we would lose Adelaide, irrespective, of the Adelaide Oval, it's about the broader issues.

Pyne: Schachty makes a very good point, but there's a lot of local issues in Adelaide which cost Jane Lomax-Smith her electorate and Kate's got the same problems. Not only the Adelaide Oval redevelopment which is upsetting some people, but also the Royal Adelaide Hospital redevelopment is the local hospital for the people who live in metropolitan Adelaide. That is upsetting them. People are still upset in the Eastern corner of Adelaide about the Clipsal 500. And in the area of the Southern part of the electorate around Unley, a lot of communities are very upset about the local planning laws being suspended for the BER programs, the school halls being built. So there's a number of local issues that Kate Ellis will struggle with and she might well be in trouble.

Schacht: I just want to say something positive about Kate Ellis. I have a sporting interest as you know. In the Federal Budget last week Kate Ellis delivered another 50 million dollars a year over the next four years for Australian sport.

Pyne: That was Wayne Swan.

Schacht: Well, I think she was the Minister who went in and argued for it and got it for both elite, but above all community participation in sport. So all I can say is that is not a bad effort for a non-cabinet minister to get that outcome with tough ministers in finance and treasury.

Abraham: Chris Pyne, one of your electors, a Mr O'Connor. You sent him a happy birthday card for his 80^th birthday. "Mr O'Connor, my best wishes to you on this special day. Happy Birthday."

Schacht: What, is he dead already?

Abraham: No, he's very much alive. He wasn't all that impressed with the card and I have to say, whatever happened to-and this is a birthday card-and it's got a photo of Parliament House Canberra on it.

Pyne: Because I'm a Federal Member of Parliament.

Abraham: But whatever happened to the one with the pipe and the fishing rod. Look, it's hardly....

Pyne: We get lots of very positive responses to our birthday cards. Of course we do.

Abraham: Did you put a five dollar note in it?

Pyne: My Great Aunty Cathy used to give me a five dollar note every year.

Schacht: Were you able to get that printed within your entitlements because it's got a photograph of Parliament House on it.

Pyne: No. I think it was printed from our entitlements because it comes from the Federal Member for Sturt.

Bevan: Really, what is the point?

Pyne: Because people who are turning 80 like to get a birthday card.

Bevan: He didn't.

Pyne: Mr O'Connor didn't.

Bevan: He threw it in the bin.

Pyne: Well good on him, but I've put out thousands over the years and I can tell you what, there are a lot of lonelier people at 85 and 75 than your probably realise out there.

Bevan: Then you're a friend.

Pyne: It cheers them up no end and we get marvellous responses to that. Now Mr O'Connor, if he didn't like it, well not every consumer likes every single product

Abraham: So it's a product. I thought it was a gesture, but it's a product.

Pyne: No, just generally speaking not every consumer needs to buy every product. When you turn up at the bakers you don't have to buy every single Danish scroll. It doesn't mean that the Danish scroll is no good.

Bevan: He's not a consumer he's a man.

Schacht: By the way, I'm not going to criticise him over it because I suspect there are some Labor members of Parliament who do something similar.

Ends