Federal Opposition Leader Bill Shorten this week labelled private health insurance ‘a con’, but health fund Bupa says people want cheaper cover that excludes some conditions.
Mr Shorten made the cost of private health cover and the quality of cover provided a major theme of his first big speech for the year. He noted many more policies now had exclusions and argued that meant consumers were getting less value for money.
National Seniors knows that the rising cost of health cover is one of members’ biggest worries. In a survey late last year, members said if private health costs went up again, three out of four of you would cancel or reduce your cover.
The federal government has announced a rise of 3.95 per cent in health insurance premiums from April this year – less than last year’s hike and the lowest for 20 years. But still a rise.
Do you think Bupa has it right when it says people are demanding private health cover with exclusions because it is cheaper. If so, why did the Private Health Insurance Ombudsman's latest report show there were 1,740 complaints about issues like exclusions.
"The main issue of concern were hospital policies with unexpected exclusions and restrictions," the ombudsman's report for last financial year said. “Some basic and budget levels of hospital cover exclude or restrict services that many consumers assume are routine treatments or standard items."
If you’ve paid private health insurance premiums for decades, do you think you should be entitled to full coverage in your later years or would you prefer a ‘bare-bones’ policy rather than nothing?