While health funding commitments from Labor and the Coalition have topped the charts this federal election, very little has been specifically earmarked for rural and remote patients or the health services that care for them, the Rural Doctors Association of Australia (RDAA) has warned.
RDAA has published a summary of the main health commitments announced by the major parties this election, and included commentary on their impact (or otherwise) on rural and remote patients and health services.
‘There have been a lot of dollars committed in the health space but most of this will flow to those living in the capital cities and large regional cities,’ RDAA President Dr RT Lewandowski said.
‘The Coalition’s announcement of an additional $100 million for rural healthcare, for 200 more regionally-based medical school places and to upgrade regional medical training facilities as well as developing a National Rural Health Strategy and setting up a Regional Australia Future Fund (that should in part benefit rural health infrastructure development), have been virtually the only rural-specific health commitments we’ve seen this election.
‘While Labor’s $8.5 billion investment in primary care (via the expansion of the bulk-billing incentive) is otherwise welcome, it will mainly support city and suburban general practices that provide short consultations and have a high patient throughput.
‘On the positive side, this will benefit Aboriginal Medical Services (which predominantly bulk-bill their patients) and provide some additional funding to assist some rural patients, but it will not apply to all consultations because bulk-billing alone is not enough to keep rural practices financially viable.
‘So unfortunately most rural patients, and many city patients too, will still need their credit card – as well as their Medicare card – when they go to see the doctor.’
Future doctors
‘We also welcome commitments by the major parties to better support and incentivise junior doctors to choose to train in general practice as their future medical career path,’ said Dr Lewandowski. ‘But again these commitments do not provide any additional advantage for those choosing to train as a GP or rural generalist doctor in rural or remote communities, so many will simply opt to undertake their GP training in the cities.’
He said said investment in training future rural doctors was a key area in which RDAA had hoped for some strong election commitments but the reality has been underwhelming.
‘While Labor announced 200 extra training positions for GPs in 2026, only 70 have been allocated to the Australian College of Rural and Remote Medicine (ACRRM) for its dedicated Rural Generalist training pathway. This is about 25 fewer places than they have filled, using one-off underspends in other areas of the training budget, over the past two years to meet demand.
‘The extra training positions allocated to the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP) for the general pathway will help to address the broader popularity of GP careers in urban areas. This lost opportunity to deliver more doctors to the bush is very disappointing,’ said Dr Lewandowski.
‘Meanwhile the extra 400 junior doctor rotations announced by Labor this election under the newly named Australian Primary Care Prevocational Program (APCPP) which has replaced the John Flynn Prevocational Doctor Program (JFPDP) are all going to be allocated to general practices in metropolitan areas.
‘These rotations enable junior doctors to experience careers in general practice before deciding on their medical career path so to not have any of these allocated to rural practices is simply nonsensical. We have been urging the government to deliver 1600 rural rotations annually through the newly named APCPP, and while Labor has committed to 1000 rotations from 2026 we will still fall well short on what is needed.’
Responsibility
‘It will be crucial for whichever party forms government to not forget their responsibility to rural and remote Australia,’ he said. ‘It’s easy to make election one-liners that going to the GP will be more affordable, but if you don’t have a GP to go to – which is the case for many rural and remote Australians – it quickly becomes a hollow promise,’ said Dr Lewandowski.
‘The next government must tread carefully in making any changes to programs or initiatives that currently underpin the renewal of the rural and remote medical workforce, or support rural patients,’ he said.
‘We don’t want to see important rural-specific programs cut in order to fund this campaign’s expensive healthcare promises that will have only a marginal benefit in rural communities.’
