Seems like the tl;dr is that profits of pharmacies is the highest priority.
Under the changes to take effect from 1 September, about 6 million Australians will be able to collect two-for-one scripts for 320 common medicines, leading to savings of up to $180 a year for each medicine.
The move will save patients more than $1.6bn over the next four years, but is estimated to cost pharmacies $1.2bn due to less frequent dispensing fees.
The Pharmacy Guild has lobbied intensely against the policy, seeking compensation from the government and warning of staff cuts and fee increases for services such as packing Webster packs for elderly patients.
In in-store campaign material, pharmacists have claimed the policy has contributed to medicine shortages and urged patients to blame the prime minister, Anthony Albanese.
Coalition talk a big game about "small government" but actually they're a huge overweight slob that exists only to separate you from your money and give it to businesses.
The human representation of the LNP would be Clive Palmer and Gina Reinhardt's love child abomination
This shit just pissed me off.
It's really hard for me to go to the pharmacy due to chronic pain and just getting there in general. So being able to dispense two at a time would be helpful as.
Liberals are absolute scum.
And what a lot of people don’t appreciate is that often it’s not just one drug. When you’ve got serious medical shit going down you might be on many drugs. That’s many scripts and something running out every week or two it feels. So this really helps.
I'm all for it but wish that more drugs were on it. Some of my meds are there but some aren't. So it'll still be monthly visits to the pharmacy for those things.
Oh well, baby steps
Yep. I take about four different types of medication, and while they're cheap because of my concession card, it still stacks up, and I have to remind doctors for repeats, because I also just hate going to the doctors to get script refills.
This policy would genuinely improve my life and reduce barriers to accessing essential medications. That's what good government policy is supposed to do.
I've actually been able to do this occasionally in the past. I tend to be very drug-tolerant (and it sucks) and for a couple of my meds my GP called up medicare and the prescription was modified so I could do this.
I wonder if this is a simplification of that process?
yeah, my doctor has to regularly call up (medicare/the PBS/someone) to have my script generated "on authority" so that I can receive x amount of boxes of something at once (as my dose for that medication falls between two different mg levels of what is produced and boxed).
if this didn't happen, i would have to get two seperate scripts for different strengths of the same medication and be questioned on it every month, or would have to get one box of the lower strength medication, use the whole box and return to the pharmacy every week (and therefore got to the doctors for new repeats every 6 weeks instead of months).
now the second situation might seem unrealistic on the face of it, but imagine if that medication was a pain medication - maybe you're seeing a new-ish doctor and they're weary of prescribing it, or refuse to have it issued on authority to expand your script for whatever reason. it'd be a fucking nightmare
That's what it was, yeah it was "on authority"! It would suck because otherwise I'd have to get the prescriptions filled out every 2 weeks which was a PITA. (even monthly is a PITA...)
Update: The senate has voted down the attempt by the Coalition to block the changes, so it will go ahead as planned.
Although the Coalition is apparently continuing to push this farce:
McKenzie immediately announced that the Coalition had lodged “another disallowance” motion that could see the measure put to a vote in the week of 4 September.
great news. such a stupid thing to try and block especially as the coalition have been crying for the government to ease cost of living pressure
I'm actually sympathetic to rural pharmacies having increased financial viability issues (although the Rural Pharmacy Maintenance Allowance will apparently be doubled in the next budget), but the Pharmacy Guild I think has run a misleading campaign, such as referring to widespread shortages. The Pharmacy Guild has a lot of power in this country, but I'm glad most people seem to support increased dispensing.
They way the Pharmacy Guild presented their case was pretty disgusting. I would have had a lot of sympathy about the issue of reducing income for pharmacies, and supported changes to make sure there are equitable outcomes for them. But the whole thing about shortages etc. and just trying to block any change was just rotten. They could have focused on making it a win/win situation - asking for an increase to their payments to make sure they are not losing money would be fair, and the changes would give more time to both customers and pharmacists. Instead of stressing about not forcing people in to their stores frequently so they can upsell them on the other dodgy shit they sell they could have focused on using that extra time to improve health outcomes, which they are constantly saying they are so vital for. If they want to keep their special privileges they get as medical professionals they should act like medical professionals and not shop owners who dispense medicine as a sideline.
For lucky people like me who won't be affected at all by this, here's a couple of quick links to explain what's going on:
Health Dept. explaination of what they are changing
Good write-up from ABC about the impact and explaining why pharmacy guild is madThe short version:
At the moment, you can only get a one-month supply of medicines at a time. The Government is adjusting this for a bit over 300 medicines prescribed for chronic, long-term patients. They'll be able to get two months' supply.
- This saves these people with some long-term medical issues from having to go to the pharmacy all the time to fill their scripts.
- The pharmacy guild doesn't like it, because they like people coming into their stores all the time. They get paid to dispense medicine and like selling you other stuff while they have you in-store.
why does lobbying always sound like blatant corruption? Lobbyist asks politician for help on something, lobbyist isn't getting it for free, they are either calling a favor (corrupt), paying for it (corrupt) and appealing to the politicians good will (lol)
pharmacy guild really turning towards the 'police union' model of industrial organisation, huh?
