This bill is currently before Parliament.
Health, care & disability
Lets the Health Department publish clearer information about medical fees and likely out-of-pocket costs for private health care, using Medicare, hospital and insurer billing data already collected by government.
The government introduced the bill because specialist and private health costs were hard for patients to compare before committing to treatment, and voluntary publication on the Medical Costs FinderA government website intended to help patients compare typical medical fees and out-of-pocket costs before choosing treatment. had very low take-up. It also sought to close a private health insurance loophole where insurers could close a product and open a similar one at a higher price or with reduced value without the same ministerial premium scrutiny.
The bill sits in a wider affordability debate about specialist fees, private health insurance premiums and whether the private system is giving consumers clear value. The original Medical Costs FinderA government website intended to help patients compare typical medical fees and out-of-pocket costs before choosing treatment. relied on specialists and insurers opting in, but the explanatory memorandum and minister’s speech said participation remained only about one to two per cent of specialists and 10 per cent of insurers by December 2025. Debate speakers across government, opposition and the crossbench generally accepted that better price information and action on product phoenixingA private health insurance practice where an insurer closes a product and opens a similar one at a higher price or with reduced value, avoiding the ordinary premium-change approval process. were useful, while many argued that transparency alone would not fix access, regional specialist shortages, premium pressure or high gap fees.
The main criticism was not that the transparency and anti-phoenixing measures were wrong, but that they were incomplete. Coalition speakers called for Senate scrutiny and warned of unintended effects on the private health system, while crossbench speakers argued that publishing prices would not itself make specialist care affordable, that the published fee methodology needed safeguards, and that premium approvals needed clear decision timeframes.
Mark Butler MP introduced this bill. Supportive speeches so far have come from Labor.
Did it become law?
Not yet
Final passage
No final vote yet
The bill has not yet completed passage through Parliament.
Days since introduction
118 days
Updated 10 June 2026.
Meaning
Lets the Health Department publish clearer information about medical fees and likely out-of-pocket costs for private health care, using Medicare, hospital and insurer billing data already collected by government.
Allows the Medical Costs FinderA government website intended to help patients compare typical medical fees and out-of-pocket costs before choosing treatment. to include information about particular medical practitioners, hospitals, insurers, fees, Medicare benefits, gap-cover arrangements and locations, while prohibiting publication of patient personal information.
Creates information-sharing powers so relevant datasets can be linked for publication, and gives medical practitioners, hospitals and insurers an internal review path if they dispute published information.
Requires private health insurers to seek ministerial approval for premiums on new products and for changes that reduce cover, benefits or other terms of an existing product.
Formalises parts of the annual private health insurance premium roundThe annual process through which private health insurers seek approval for premium changes., including public-interest tests, requests for more information, resubmission processes and limited delegation of approval decisions.
The amendments will allow for the publication of the relevant data on the Medical Costs Finder, without the need for input from medical practitioners as it will be drawn from Medicare, hospital and insurer billing data collected by government.Explanatory memorandum
allow for the publication of information about medical practitioners and their billing (including names, qualifications, specialty, any languages spoken, fees charged by location, their utilisation of gap cover arrangements with insurers)Explanatory memorandum
The new Part VE of the HI Act and amended Chapter 6 of the PHI Act will authorise the use and disclosure of the relevant datasets (including linkage between them) supporting Transparency by Default.Explanatory memorandum
The new provisions will address product phoenixing. Insurers will no longer be able to open new products or reduce cover/value to consumers of existing products without scrutiny of the proposed premium based on public interest considerations.Explanatory memorandum
providing a legislative basis for the Premium Round which has operated administratively for many years, by introducing an ‘approved application period’Explanatory memorandum
Context
The bill sits in a wider affordability debate about specialist fees, private health insurance premiums and whether the private system is giving consumers clear value. The original Medical Costs FinderA government website intended to help patients compare typical medical fees and out-of-pocket costs before choosing treatment. relied on specialists and insurers opting in, but the explanatory memorandum and minister’s speech said participation remained only about one to two per cent of specialists and 10 per cent of insurers by December 2025. Debate speakers across government, opposition and the crossbench generally accepted that better price information and action on product phoenixingA private health insurance practice where an insurer closes a product and opens a similar one at a higher price or with reduced value, avoiding the ordinary premium-change approval process. were useful, while many argued that transparency alone would not fix access, regional specialist shortages, premium pressure or high gap fees.
Voluntary fee publication begins
Specialists and insurers were able to publish fee and out-of-pocket costThe part of a medical bill the patient pays after Medicare and any private health insurance benefit are applied. information on the Medical Costs FinderA government website intended to help patients compare typical medical fees and out-of-pocket costs before choosing treatment., but participation remained voluntary.
Explanatory memorandum ↗Cost keeps patients from specialist care
The explanatory materials said 8.6 per cent of people, more than 800,000 Australians, delayed or missed specialist care because of cost.
Explanatory memorandum ↗Medical Costs FinderA government website intended to help patients compare typical medical fees and out-of-pocket costs before choosing treatment. take-up remains low
Official materials said only one to two per cent of specialists and 10 per cent of insurers were participating on the website.
Explanatory memorandum ↗Bill introduced in the House
Mark Butler moved the second reading and described the bill as a transparency and consumer-protection reform for private health consumers.
Second reading speech ↗House debate continues
Members debated the bill’s price-transparency and premium-approval measures, with crossbench amendments pressing for affordability reforms, stronger data publication and approval timeframes.
House debate speeches ↗Legislative route
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
The bill was referred to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee for inquiry, with a report date listed for 15 April 2026.
Referred to committee
APH bill page notesMembers debated the bill in principle, including its proposed price-transparency rules, premium-approval changes and crossbench amendments.
Key criticism
The main criticism was not that the transparency and anti-phoenixing measures were wrong, but that they were incomplete. Coalition speakers called for Senate scrutiny and warned of unintended effects on the private health system, while crossbench speakers argued that publishing prices would not itself make specialist care affordable, that the published fee methodology needed safeguards, and that premium approvals needed clear decision timeframes.
Most criticism was framed as support for the bill’s direction combined with calls for stronger safeguards or broader reform.
Senate scrutiny and unintended consequences
Coalition speakers said they would not block the bill in the House but wanted a Senate inquiry to test data use, specialist and insurer concerns, government overreach and possible effects on innovation and the broader private health system.
Transparency does not equal affordability
Several crossbench MPs argued that fee publication may show patients the size of the gap but will not cap fees, increase Medicare rebates, expand specialist supply or stop high out-of-pocket costs by itself.
Need stronger private-system oversight
Sophie Scamps supported the bill but argued the private health system needed an independent authority, stronger payout expectations, fairer contracting and wider reform so the changes would last.
Approval delays
Allegra Spender supported stronger oversight but warned that new ministerial or delegated approval requirements could delay new or improved insurance products unless clear decision timeframes were enforced.
Further sources
Votes
No recorded votes have been found yet for this bill.
Parliamentary debate
Start here — lead voices
Mark Butler says the bill gives private health consumers clearer information about practitioner fees and out-of-pocket costs, while closing a product-phoenixing loophole in private health insurance premium oversight.
Read in Hansard ↗Allegra Spender supports the bill’s intent but wants enforceable decision timeframes so new ministerial approval requirements do not delay useful insurance products or benefits.
Read in Hansard ↗Monique Ryan supports better transparency but says it will not make care affordable by itself, calling for stronger specialist billing reforms, Medicare rebate work, price-updating rules and quality information.
Read in Hansard ↗Sophie Scamps supports the transparency and anti-phoenixing measures, but argues they need to be backed by an independent private health system authority and broader reforms on value, contracting and payouts.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
13 speakers · 14 contributions · 13 support
“Today I rise to support the Health Legislation Amendment (Improving Choice and Transparency for Private Health Consumers) Bill 2026, brought forward by the Minister for Health and Ageing”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Like the member opposite who just spoke, I've also met with many constituents about the rising costs of private health care, private health insurance and seeing specialists.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The Health Legislation Amendment (Improving Choice and Transparency for Private Health Consumers) Bill 2026 seeks to course-correct longstanding deficits in the private health system.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I support the introduction and passage of the Health Legislation Amendment (Improving Choice and Transparency for Private Health Consumers) Bill 2026.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill takes a clear approach: transparency by default.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I believe in our health system, and I think that this bill continues with those improvements.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill is a step towards greater transparency of gap fees.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Julie-Ann Campbell on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Julie-Ann Campbell backs the bill as a consumer-confidence measure, saying patients should be able to compare specialist costs and insurers should not be able to repackage similar products at higher prices without scrutiny.
“This bill helps Australians find the best value when they need specialist medical advice and treatment, and provides more confidence in their private health insurance by outlawing product phoenixing.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
In a short additional contribution, Julie-Ann Campbell says specialist price information should be as easy to compare as other major household costs.
“But when you need to see a medical specialist, when the stakes could not be higher, you are expected to make an appointment without knowing what it will cost you, without knowing the impact on your hip pocket and without knowing the price tag for your family.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“I know there is much more work to be done.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I would like to speak in strong support of the Health Legislation Amendment (Improving Choice and Transparency for Private Health Consumers) Bill 2026.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“It provides clarity on individual medical practitioner fees and out-of-pocket costs.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise today to speak in support of the Health Legislation Amendment (Improving Choice and Transparency for Private Health Consumers) Bill 2026.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“At its core, this legislation delivers on the Albanese government's commitment to strengthen Medicare while ensuring Australians who engage with the private health system are better informed, better protected and better supported.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
4 speakers · 4 mixed
“Greater transparency in healthcare pricing, which this bill seeks to achieve, is a good thing.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The coalition supports ensuring greater transparency in healthcare pricing and the need to help consumers make informed decisions about their health care and obtain better value from private health insurance.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The coalition is not going to stand in the way of this, because what we want to see is people being able to access help, certainly in regional areas.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The coalition will not stand in the way of this bill passing the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
4 speakers · 4 mixed
“I rise to support the Health Legislation Amendment (Improving Choice and Transparency for Private Health Consumers) Bill 2026.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“It doesn't matter what the cost of the service is if you still can't afford it.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I support these steps that improve choice and transparency for consumers.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“These are sensible measures, and I'll support them, but they must be seen as the beginning, not the end, of the work that needs to be done.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Record
House · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
House · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
Members debated the bill in principle, including its proposed price-transparency rules, premium-approval changes and crossbench amendments.
Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (15/04/2026)
Referred to committee
The bill was referred to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee for inquiry, with a report date listed for 15 April 2026.
Referred to Committee (5 Mar 2026): Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (15 Apr 2026)
APH bill page notes
