Chapter 1Introduction
1.1The Health Legislation Amendment (Improving Choice and Transparency for Private Health Consumers) Bill 2026 (the bill) was introduced by the Hon Mark Butler MP, Minister for Health and Ageing (the Minister), to the House of Representatives on 12 February 2026.
1.2On 5 March 2026, the Senate referred the bill to the Community Affairs Legislation Committee (the committee) for inquiry and report by 15 April 2026.
Structure of the report
1.3This report contains two chapters. This chapter sets out:
the purpose of the bill;
background information and the context for these reforms;
an overview of the bill’s key provisions; and
general information outlining the conduct of the inquiry and other committees’ consideration of the bill.
1.4Chapter 2 examines the key issues raised by submitters and concludes with the committee’s view and recommendation.
Purpose of the bill
1.5The purpose of the bill is to introduce two important measures, which aim to improve fee transparency on medical fees charged by medical practitioners and to strengthen ministerial oversight of private health insurance premiums to better protect consumers.
Fee Transparency – Medical Costs Finder
1.6The bill would amend the Health Insurance Act 1973 (HI Act) and the Private Health Insurance Act 2007 (PHI Act) to allow the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing (the Department) to publish information for consumers on medical fees charged by medical practitioners and likely out-of-pocket costs for their private health care experience.
1.7The bill would allow for the publication of relevant data on the Medical Costs Finder, without the need for input from medical practitioners. The information that would be published is intended to be indicative and contextual. It would be derived from administrative government-held data and would reflect fees and out-of-pocket costs over a defined period, rather than representing point‑in‑time charges or guaranteed prices for individual services. Importantly, it would not affect the privacy of consumers, and no patient information would be published.
1.8It would support greater transparency in healthcare pricing and help consumers to make informed decisions about their healthcare and obtain better value from their private health insurance.
Regulating private health insurance premiums
1.9As explained by the Minister, the purpose of the bill is also to address ‘product phoenixing’ in the private health insurance sector, which is the practice of closing existing policies and replacing them with almost identical policies at a higher price.
1.10The bill would amend the PHI Act to require insurers to seek Ministerial premium approval for new products, and existing products where certain changes are proposed. According to the Explanatory Memorandum (EM), the new premium approval process provided in the bill broadly aligns with the current process for premium changes for existing products. The new provisions would expand and formalise Ministerial oversight of premium setting for private health insurance products.
Background
1.11The following section provides some background to the proposed legislative changes.
Fee transparency
Out-of-pocket costs for medical specialists
1.12As explained on the Department’s website, ‘an out-of-pocket medical cost is the difference between the amount a doctor charges for a medical service and what Medicare and any private health insurer pays. Out-of-pocket costs are also called gap or patient payments.’
1.13In his second reading speech, the Minister explained that ‘an increasing number of Australians are not taking up referrals from their General Practitioners (GPs) to see a specialist due to cost’.
1.14For example, in 2024–25, 8.6 per cent of people delayed or missed specialist care (over 800,000 people) because of cost. The most common cause of out-of-pocket costs is medical specialist fees.
Medical Costs Finder
1.15In March 2019, to address issues surrounding out-of-pocket costs, the then Coalition government announced a ‘national strategy to tackle excessive out of pocket costs charged by medical specialists’, which included the development of a website to ‘provide Australians with transparency…about the costs of specialist services’.
1.16The ‘Medical Costs Transparency’ website (the Medical Costs Finder) was launched in 2019. It was intended to provide consumers with information on typical out-of-pocket costs for a range of medical procedures and services.
1.17Since 2022, specialists and insurers have had the opportunity to participate in the Medical Costs Finder and publish their fees and out-of-pockets data. Uptake has been low as only 1–2 per cent of specialists and 10 per cent of insurers were participating on the website as at December 2025.
1.18The objectives of the proposed amendments are to improve transparency of costs and help people make informed decisions about healthcare. Without the proposed changes, the Minister stated that ‘patients will continue to be unable to compare between providers and unable to seek better value from their private healthcare’.
Regulating private health insurance premiums
1.19Private health insurance is regulated primarily under the PHI Act, the Private Health Insurance (Prudential Supervision) Act 2015, and related rules and regulations.
1.20The PHI Act requires private health insurers to apply to the Minister for approval of premium changes. The process for approving premiums has been managed administratively through an annual ‘Premium Round’. However, insurers can close and open products at any time without Ministerial scrutiny.
1.21In May 2024 and 2025 CHOICE reported the price of Gold hospital cover had increased by approximately 58 per cent in the past five years, much higher than the 16 per cent average across all product types reported by the Department over the same period. CHOICE stated this was due to product phoenixing.
1.22The ability for insurers to open and close products at their discretion has allowed insurers to close an existing product and open an identical or similar new product at a higher premium while avoiding the existing oversight requirements (product phoenixing).
1.23In December 2024, the Commonwealth Ombudsman released a statement raising concerns that phoenixing may be being used to circumvent the premium review process.
1.24In April 2025, the Minister made an election commitment to outlaw product phoenixing.
1.25In his second reading speech, the Minister explained that ‘product phoenixing, hurts not just new entrants to private health insurance who are directly impacted, but the 15.3 million people who hold private health insurance who are left unprotected from underscrutinised changes’.
1.26The bill would address ‘phoenixing’ by strengthening the PHI Act provisions for Ministerial oversight of private health insurance premiums.
Financial Impact Statement
1.27The EM states that Schedule 1 of the bill, which deals with fee transparency, ‘will support the delivery of the Australian Government’s 2025–26 budget measure and commitment of $7 million to fund the implementation of upgrading the Medical Costs Finder.
1.28Schedule 2 of the bill, which deals with regulating private health insurance premiums has no impact on the Australian Government Budget.
Key provisions of the bill
1.29This section explores the bill’s key provisions. The bill is comprised of two schedules:
Schedule 1 – Amendments relating to fee transparency and information sharing
Part 1 – Main amendments
Part 2 – Other technical amendments to modernise the secrecy provisions in the PHI Act consistent with amendments to secrecy provisions in other portfolio legislation made by the Regulatory Reform Omnibus Act 2025.
Schedule 2 – Amendments relating to regulating premiums
Part 1 – Amendments
Part 2 – Application provisions
Commencement
1.30Clause 2 provides that the bill, if passed, would commence as follows:
Schedule 1 will commence the day after the Act receives Royal Assent.
Schedule 2 will commence on 1 April 2026, or if the bill has not yet received the Royal Assent by 1 April 2026, on the day after Royal Assent. The commencement arrangements for Schedule 2 give certainty to private health insurers on the requirements intended to apply, including for the ‘approved application period’ (Premium Round) which is due to commence in September 2026.
Schedule 1 – Transparency by default and information sharing
1.31Part 1 would amend the HI Act and the PHI Act. The amendments in Part 2 are intended to make technical changes to the secrecy regime in the PHI Act. The Department explained that ‘the amendments are designed to reduce information gaps faced by consumers by improving visibility of specialist fees and the use of gap cover arrangements, assisting consumers to better understand potential costs associated with care’.
Part 1: Amendments to the HI Act
1.32Item 1 inserts new ‘Part VE – Publication of information about professional services into the HI Act’. The policy rationale reflected in the objects set out in new section 124ZX is to improve transparency of costs, promote efficient access to services, and to help people make informed decisions about healthcare.
1.33Proposed new section 124ZY would allow the Secretary to publish certain information about professional services provided by or on behalf of a medical practitioner. Subsection 124ZY(2) defines the information that may be published by the Secretary:
amount of Medicare benefits paid for particular kinds of professional services;
extent of any bulk billing under subsection 20A(1) of the HI Act for those services;
fees charged in respect of particular kinds of professional services;
information relating to particular medical practitioners who render professional services); and
information about the locations and hospitals where these professional services are provided.
1.34Subsections 124ZY(3) to (6) would provide for the Minister to make a legislative instrument specifying additional information that may be published and to specify the manner in which it must be published. This would allow flexibility for the publication of additional information on the Medical Costs Finder.
1.35New section 124ZZ would provide that a person may use or disclose information for the purposes of assisting the Secretary to prepare information. It also clarifies that using information includes linking or matching information.
1.36Section 124ZZ would be relied on for matching of Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) claims data with Centralised Register of Medical Practitioners (CROMP) data (obtained under the HI Act), and either or both types of data with Hospital Casemix Protocol 1 data (obtained under the PHI Act). Data would be matched by using the medical practitioner’s Medicare provider number. The matching would provide a clearer picture of a medical practitioner’s professional information and complement their fee information.
1.37New section 124ZZA provides that the Secretary is not liable to civil proceedings because of the publication of information under section 124ZY.Section 124ZZA provides immunity to ensure that actions taken in good faith under statutory authority cannot be undermined, which could otherwise deter transparency initiatives. The EM explains that a similar example of immunity from civil proceedings relating to the publication of information can be found in section 541 of the Aged Care Act 2024.
Part 1: Amendments to the PHI Act
1.38Item 2 inserts new Division 324 – Publication of information about treatments covered by health insurance policies etc. The EM explains that ‘the policy rationale for this Division is to support greater transparency in healthcare pricing and helping consumers access care and make informed decisions about their healthcare’.
1.39New section 324-5 would allow the use and disclosure, including publication, of information about treatments covered by health insurance policies. Subsection 324-5 (2) sets out the information that may be published by the Secretary:
information about benefits paid by an insurer relating to covered treatment (324-5(2)(a));
information about fees charged for covered treatment (324-5(2)(b));
information about the amount of Medicare benefits paid in relation to covered treatment (324-5(2)(c));
information about complying health insurance policies and products offered by insurers (324-5 (2) (d));
information about gap cover arrangements between particular insurers and
medical practitioners, whereby insurers pay a medical practitioner more if they agree to reduce the out-of-pocket costs for a person to zero or a fixed amount (324-5 (2) (e));
information about agreements between particular private health insurers and hospitals for the provision of covered treatment to persons insured by the insurer (324-5(2) (f));
information about particular medical practitioners who provided covered treatment (324-5(2) (g)); and
information about the locations and hospitals where the covered treatment is provided, including hospital accommodation costs (324-5(2)(h)).
1.40According to the EM, the types of information listed above are the types of information that consumers indicated would be useful to know about their out-of-pocket costs for a treatment covered under private health insurance.
1.41New subsections 324-5(3) to (6) would provide for the Minister to make a legislative instrument specifying additional kinds of information that may be published and to specify the manner in which it must be published, and for the Secretary to publish that information accordingly.
1.42The purpose of subsections 324-5(3) to (6) is to allow the flexibility for the publication of additional information on the Medical Costs Finder. Section 324-5(7) provides that information published under section 324-5 must not include personal information about an individual who is not a medical practitioner.
1.43New section 324-10 would provide that a person may use or disclose information for the purposes of assisting the Secretary to publish information. This would allow the use of Hospital Casemix Protocol 1 data which insurers provide to the department. The intended use would be to match Hospital Casemix Protocol 1 data with CROMP data and MBS claims data to provide a more holistic picture of a medical practitioner’s charging practices for in- and out-of-hospital services.
1.44New section 324-15 would provide that the Secretary of the department is not liable to civil proceedings because of the publication of information under section 324-5.
Part 2 – Authorising information sharing
1.45Amendments in Part 2 of Schedule 1 are intended to make technical changes to the secrecy regime in the PHI Act to make the provisions consistent with amendments to secrecy provisions in other portfolio legislation (such as the HI Act) made by the Regulatory Reform Omnibus Act 2025. Only the main provisions are summarised below. The other items clarify terms, provide definitions or remove definitions no longer used.
1.46Item 6 would repeal section 323-1 of the PHI Act and substitute this section with a rephrased offence provision aligned with modern drafting practices. Section 323-1 also clarifies that the offence will now apply to the use of protected information.
1.47Item 8 would add new paragraphs at the end of section 323-5 to allow the Secretary to disclose information that has been obtained or generated for the purpose of Part VE of the HI Act, consistent with the secrecy provisions.
1.48Item 11 would replace existing paragraphs 323-15 (1)(d) and (e) with paragraph 323-15(1)(d) to allow the Secretary (instead of the Minister) to now certify that information can be disclosed where the disclosure is in the public interest. These proposed changes are consistent with changes made to the public interest authorisation set out in other portfolio legislation in the Regulatory Reform Omnibus Act 2025.
1.49Item 16 would add new section 323-23 to insert terms and conditions on the subsequent use or disclosure following a disclosure under section 323-15 or 323-20. The EM explains that the terms and conditions would provide an important method to limit the use and disclosure of information.
1.50Item 19 would add new section 323-33 to allow for a person to disclose information in a variety of circumstances. It would be consistent with changes that have been made to secrecy provisions in portfolio legislation in the Regulatory Reform Omnibus Act 2025. The section covers disclosure in the following circumstances:
(a)The information has already lawfully been published.
(b)The person to whom the information relates has provided consent to the disclosure.
(c)Where the information has already been lawfully disclosed to the recipient.
(d)Where the information to be disclosed by a person to another relates to that other person.
(e)Where the disclosure is for the purpose of obtaining legal advice.
1.51Item 35 clarifies that the changes made by Schedule 1 would apply to the use or disclosure of information after the Schedule commences.
1.52Item 36 states that certificates that are made in the public interest under paragraph 323-15(1)(d) of the PHI Act and in effect immediately prior to the commencement of Schedule 1 would continue to be valid and apply in relation to disclosures made under sections 323-15 and 323-20, respectively, before the commencement of Schedule 1. The EM explains that it means that any work that requires protected information can continue without requiring a new public interest certificate.
Schedule 2 – Regulating premiums
1.53Proposed amendments in Schedule 2 would strengthen Ministerial oversight of private health insurance premiums by extending approval requirements under the PHI Act.
Part 1- Amendments PHI Act
1.54Items 2 to 4 would make amendments to section 66-1 to ensure premium requirements referred to in section 66-5 apply to policies under both new and existing private health insurance products.
1.55Items 5 to 7 would amend section 66-5 to clarify premium requirements for a private health insurance policy to meet the community rating requirements, which ensure people can buy the same private health insurance at the same price.
1.56The EM explains that ‘the effect of the amendments to section 66-5 is that it will be an offence under section 84-1 for an insurer to offer an insurance policy without a premium approval for the policy being in effect’.
1.57Item 8 would repeal section 66-10 and substitute six new sections, which are summarised below.
New section 66-6 – Meaning of ‘approved application period’
1.58New section 66-6 would set out the definition for an ‘approved application period’ (Premium Round). The dates set for the Premium Round control the timing for a regular period for consideration of premiums and is used to identify which of two public interest tests applies to the application. According to the EM, these arrangements would encourage insurers to submit premium applications during the approved application period as they will be subject to the less stringent public interest test.
1.59Subsection 66-6(1) would set the ‘approved application period’, which would be either:
(a)the period of 55 days beginning on the third Friday in September each year; or
(b)the dates specified by the Minister in a legislative instrument made under subsection 66-6(2).
1.60Subsection 66-6(2) would provide flexibility to set a different application period if required. An instrument may be made to change the approved applications for all premium approval applications, or for a class of applications. Subsection 66-6(3) states that a written instrument made under subsection 66-6(2) would not be disallowable by Parliament.
1.61The EM explains that the instrument would not be disallowable because commercial certainty would be undermined by disallowance and would have a flow on effects for consumers. The view is that certainty in the approved application period is needed for insurers to plan for and engage with the approval process.
New section 66-7- Meaning of ‘designated change’
1.62Section 66-7 defines what would be a ‘designated change’ to an existing product. A ‘designated change’ means a change:
(a)that results in a reduction in, or removal of, a treatment that is covered by an existing product;
(b)that results or might result in reduction of a benefit under an existing product, as specified in Private Health Insurance (Product Premium) Rules (Product Premium Rules);
(c)to any other term or condition of an existing product that results or might result in the value to a policyholder being reduced, as specified in the Product Premium Rules.
New section 66-8 – Minister’s approval of premium charged under new product subgroups
1.63The purpose of section 66-8 would be to require an insurer to apply to the Minister for approval of the proposed premium and to set out the matters relevant to consideration and outcome of an application.
1.64Subsection 66-8(2) states that the application must be accompanied by any application fee set by the Product Premium Rules.
1.65Subsection 66-8(4) states that the Minister must, in writing, either approve or not approve proposed premiums. This would ensure clarity in the outcome for all applications. Consistent with the current arrangements of premiums under the PHI Act, a decision made under 66-8(4) would not be subject to merit review.
1.66Subsection 66-8(5) states that if an application is made within the Premium Round, the Minister must approve the proposed premiums, unless it would be contrary to the public interest. The public interest test provides a broad discretion for the Minister to consider relevant matters, including policy considerations in addition to the information provided by the insurers.
1.67Subsection 66-8(6) states that if an application is made outside the Premium Round’ (defined in section 66-6), the Minister must approve the proposed premiums if it is in the public interest. Otherwise, the Minister must refuse to approve the proposed premiums.
1.68The EM explains that the purpose of having a different public interest test under subsection 66-8(6) is to disincentivise insurers from applying outside a Premium Round but preserve the opportunity to do so.
1.69Subsection 66-8(9) states that if the Minister refuses to approve the proposed premiums, the Minister must table their reasons for refusal in each House of the Parliament within 15 sitting days of that house.
1.70Subsection 66-8(12) concerns the delegation of the Minister’s powers. It states that if the Minister delegates their powers to a delegate, the delegate can only decide to approve the premium. If a delegate considers the premium should not be approved, the delegate must not make a final decision and must refer the application to the Minister for their consideration.
1.71The EM explains that these delegation arrangements allow for potential development of streamlined assessment processes for certain types of applications for premium approval.
Revised section 66-10 – Minister’s approval if certain changes are made to premiums or products
1.72Section 66-10 would be revised to align with new section 66-8 and expand the scope of Ministerial premium review. Subsection 66-10(2) clarifies that an application must be accompanied by any application fee as set in the Product Premium Rules.
1.73Subsection 66-10(4) states the Minister must, in writing, either approve or not approve proposed premiums. The decision would not be subject to merits review, which is consistent with the current arrangements for approval of premiums under the PHI Act.
1.74Subsection 66-10(6) clarifies that if an application is made outside the Premium Round the Minister would only be able to approve the proposed premiums if the insurer does not propose to increase the premiums or if the approval of increasing premiums and/or making a designated change are in the public interest.
1.75Subsection 66-10(9) states that if the Minister refuses to approve the proposed premiums, the Minister must table their reasons for refusal in each House of the Parliament within 15 sitting days of that house.
1.76Subsection 66-10(12) concerns the delegation of the Minister’s powers. Similarly to new subsection 66-8(12), the delegate can only decide to approve the premium. If a delegate considers the premium should not be approved, it must be referred to the Minister for their consideration.
New section 66-11 - Further information about applications under sections 66-8 and 66-10
1.77The purpose of section 66-11 would be to allow the Minister to request further information about an insurer’s application under sections 66-8 and 66-10. Subsections 66-11 (1) (2) (3) and (4) specifies the period to provide further information and under which circumstances the Minister is not required to have regard to the information.
New section 66-12 – Resubmission of applications under sections 66-8 and 66-10
1.78Section 66-12 sets out the process for insurers to respond if the Minister is considering refusing an application made under sections 66-8 or 66-10.
Part 2 – Application provisions
1.79Item 15 sets out when, and to what, the provisions in Part1 of Schedule 2 of the bill would apply. It specifies that sections 66-8 to 66-12 would come into force on Schedule 2 commencement day and would also apply to new products and to designated changes made on or after commencement day.
1.80Item 17 provides for existing private health insurance policies to continue to have premiums in place after commencement of the Schedule 2 amendments, despite those premiums not being approved under the new provisions. This saves the policies from ceasing to be complying health insurance policies.
Impact Analysis
1.81The Department prepared an impact analysis on regulating insurance premiums, which was formally assessed by the Office of Impact Analysis.The Impact Analysis comprises the consideration of the options of keeping the status quo or amending the PHI Act to require insurers to seek the Minister’s approval for premiums for new products, and existing products for which cover or value to consumers has been reduced. It also includes a summary of the consultations held with the industry.
Consultations
1.82 Between 19 September and 17 October 2025, the Department held a public consultation on its Consultation Hub entitled ‘Regulating product openings for private health insurance’. It invited feedback on the requirement for insurers to seek Ministerial approval for new product premiums. Seventeen responses were received and feedback included:
concerns from insurers and actuarial groups about the additional regulatory burden associated with having to apply to the Minister for the premiums of new products, and reduced flexibility to open new products outside of the Premium Round;
insurers suggesting that only premiums that met a narrow definition of ‘product phoenixing’ should be subject to Ministerial approval (as opposed to all new product premiums);
insurers were of the view that the proposed reform will encourage insurers to take other measures to protect their financial viability and overall competitiveness; and
broad support for the proposal and a call for stronger action against phoenixing from the Australian Medical Association (AMA), CHOICE and private hospital peak bodies.
1.83The Department also consulted with the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority, the Private Health Insurance Ombudsman and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission ‘to ensure any prudential, competition and consumer matters were appropriately addressed’.
1.84In response to the feedback received, the Department sought to minimise the additional regulatory burden on insurers by allowing the Minister to delegate to the Department the power to approve (but not reject) certain class(es) of applications received outside the Premium Round that are likely to be in the public interest.
1.85Further, the Department advised that a recent consultation on potential implementation, including an industry wide question and answer session and individual discussions, is helping the Department and insurers prepare for these reforms.
Compatibility with human rights
1.86The bill’s Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights (the statement) noted that the bill is compatible with the human rights and freedoms recognised or declared in the international instruments listed in section 3 of the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011.
1.87The statement explained that the bill engages the following human rights:
Right to Health – Article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR);
Right to Privacy – Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR);
Rights of Equality and Non-Discrimination – Articles 2, 16 and 26 of the
ICCPR and Article 2(2) of the ICESCR;
Right to an Effective Remedy – Article 2(3) of the ICCPR;
Right to the Presumption of Innocence – Article 14(2) of the ICCPR; and
Right to Freedom of Expression – Article 19(2) of the ICCPR.
1.88The statement clarified that the bill includes adequate privacy safeguards to ensure that the restriction on the right to privacy is reasonable and proportionate. The authorisations to publish information are necessary and proportionate to achieve the objective of promoting the right to health.
1.89Further, the statement concluded that the bill is compatible with human rights as it promotes the right to health and the right of equality and non-discrimination, and maintains the right to privacy, right to an effective remedy, right to presumption of innocence and right to freedom of expression.
Consideration by other committees
1.90Both the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights (Human Rights Committee) and the Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills (Scrutiny Committee) have made comments on the bill as summarised below.
Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights
1.91The Human Rights Committee considered the bill in its second report of 2026, tabled on 4 March 2026. The Human Rights Committee noted the bill may expand the authorisation relating to the use and disclosure of information in the public interest. As such, it reiterated the previous comments and recommendations it made in its Report 6 of 2025 when it examined the provisions authorising the disclosure of information in the public interest in the Regulatory Reform Omnibus Bill 2025 (now Act). It recommended that the government consider undertaking a foundational review of the HI Act and the PHI Act for their compatibility with the right to privacy.
Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills
1.92The Scrutiny Committee considered the bill in its Scrutiny Digest 3 of 2026 tabled on 25 February 2026. It made comments on the bill, in the following areas.
Immunity from civil liability
1.93The Scrutiny Committee sought the minister’s advice as to whether it is intended that the immunity from civil liability in proposed sections 124ZZA and 324-15 of the bill would extend to the Commonwealth as a whole; and if applied to the Commonwealth as a whole the justification for it and recourse available to affected individuals.
1.94In his response, the Minister advised that the immunities in proposed sections 124ZZA and 324-15 are not intended to extend to the Commonwealth as a whole but aim to protect the Secretary, or persons acting under their authority, from civil proceedings. The Minister advised that the immunities would not remove appropriate avenues of recourse for affected parties, including judicial review of decisions concerning the publication of information. The response also clarified that the Department would establish an administrative process to enquire about or seek review of information that is published.
1.95The Scrutiny Committee noted the response and reiterated its concerns, drawing to the attention of senators and the Senate as a whole the appropriateness of Schedule 1, item 1, proposed sections 124ZZA and Schedule 1, item 2, proposed section 324-15 providing an immunity on the Secretary from civil proceedings for the publication of information under Schedule 1, item 1, proposed section 124ZY and Schedule 1, item 2, proposed section 324-5 of the bill.
Exemption from disallowance
1.96The Scrutiny Committee made comments on the exemption from disallowance of the approved application period for consideration of premiums and drew to the attention of senators and the Senate as a whole the appropriateness of proposed subsection 66-6(3) exempting determinations that alter the approved application period from disallowance.
Fees in delegated legislation
1.97The Scrutiny Committee made comments in relation to the proposed provisions providing a power to charge a fee for making applications for premium approval, which would be calculated within delegated legislation. The Scrutiny Committee sought the minister’s advice as to why it is appropriate for proposed paragraphs 66-8(2)(b) and 66-10(2)(b) to provide that applications must be accompanied by a fee that is to be determined by delegated legislation and why it would not be appropriate to include a limitation on the amount of the fee that may be set in delegated legislation.
1.98In his response, the Minister advised empowering delegated legislation to include a fee is a key element in the bill as it would encourage private health insurers to submit applications within the Premium Round. The Minister explained that because new factors will become apparent as the amended legislation is implemented, it is appropriate that the methodology for determining the amount of a fee is provided in delegated legislation. The Minister also explained that it would not be appropriate to set a limit on the amount of fees that may be charged in the bill because fees will be determined on the expected cost to government and it is, at present, difficult to anticipate the number and complexity of applications.
1.99The Scrutiny Committee considered the response and recommended that consideration be given to amending the bill to provide guidance that the amount of fee that may be provided for in delegated legislation by Schedule 2, item 8, proposed paragraphs 66-8(2)(b) and 66-10(2)(b) of the bill is to be limited to cost recovery.
1.100The Scrutiny Committee also drew to the attention of senators and the Senate as a whole the appropriateness of Schedule 2, item 8, proposed paragraphs 66-8(2)(b) and 66-10(2)(b) of the bill providing that an application fee be prescribed in delegated legislation.
Conduct of the inquiry
1.101Details of the inquiry were made available on the committee’s website. The committee also contacted a number of organisations to invite them to lodge written submissions by 24 March 2026.
1.102The committee received 31 submissions, which are listed at Appendix 1 of this report. The committee held one public hearing in Canberra and via videoconference on 7 April 2026. A list of witnesses who gave evidence at the public hearing is available at Appendix 2.
Note on references
1.103References to Committee Hansard in this report are to proof transcripts. Page numbers may vary between proof and official transcripts.
Acknowledgements
1.104The committee thanks the organisations and individuals who contributed to the inquiry by making written submissions and appearing as witnesses at the public hearing.