Key Points
- The Coalition has delayed its planned disallowance motion on the government's 60-day dispensing policy.
- The plan would allow eligible patients to buy two months' worth of subsidised medicine with a single prescription.
- The Pharmacy Guild has opposed the plan, saying it would lead to financial loss and closure of pharmacies.
A signature Labor health policy to cut the cost of prescriptions is set to go ahead after a push to block the plan was delayed, but it could be challenged when parliament returns in September.
Labor's 60-day dispensing plan will allow people to buy more medication on one prescription and is set to start on 1 September.
The government says the changes will halve medication costs for about 6 million Australians, but the Pharmacy Guild has lobbied against the policy.
The Coalition sought to move a disallowance motion overturning the policy in the Senate on Thursday but later decided to defer the vote, meaning Labor's plan will go ahead.
Later on Thursday, the Coalition said it had lodged a second motion to delay the laws, which will be introduced to parliament after the laws have already come into effect.
Here's how we got to this point.
What is the 60-day dispensing policy?
From 1 September, the government will allow people to buy two months' worth of subsidised medicines on a single prescription rather than two separate prescriptions.
The changes will apply to more than 300 common medicines listed on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme and will be implemented in three stages over 12 months.
According to the government, this means about 6 million Australians will pay less for their medicines, save money on doctor's appointments, and spend less time travelling back and forth to the doctor and pharmacy.
The first stage of medicines eligible for 60-day prescriptions will support patients who are stable on current treatment for ongoing conditions, including cardiovascular disease, gout, Crohn's disease, asthma, heart failure, high cholesterol, hypertension, osteoporosis, and ulcerative colitis.
Is the Coalition challenging the 60-day prescription policy?
On Wednesday, Opposition health spokeswoman Anne Ruston moved to have the Senate strike out the policy with a disallowance motion, saying there were concerns small pharmacies could shut or cut back on staff to cover the costs.
Ruston said the government needed to delay the policy's start date and consult with pharmacists.
On Thursday, Liberal and Nationals senators decided to seek to defer the vote and did not move the motion.
But Coalition frontbencher Bridget McKenzie told ABC News the Opposition had lodged a second motion to delay the laws, which will be introduced to parliament in September - when the laws will already be in effect.
“That means making sure that whilst providing cheaper medicines, you're not also simultaneously reducing health services,” she said.
“We are absolutely confident that our local pharmacists want to sit down with Mark Butler and find the right solution."
Butler learned about the second motion in real-time while speaking to journalists, and just moments after warning it would be destructive.
“Right. Well, I haven’t seen that motion. But the circus continues,” he replied.
“I just wonder when the Coalition is going to learn to back the interest of patients, rather than this pharmacy lobby. The Senate has expressed its will.”
Butler earlier said he did not know what would happen to patients who received a 60-day script before any successful Coalition attempt to delay the rule.
“This is a very, very live debate and I would have to take legal advice about that,” he said.
“I'm sure the doctors groups, and pharmacy groups for that matter, would be very nervous about the question of whether what they were doing was legal.
“Would patients have to flock back to their GP to get a new script? … I don't have final legal advice about that.”
Ruston said the intention on Thursday had been to allow for more consultation time.
"Today we sought to ensure that this policy could be implemented without perverse consequences like job losses or restricted access to health care services, particularly for regional Australians and vulnerable Australians.
"The government still has three weeks until this policy comes into effect to pause and consult.
"Senator McKenzie and I have another motion with the clerk should the government continue to refuse to guarantee that no pharmacy will close, and no Australian will be worse off as a result of this measure."
What are the arguments against the policy?
The pharmacy sector has been fiercely lobbying against the shift from the existing 30-day limit, arguing it will lead to significant financial losses for the industry.
Modelling in a report commissioned by the Pharmacy Guild forecasts that the changes could result in the closure of hundreds of pharmacies and the loss of 20,000 pharmacy jobs within 4.5 years.
The closure of pharmacies could lead to a reduction in free services such as blood pressure checks, blister packs and asthma checks, particularly in regional and rural communities.
The Pharmacy Guild has called on the government to postpone implementation to help prevent unintended consequences impacting patients, aged care residents and pharmacies.
Pharmacy Guild vice-president Anthony Tassone said delaying the rollout would be the "right move".
"All pharmacists want to make medicines more affordable for their patients, but we can't do this in a way that forces hundreds of pharmacies to close, puts thousands of pharmacy workers out of a job, and increases the cost of services for every aged care resident in the country," he said.
Doctors have argued the changes will make medicines more affordable for patients and free up clogged GP clinics by reducing the frequency of repeat visits.
Australian Medical Association president Steve Robson said the Coalition had the opportunity to implement the same measures when they were in government but chose to kill the plan instead.
"It's time that people in the Senate overall took the opportunity to make medicines affordable at a time of cost-of-living crisis," he told reporters in Canberra.
Royal Australian College of General Practitioners president Nicole Higgins said the policy was recommended to the government more than five years ago, but the Coalition "folded under pressure from the pharmacy owners".
