Wednesday, 29 October 2025

 Sarah MANSFIELD (Western Victoria) (15:57): I rise to move my notice of motion 1118 regarding Cohealth. I move:

That this house notes that:

(1)   Cohealth have announced they will end their GP and counselling services in Collingwood, Fitzroy and Kensington in December 2025 and close their Collingwood clinic in 2026;

(2)   this will impact 12,500 community members who receive affordable, wraparound health services at Cohealth;

(3)   community health centres play a critical role in our healthcare system, despite receiving only 0.3 per cent of Victoria’s health infrastructure spend;

(4)   Cohealth’s closure and reduction in services will be disastrous and will result in increased poverty, disadvantage, poor health and hospital overloading;

(5)   since 2019 Cohealth has requested support from the Victorian government to rebuild their Collingwood health centre, alongside a fully funded build of 50 co-located community homes;

(6)   the community health sector has been saying for years that the Medicare model for funding bulk-billing is not appropriate for the complex services their centres provide;

(7)   Infrastructure Victoria has recommended that the Victorian government increase community health funding to three per cent of their health infrastructure budget;

(8)   operational funding for primary and community health funding is a shared responsibility between federal and state governments;

and calls on the Victorian government to commit, by 30 November 2025, to funding a $4 million rescue package to save the GP and counselling services at all three centres and a minimum of $25 million to upgrade the Collingwood building, and to negotiate a shared commitment with the federal government for a long-term funding model for community health.

I quote:

Without Cohealth, I would have no way to access the kind of holistic, wraparound healthcare and support that has helped me survive. Cohealth has been the one consistent and compassionate support in my life through some of my darkest chapters. Please don’t let these closures go ahead. The impact on people like me will be devastating.

This is part of correspondence we received from a local resident and client of Cohealth, who has been supported through trauma, depression, anxiety, family violence, a complex rheumatological condition, mobility impairment and rejection from other health services. Their story is one of countless we have heard since the announcement by Cohealth that they would be ending their GP services and closing their Collingwood facility.

In 2019 Cohealth in Collingwood asked for assistance from the government to repair and upgrade their crumbling, leaking community health centre and build 50 co-located community homes at their Collingwood site. They were asking for a government contribution of $25 million for a project that would benefit the broader community in both a health and a housing crisis. Every year since, that project has been put on the government’s radar at budget time, but the government has consistently turned its back on funding this project. I have personally done so. I have personally raised this with the government in my first months in this place, following a visit to Cohealth’s Collingwood site with the member for Richmond, where we saw the dilapidated state of the building, which was literally falling apart. There were wide cracks in the walls, which meant that consultations could be heard from the tearoom, and parts of the site even had to be shut down in 2022 due to leaks in the ceiling. Yet repeated requests to the state government for funding have been ignored.

Along with the community, Cohealth has advocated for years to develop 365 Hoddle Street. Over the past few years they have led a dedicated campaign and community consultation process. They have created a public petition to build support and partnered with Unison housing to call for an integrated health and housing hub. They have made submissions to government inquiries and engaged with decision-makers about the urgent need for funding for modern facilities. Despite their efforts, Cohealth have not received the funding needed for this. They have also repeatedly advocated, along with the rest of the community health sector, for increased funding to support their operational costs, which are the responsibility of both the state and federal governments, and yet these calls too have been ignored. In December 2025 GP services at Cohealth’s Hoddle Street, Collingwood; Brunswick Street, Fitzroy; and Gower Street, Kensington, sites will end. All other services, such as allied health, will also close at the Collingwood site from mid-2026 but will be relocated to the Fitzroy site. In June 2026 Cohealth Collingwood will close altogether. On Cohealth’s website they say:

This is not an easy decision to share. For many years, we have advocated, alongside community, for the funding needed to provide better care from a safer health centre.

We cannot continue delivering services from the Collingwood site and cannot afford the significant upgrades the site needs to give care our staff, clients and communities deserve. Therefore, we are closing the site.

Cohealth’s clinics in Collingwood, Fitzroy and Kensington see more than 46,000 patients each year across these three sites. Nearly 70 per cent of these people hold concession cards. The closure of the Collingwood, Fitzroy and Kensington GP clinics will mean tens of thousands of people will now no longer have access to their doctor, with around 25 doctors and counsellors to be made redundant at a time when demand for community health services is at an all-time high.

Patients who attend Cohealth’s GP clinics are among the most vulnerable in the community, and there are simply no other options for them to access essential care from GPs. A physician at St Vincent’s wrote to us, saying:

To be clear, these people will not be able to find new GPs in Melbourne’s inner East; most existing practices are closed to new patients. If the closure of Kensington CoHealth’s GP programme is included with the Collingwood and Fitzroy sites, approximately 12,000 of Melbourne’s most vulnerable patients will be without a GP. This is simply unacceptable.

While state and federal governments buck-pass and try to absolve themselves of their role in this situation by hiding in the complexity of community health funding, the reality is they do play a key role. Community health funding – both infrastructure and operational funding – is heavily reliant on state government, and Victorian Labor are well aware of this. While Medicare, a federal funding system, supports GP services, fee-for-service Medicare billing does not suit the kind of work that these community health centres deliver, and this is something the federal Labor government are also all too aware of. They smile in front of novelty-sized Medicare cards, pretending to be the champions of universal health care, but have allowed the continued privatisation and erosion of access to primary care that is funded by the government. Both levels of government have failed to address the funding needs of these services despite being well aware of the problems for many years. What makes it particularly galling is that investing in community health is just about the best bang for buck you can get in the health system. The holistic care it provides keeps people well in the community and avoids countless hospital attendances. If all you care about is the return on investment alone in dollar terms, that should be enough incentive to fund these services. For every dollar spent you get over $14 return in value to the community and benefit to the broader community.

Victoria spends $27 billion a year on health, and less than 0.5 per cent is directed to community health. Infrastructure Victoria’s health report from August this year highlights that, despite providing services to one in 10 Victorians, registered community health receives just 0.3 per cent of the Victorian government’s $2 billion annual health infrastructure budget. The chronic failure to fund community health infrastructure is plain to see. Nearly all community health organisations reported having at least one building in poor condition or close to the end of life. Infrastructure Victoria has recommended that the state government increase community health funding to 3 per cent of the state health infrastructure budget. That is still a very small amount of a massive budget, but it would pay off enormously to invest in these facilities. Then if we look at the services provided, community health program funding is less than 0.5 per cent of the total Victorian health budget, around $22 per Victorian. This compares to $3166 per Victorian for hospital care. And while the community health program did not get a cut in absolute terms in the last state budget, the failure to index funding and the growing demand for services mean it was effectively a cut.

Community Health First have been calling for a 10 per cent increase in funding for the community health program, which in relative terms is a tiny amount – $7.5 million a year. This is just a drop in the $31 billion state healthcare spend but would provide 60,000 more hours of care, meaning 12,000 more patients would be seen.

On Friday and Saturday last week, there were two public meetings, in Richmond and Kensington, where community members, patients and workers from Cohealth came together to express their opposition to the closure of these services. They told powerful stories about the need for these community health centres in their local communities. Kensington’s meeting had over 100 people; Richmond’s had over 300. It shows the depth of support for community health that is out there. Our local Greens MPs – Ellen Sandell, MP for Melbourne, and Gabrielle de Vietri, member for Richmond – were there to support the community. Over 5000 people have signed their community petition against the closures. These meetings passed resolutions that I also want to acknowledge, and we have modelled some of our motion on their motions. I want to thank the community for their work on this campaign. The Greens support you. We will continue to fight to save these vital community health services. I really hope that everyone in this chamber supports this motion to acknowledge how important these services are.

 John BERGER (Southern Metropolitan) (16:07): I rise to speak on the member for Western Victoria Region’s motion on GP services in Victoria at Cohealth’s Collingwood clinic site. In doing so I would like to first thank my friend the Minister for Health in the other place, Minister Thomas, for all the hard work she has done to support this sector.

The Allan Labor government has always placed health as a priority, whether it be emergency care, less urgent primary care, community organisations or any other part of our large and complex health system. This government has always taken seriously the need to invest in these services, and nothing demonstrates this government’s commitment to supporting our healthcare sector more than the 2025–26 state budget, which puts investment in frontline care as a top priority. That includes $9.3 billion for hospital care and the operationalising of nine brand new or expanded hospitals across Victoria. It also invests nearly half a billion dollars in mental health services in Victoria, particularly the mental health and wellbeing services sector, to support those in need.

This year the Allan Labor government are providing around $31 billion for the health sector because we know how important it is to invest in frontline care for every Victorian, and that includes community health organisations like Cohealth, who provide important care for patients at their Collingwood site. But even more specifically, the Allan Labor government is leading the way on several healthcare initiatives, including when it comes to urgent care clinics. Urgent care clinics are GP-led care centres where Victorians can expect quality attention in situations which are urgent but perhaps not an emergency. This includes treatment for situations ranging from mild infections and burns to suspected fractures and sprains. The budget includes $27 million for those GP-led urgent care clinics to continue their hard and essential work.

The urgent care clinics that have gone on to benefit Victorians are a result of the collaborative effort of the Allan Labor government and the federal Labor government in Canberra, who are dedicated to delivering these critical services – a collaborative effort which has stood to take pressure off emergency services and hospitals, which were being flooded with less-serious emergency cases, and to take pressure off GPs, who may not be the best to see such urgent cases with their current patient load. These clinics were the missing middle, and they helped our health system all around. This is in no small part thanks to the Victorian Labor government. By taking pressure off primary care-level clinics and emergency wards, they now have regained the capacity to deal with more urgent cases on their waitlist rather than looking after patients who should really be elsewhere.

This motion highlights the importance of Commonwealth and state responsibilities when it comes to funding, and this is something that I would like to briefly expand upon. Australia is of course a federation, with different corners of our health system taken under the wing of different levels of government. The Commonwealth coordinates national healthcare programs and jointly cooperates with the states, which themselves are responsible for such things like hospitals and frontline health services. GP clinics are for the most part, under the current convention and practice, under the purview of the Commonwealth, especially as they relate to Medicare, which is a federal program, not a state-based initiative. This is particularly important when we consider aspects such as funding, grants or subsidies. In this case it is important when we consider the proposals put forward in this motion against the scope of what the Victorian government does and what the Commonwealth is responsible for. For example, this motion makes allusions to the Medicare bulk-billing system. Medicare bulk-billing is a proud achievement of the Hawke Labor government, which fulfilled the mission set out by the Whitlam Labor government of ensuring every Australian, no matter their background or circumstances, would have their essential healthcare needs looked after. I note this because bulk-billing is a federal program. It is not administered, managed or controlled by the Victorian government; it falls outside the scope of this chamber and of this Parliament.

While I am very proud of the legacy built by the Labor government, it is not within our scope to debate and determine the scope of Medicare rebates. What we can control is what the Victorian Labor government do, and I am proud to say that we have continued to deliver the essential services we need in this state, and we have continued to support GPs and similar community health organisations. Last year the Allan Labor government launched a series of grants programs directed towards general practitioners. Specifically, this Labor government committed to investing $32 million over two years to provide core financial incentives to doctors to become GPs. Around 800 grants of $40,000 were available, with 400 grants in 2024 and 400 grants in 2025. This was all about supporting doctors to specialise in general practice in order to strengthen the primary care sector and in doing so improve health outcomes for all Victorians. The grants program was designed to help boost the number of GPs in Victoria in training enrolments and to provide $10,000 in support to the costs of exams to be undertaken during GP training. This program wraps up at the end of this year, so for anyone hoping to potentially access the scheme, now is the time to try and lock it in. The reason I raise this scheme is to highlight the Allan Labor government’s commitments to supporting GPs and the state’s network of general practitioners. Another core example is that this government gave exemptions from payroll tax to bulk-billing GPs, starting this financial year. Now if a GP clinic is bulk-billing its patients, those instances are exempt from payroll tax, taking off the burden from these businesses. This government has and will continue to consistently advocate for the best possible deal for our healthcare sector and workers, including investing in staff and frontline care.

Community health organisations play an important role in our healthcare system, and the Allan Labor government continues to provide these organisations with significant funding. Last year we invested $188 million to support the delivery of care across the state, and we will do more. We will continue to advocate for the Commonwealth to address any concerns around Medicare rebates for patients with complex care needs, which is a core element in this motion here today. We are focused on strengthening care across Victoria’s healthcare system, whether it is through our public hospitals or through our community health partners, such as Cohealth’s Collingwood site, so that every Victorian can get the essential care they need close to home. Cohealth is an important community health partner organisation that operates clinics in metropolitan Melbourne, delivering essential services at accessible locations for Victorians. Community health organisations and centres such as the Collingwood site deliver a mix of services funded by both state and federal government, such as primary care, alcohol and drug treatments and mental and social support services. That is why this Labor government will continue to advocate for sites such as Collingwood, run by Cohealth.

The Allan Labor government is working to create more connected health systems under the Health Services Plan that strengthen across the primary care sector, particularly for those living in rural and regional communities. It is a plan which builds on our commitment to building more resilient and well-resourced health systems. This plan invests in community and local health service networks to ensure people can access care closer to home and where they are in need, with geographic groupings of health services responsible for planning and managing care so that it meets the population health needs of that community. The model formalises stronger connections between specialised health professionals, ensuring every Victorian has access to specialist care expertise when they need it.

The plan outlines a system-wide reform to help meet growing demand in the health system, strengthening consistent access to high-quality care. It focuses on improving communication between services to help support general practices. The relevance of this is to understand that health systems are not only insular or an exclusionary group of independent bodies but rather an extremely holistic network of care, with domino effects across the health system. We saw during the COVID-19 pandemic how quickly overwhelmed frontline care workforces being overrun with the virus led to system-wide issues with pressure and under-resourcing. When we invest in the various aspects of our health system it not only takes pressure off other sectors, it shows how urgent care clinics are taking pressure off GP clinics. But it also delivers more primary care for Victorians, which is the very heart of this motion.

The Allan Labor government is proud of its record when it comes to investing in our health system, and in particular when it comes to supporting community health programs and organisations. We will always put our health systems first and will always advocate for Victorians to get the very best. We will always back in our frontline and primary care services, and we will continue to advocate on behalf of Victorian patients for the Commonwealth government to address any issues with Medicare rebates and those with complex care needs. But they can rest assured that the Allan government is putting them on our extensive GP network first, and we will always fight for more reliable support access for patients at these clinics.

 Georgie CROZIER (Southern Metropolitan) (16:17): I rise to speak to this motion put to the house by Dr Mansfield – an important motion, I might add, and one that the Liberals and Nationals will not be opposing. In fact I want to make some points in support of this motion, because I think Mr Berger is confused. I think he in his contribution said that Labor was continuing to advocate for Cohealth at the Collingwood site. Well, Mr Berger, this is the point of this motion, because the GP clinics are closing down and goodness knows what is going to happen to that site. If you actually read the motion properly, it states:

Cohealth have announced they will end their GP and counselling services in Collingwood, Fitzroy and Kensington in December 2025 and close their Collingwood clinic in 2026 …

The motion goes on to say, concerningly:

this will impact 12,500 community members who receive affordable, wraparound health services at Cohealth;

community health centres play a critical role in our healthcare system, despite receiving only 0.3 per cent of Victoria’s health infrastructure spend;

Cohealth’s closure and reduction in services will be disastrous and will result in increased poverty, disadvantage, poor health and hospital overloading;

since 2019 Cohealth has requested support from the Victorian government to rebuild their Collingwood health centre, alongside a fully funded build of 50 co-located community homes;

the community health sector has been saying for years that the Medicare model for funding bulk-billing is not appropriate for the complex services their centres provide;

Infrastructure Victoria –

and this is the important point I wanted to make –

has recommended that the Victorian government increase community health funding to three per cent of their health infrastructure budget;

operational funding for primary and community health funding is a shared responsibility between federal and state governments …

The final part of the motion:

… calls on the Victorian government to commit, by 30 November 2025, to funding a $4 million rescue package to save the GP and counselling services at all three centres and a minimum of $25 million to upgrade the Collingwood building, and to negotiate a shared commitment with the federal government for a long-term funding model for community health.

I read that in from Dr Mansfield’s motion because I think there are some excellent points in it. I want to go to those points in my contribution, because, as the motion says, thousands of vulnerable Victorians will lose access to those very important services.

I made this point yesterday with what was going on at St Vincent’s emergency department, which sees a lot of vulnerable patients too. When this service shuts down, where are these vulnerable patients and vulnerable people accessing these vital services going to go? They are going to access the acute system. They are going to end up in our busy EDs. They are going to have an impact on an already overstretched acute health system.

It is something that the government fails to understand as well – that when you have GPs and you have community health care and you have patients coming in and having a relationship with those providers and practitioners and carers, you get better health outcomes. Mr Berger was just raving on about the investment that the government has done and their priorities in health care. It has been a disaster, actually. He mentioned COVID. Let us not forget what the government did: they cut down surgery, they cut down cancer screening and they did a whole range of things that have put more pressure on the system since those disastrous decisions. I was saying at the time, and I will say forever more: we should have had a royal commission into COVID to understand what worked well and what did not. Shutting down cancer screening and elective surgery was going to have a massive impact on chronic disease.

I digress. A lot of vulnerable Victorians who access these community healthcare centres and GPs, as I said, develop relationships. The urgent care centres that Mr Berger was saying the government has set up to try and deal with some of the issues in our acute system as a result of all of those issues that have been building up over years, including what happened in COVID, are a bandaid measure. These vulnerable patients need, more than ever, continuity of care, and that is what these GPs and these community healthcare centres actually provide. They are an absolutely critical part of our health system. Whether it is acute care, aged care, primary care or community care, it is all part of the matrix of our healthcare system. Yet the government in their speaking notes just point to ‘We’ve invested in this’ and ‘We’ve done that’ and ‘We’ve done this’ in a very departmental, talking-point way, without understanding how the health system works. It beggars belief that the government is shutting this down and not going in to bat with the federal government to support these GPs.

I was phoned, before the announcement was made, by somebody extremely concerned about what was happening, and I could not believe it. I could not believe it because of the impact it will have on this community, which does have a lot of vulnerable Victorians. The Cohealth Collingwood area, we all know, does have some very vulnerable patients, and they were distressed.

I have had another letter from a GP, and I want to read this in, because they too understand. It reads:

[QUOTE AWAITING VERIFICATION]

I am a GP working in community health, and I am shocked and saddened to hear of the closure of three longstanding, quality, community-based Cohealth general practice clinics – Kensington, Fitzroy and Collingwood. These clinics are all located near public housing estates and provide wraparound, bulk-billing health care in areas of high need. As a GP working in community health, I know this patient group. They often experience high levels of social disadvantage, have complex physical and mental health issues and struggle to access mainstream care. They face barriers of cost, sometimes language and fear when trying to find a GP.

Again, I go to the point: having that relationship and having a GP there for this vulnerable cohort, as this GP has explained in her email to me, is what I am concerned about. And I know that the state government is going to blame the federal government – ‘Oh, GPs are primary care, that is a federal government responsibility.’ Well, no, because you have a responsibility, state government, to work with your federal counterparts to say, ‘Hey guys, we’ve got a problem here. We’ve got a very vulnerable cohort of people, and we need help and support, and we need to keep these people out of our acute healthcare system, because that is going to cost us more in the long run.’

I go back to the very point that they do not understand how the health system works. They do not understand exactly the issues around health care and the complex needs of patients. In fact, they make sweeping statements without actually understanding the full impacts.

The AMA and other medical groups, such as the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners, have all expressed deep concern. They have actually slammed this government. They can see through this government. They can see through what this government has failed to do and see the hollow words and the inability to understand the priorities of what we need to do – and that is put taxpayer money into areas within our community so that we can have better patient outcomes and better health outcomes. We hear a lot from this government about doing various programs that are working towards this, but it just flies in the face of this when there are 12,500 vulnerable Victorians that are not going to have access to this service, and I do not know where they are going to go. I think the government should answer that question. I think their next speaker should stand up in this house and tell this house and tell that community and tell Victorians where these 12,500 people are going to get care.

Community health right across Victoria is an incredibly important part of the overall health ecosystem, as I have explained. This government has ignored community health. They have ignored the preventative healthcare measures that are undertaken in these community healthcare centres. They have literally done no investment in preventative health care at all. Community health has been crying out for sufficient funding for years. In fact in terms of the ageing population and in terms of the increasing population we are going to need more community healthcare centres, not less, and this government has failed in acknowledging that piece of work and understanding.

I want to in the last 30 seconds that I have say that they bailed out when they stuffed it up last year. I am sure with the $20 million of interest repayments Victoria is paying each and every day on the Victorian debt they can find $4 million for a rescue package to save the GP and counselling services at all of these centres. It is $25 million – 1½ days of interest repayments – that this community is crying out for. Government – just do it.

 David ETTERSHANK (Western Metropolitan) (16:27): I would like to talk a little bit about the Kensington experience in this matter, because I have been a resident there for 30 years and the Kensington community health centre has been a part of that community since 1975 continuously. I will come back to the history and the nature of the organisation in a minute, but the meeting we had on Saturday morning was on very short notice. It was 10 o’clock in the morning, which is a terrible time to do a community meeting, and we still had a couple of hundred people there packed into the Holy Rosary School hall, and they were thoroughly, thoroughly outraged and frustrated. I think in large part that was due to the fact that the communication from Cohealth was atrocious, to the point where both staff and patients found out about it from the Age, from the Herald Sun, from the ABC or from their neighbours but not from Cohealth. No rationale, no FAQs, and going hand in hand with that was the entirely opaque decision-making process. As Cohealth have grown so too have their governance structures changed, and they have gone from roughly half professional and half community voices to a self-selecting board that perpetuates its own wisdom and invariably narrows its scope. I think the way in which this has been handled is just an indictment of the current organisation. They really need to take a good, hard look at themselves, because there are so many distressed people that having a simple discussion is extremely difficult.

As I said, the Kensington community health centre was set up in 1975. My first involvement with it was in about 1993, I think. I was working for the Health Services Union, and I got a phone call from the union rep saying, ‘They’re forcing us to merge with the Flemington community health centre. We’ve put a ban on the CEO; we’ve cut off her communications. We’ve set up a picket line out the front. Can the union send someone out, because we need to know what to do next,’ which I thought was pretty damned impressive. But it is a spirit of fight that has been within these community health centres for more than 50 years. And when they were merged into Doutta Galla Community Health Centre there was argy-bargy and a bit of aggro, and then that in turn ultimately got aggregated into Cohealth.

Cohealth do some great work. They have some innovative programs. They have a lot of incredibly skilled, talented and committed staff, many of whom feel betrayed by this. More than that, in many of these suburbs the community health centre is part of the fabric of the community. It is something that people come to rely on. Particularly in Kensington, where we have got a large public housing cohort, the Kensington community health centre also services a lot of residents from the Flemington flats and some from the North Melbourne flats. It has got a big catchment, and its books have been closed for years – literally one in as one dies or moves away. It is that tight, and it is also a testament to how good the service is and how restricted the resources are.

If we look at who is, for example, in the Kensington public housing estate, we see that there was put in by the government – a Labor government at the time – specifically an older persons block, so we inherently got older, complex patients. It is also a first port of call for refugees, many of whom have been through horrendous life experience prior to coming here, and they get dropped into Kensington. Up until now they could look at a suite of wraparound services, from primary health through to allied health and suchlike. This is a really, really important part of the community, and to have the rug so suddenly ripped out from under them is horrendous.

My understanding is that of the roughly 55 community health services around Victoria only seven now offer GP services, so that is a dying trade. But in those neighbourhoods and in those catchments where we are talking about older and often more complex clients, the wraparound suite of services that are provided are critical not just to caring for those people in situ but also to preventing, as has been alluded to before, admissions to hospital and to other health services. When we look at an organisation like this and we hear the state government saying, ‘We only do capital works,’ and the feds saying, ‘We do Medicare, but their model doesn’t work with us,’ it is not good enough. From a state point of view there are something like 80 programs that are run through and funded – many of them are state, and you cannot just tease out one service or another, particularly if you are offering a wraparound suite of services.

The other thing that Cohealth does is it has its doctors on salary, and those salaried doctors are fantastic. But of course if you look at, for example, the recent Medicare bulk-billing incentive from the feds, it was targeted particularly at places where you are not dealing with salaried medical officers – you are dealing with GPs who are doing a bulk-billing service, and bit under half goes to the service and bit over half goes to the GPs. At Cohealth that does not happen, because they are salaried, so that is a problem as well. If we have this rug pulled on the GP services, it is like pulling one thread in a woollen jumper: it is all going to unravel, and the quality of care and support provided will inevitably be fundamentally reduced.

In that context we support the motion that has been moved by the Greens. We thank them for kicking this off. We indicate that this is a really, really important issue for the communities that are directly affected, and I think everyone is very committed to fighting it. Kenny and Flemington have always been fighting. This will just be another encouragement and the next campaign because this is worth fighting for. The community is committed to getting this change, and I would call upon the Minister for Health at a state level and I would call on the health minister at a federal level to come together to reach some understanding about how funding shortfalls can be addressed and how the structure of Medicare incentives can be tweaked to allow for the models of care that are premised upon quality time with patients over a longer timeframe to be maintained and for that suite of wraparound services to continue to be provided to the communities concerned.

 Sheena WATT (Northern Metropolitan) (16:35): First and foremost thank you to Dr Mansfield for bringing this motion before us. I must confess that I have spent a great deal of the last week with the leadership of our community, talking to them about Cohealth and what is going on, and not just the leadership, but the community – the frontline workers, the service users, the other impacted services and others in the community health space. I have certainly very much felt the ripples of this news in Fitzroy, Collingwood and Kensington. Just like so many others, it came to me as a giant shock and frankly a scare, and I was not alone. My phone has not stopped since the news came through. Can I first and foremost thank everybody who is speaking out, everybody who has an idea that this is not what community health is about. For so many who rely on Cohealth each and every day, I send to you my understanding when you say that it feels like the rug has been pulled out from underneath you.

I was actually deputy chair of Merri Health, which is one of the neighbouring community health services, before I entered Parliament. I sat in deliberations around funding models, Medicare benefits schedule (MBS) payments, the ineffective federal system, whether or not the community health system is established with the square peg into a round hole thing that I never quite get right, but it did not seem, in my experience there, to just work. It seemed that Canberra just was not listening when were talking about the very unique circumstances of service users in community health. These are indeed community health consumers that need a little bit more than 2 minutes and 10 seconds to talk to their doctor. I know from being in conversations around the modelling of MBS and what it looks like that it is just not enough. Perhaps some folks have got to listen to that, because these calls have been going on for a very long time, and I cannot help but think of the lives of families in my community that will absolutely be affected by this.

So many have reached out to me, clearly distressed, very troubled, very lost, very hurt and very much concerned about what their future health care will look like, because for them Cohealth is the place that they can go and get culturally safe health care. They can go in and be their true self and get the service that they absolutely deserve. There are parents of young children, older residents, people with very complex medical conditions, those that have housing insecurity and others that have been using Cohealth services for a very long time. I have actually visited during some of the outreach work of Cohealth and seen the work that they do firsthand with members of our homeless community, and I know that what they do is vital. It is important and it matters, and it very much makes a difference. These people do not just vanish when Cohealth vanishes. They are left with enormous questions, starting with: what now? Because for so many, Cohealth is not just a service; it is part of their life, it is their sense of community, it is how they connect, it is a link to their wellbeing and it is a link to their care.

I just want to make sure that everyone knows that I did not get a phone call from Cohealth. It was not like I was sitting on some secret information. I too found out just the same way that everybody else did. I was not informed and did not get an early mark – just to be absolutely clear with the chamber – of their imminent closure. Nor did they reach out to attempt to have these closures avoided. This is something I am really disappointed about. I have had a long-term relationship with community health, and frankly, I thought that I deserved better, and these consumers deserve better. They deserve answers that we could have found before they went to such a drastic step. I have met with the workers affected, I have met with consumers and I have talked to board members, and I cannot tell you the kind of rage that I feel about this right now. Community health needs community to be involved. It is in the name. It is about who they are. It is about what they do. As you have said, Dr Mansfield, over 12,000 community members are provided with care by Cohealth, and the depth of the services across all of the centres is quite vast. There are mental health, dental, physiotherapy, child and family health care and general health concerns and so much more. They are really designed for easy access. They are designed for common and low-risk health concerns to reduce the burden on our health system, and sometimes they are the place that people go to when there is just not anywhere else that they feel that they can go – they often go to Cohealth.

The effects of this closure will be vast. I could go on about it, but the truth is that it will be felt very deeply in the Northern Metropolitan Region. I have been talking with other elected representatives in the area, and I thank members who have attended community forums that have been held. Yes, they were held at very late notice, but the turnout from elected representatives has been incredibly strong, and I will acknowledge the member for Maribyrnong Jo Briskey, the member for Melbourne Sarah Witty, City of Melbourne Cr Davydd Griffiths, the City of Yarra mayor and deputy mayor as well as other members of the state Parliament who have been engaging with the various community forums that are taking place. I know that the message is the same: it is not on. I just want to say that there are a range of efforts that are being undertaken to see what we can do to stop this decision, because we must live up to community health and what it is about. Very foundationally, it is about the social, emotional and cultural determinants of health being part of the wraparound support services in one place, a place that provides you with the comfort to come back time and time again to get the help that you need, particularly for our most vulnerable health consumers.

I have spoken to the Minister for Health, and I know that there is a vast array of advocacy that has been happening here. Victoria is home to a very unique model of care in community health. It is something that we have held onto very tightly for many, many years when other states have long abandoned it. We believe in community health and have invested in it, and sometimes it takes a little while longer for Canberra to understand the unique and powerful role that community health plays in our state. I am entirely committed to continuing to work with whoever it is that comes to me about these concerns, because they have certainly hit home. I know that I am not giving up today or tomorrow. I thank Dr Mansfield for bringing this before us because it gives me an opportunity to say to this chamber that I too will join with you in fighting against these closures, and I have been – rather privately, I must confess, but now I am putting it on the record rather publicly.

To the board members of Cohealth and to the leadership of Cohealth, please know that there is more that you can do. I do encourage you to step up and consider alternatives, because this sudden closure is deeply saddening, and it should not be a part of the community health story at Cohealth. This government believes in community health and the community believes in community health, and it absolutely needs it. I will continue to walk with you as we take all the advocacy required to make sure that our most vulnerable health consumers and people that deserve modern, patient-centred care are at the forefront of the decision-making. For community health, whether that is Cohealth or others, right across our state, I know that a smarter outcome is possible, and I implore Cohealth to step up and meet the opportunity to change its mind for the community that most relies on it.

 Evan MULHOLLAND (Northern Metropolitan) (16:45): I rise to speak on the Greens’ motion regarding Cohealth, and it particularly mentions that Cohealth have unfortunately announced they will end their GP and counselling services in Collingwood, Fitzroy and Kensington in December 2025 and close their Collingwood clinic in 2026. Again, 12,500 community members who receive affordable wraparound health services at Cohealth – the centres play a critical role in our healthcare system, despite receiving only 0.3 per cent of Victoria’s health infrastructure spend. We heard comments from the other member for Northern Metropolitan, Ms Watt, that she wished that she had been told or given some forerunning so that they could possibly help sort this out, but we know that since 2019 Cohealth have been practically begging for additional support from the Victorian government to rebuild their Collingwood health centre alongside a fully funded build of 50 co-located community homes, with continuous requests for additional supports.

Groups like Cohealth do not make those requests for no reason: it is because there is a financial situation that they are trying to deal with. So to come in and say, ‘Oh, I’m outraged they didn’t come and see me first’ – they have been trying to see the government and making requests of the government since 2019. So to me that is just like a little bit of crocodile tears playing out regarding the situation that we find ourselves in. We know that Infrastructure Victoria has recommended that the Victorian government increase community health funding to 3 per cent of their health infrastructure budget, up from 0.3 per cent. That would be nice, that would be fair, but of course what is 0.3 per cent to 3 per cent when you are dropping over $50 billion on infrastructure cost blowouts? When you have up to $190 billion of debt, $25 million a day, over $1 million an hour just to service the interest on that debt – could you imagine what Cohealth could have done with a million dollars an hour? But this is the problem with Labor’s lack of fiscal responsibility.

So I do support this motion, and I think it is worth speaking in support of the motion by Dr Mansfield. The opposition and the Greens do not often agree, but where we can, it is on the idea that this Labor government’s priorities are wrong. Cohealth have operated in Collingwood for 75 years and also have facilities in Fitzroy and Kensington, most of which happen to be in my electorate. Since the 1970s, Cohealth have provided primary care for the community’s most vulnerable, including people facing homelessness, refugees, people experiencing family violence and people dealing with trauma and chronic illness. It has been reported that as a result of this government’s refusal to fund the service, 25 doctors and counsellors will be made redundant, and around 12,500 Victorians who receive care will be impacted. Cohealth will cease its GP services and general counselling at its Collingwood, Fitzroy and Kensington sites in December 2025. This is despite Cohealth chief executive Nicole Bartholomeusz saying that several compounding issues made it impossible to sustain services. She said:

We have a $4 million gap between what we receive from Medicare and what the cost is to deliver our services.

It’s been death by a thousand cuts.

She said that the service had also struggled with the dilapidated Collingwood building, which had a leaking roof and uneven floor, and there were also structural issues affecting the buildings, which were in desperate need of repair, with leaks in the roof and buckets catching water during storms. We saw the media response from a Labor spinner:

The government remains committed to ensuring that all Australians, particularly those who are most vulnerable, can continue to access high-quality, affordable primary care close to home …

As is so often the case, Labor’s rhetoric does not match their action, or in this case the lack of action that has come from this government. This is one of their core responsibilities – shared, of course, with their Labor mates in Canberra – and they are shirking it.

I join Dr Mansfield in calling on the government – who always seem happy to find money for twisted priorities like the Suburban Rail Loop – to commit to a $4 million rescue package that will allow Cohealth to continue to offer their vital services for those most in need across my electorate in the northern suburbs. Again, it is $4 million. When you weigh that up against $50 billion in infrastructure cost blowouts, or what is very likely going to be close to $50 billion for the Suburban Rail Loop East, this chamber is asking for $4 million for community health care. These are the twisted priorities of the minister. They will say, ‘They should have come to us.’ They are spending billions after billions of dollars on both blowouts and warped priorities like the SRL East, which we know is not going to cost between $30 billion and $34 billion. Literally no expert the minister can find will repeat that claim, because it is not going to happen. It is not going to happen because their cost–benefit analysis is baked in from –

Ryan Batchelor: On a point of order, President, I am struggling – really struggling – to understand what the Suburban Rail Loop has got to do with the motion.

The ACTING PRESIDENT (Michael Galea): I will invite Mr Mulholland to come back to the motion.

Evan MULHOLLAND: I was talking about the fiscal parameters in which the government, even though they have had requests since 2019, cannot find money for community health care. The fiscal parameters in this state are dire, and the government have warped priorities where they allow and have been complicit in infrastructure cost blowouts – in blowouts across most government departments, in blowouts in the public sector – despite promises to rein that in. We see yet another promise that is going to come in in December with the Silver review, yet it cannot find $4 million to keep Cohealth going, to keep vital healthcare services going in the northern suburbs. These are the warped priorities that are going on with this government at the moment. Yes, the Suburban Rail Loop is connected to that. Yes, other infrastructure cost blowouts are connected to that, because when Labor cannot manage money – and they cannot manage money – it is Victorians that pay the price. It is Victorians that need vital health care in the inner city of Melbourne that are paying the price, because when they blow out the budget, somebody has to pay for that. It is my community in the northern suburbs that are paying for that. The fact that you cannot find $4 million is shameful. And it is shameful for Ms Watt to come into the chamber saying, ‘I’m outraged that they didn’t tell me.’ They have been asking since 2019 for additional funding. They do not ask that for no reason. So spare me the crocodile tears from the other side about the situation that we are in right now.

 Ryan BATCHELOR (Southern Metropolitan) (16:55): I am very pleased to rise to speak on Dr Mansfield’s motion about Cohealth and the decision that Cohealth has announced – that they will end their GP and counselling services in Collingwood, Fitzroy and Kensington in December of this year and close their Collingwood clinic next year. I want to acknowledge the very passionate contributions that have been made by many in the chamber who obviously care very deeply about the quality service that our community health services provide to those in the communities that they represent.

I echo the words of my colleague Ms Watt, who I think very clearly outlined, as a government member in this region, what she has been doing in terms of engagement with this particular independent community health service and the decision that the board of that health service has taken with respect to their plans for the provision of their primary care services, particularly their GP and counselling services. I can echo Ms Watt’s comments that we know that not just with Cohealth and not just in the northern suburbs of Melbourne but right across Melbourne and right across Victoria the Victorian government understands the incredibly important role that these community health services play in various parts of our community and in various different ways. I have certainly engaged extensively with the community health providers in the Southern Metropolitan Region, particularly as they have recently gone through a merger of various community health providers to integrate into the Better Health Network in Southern Metropolitan Region. Certainly a pattern of consolidation and merger has occurred across the sector.

This particular case obviously arises because of decisions that the Cohealth board have taken with respect to the challenges that they see in their continuing, as an organisation, to provide GP services at these locations in this way. That is by no means the totality of the services that they provide. The funding and support that comes from the Victorian government to support the range of other services – support services and community-based services – that this community health network, Cohealth, provides and that other community health networks provide is not what is in question here. The Victorian government’s support for community health and support for this community health service and others is not what is in question here, because the programs that we fund are continuing to be funded.

The challenge that Cohealth have described in their operating model, which has led them to make this decision, arises because of the way that federal funding of our primary healthcare system works. It is a fact that our health system in Australia and in Victoria is the product of agreements between the Commonwealth and the state about the provision of different types of services. You will forgive me if I do not have the current acronym of the name of the health agreement in my head; it has had many over many years. Essentially we have an agreement and an understanding in this country that there are certain services that are provided by the state and there are certain services that are provided by the Commonwealth. For example, the provision of public hospitals in this country is delivered by the state.

There are a range of community-based support services that are delivered and funded by the state, and some by the Commonwealth. But primary healthcare – the provision of general practice, Medicare – that is the responsibility of the federal government. The settings that exist in the funding of primary care and the way that Medicare funding works in this nation – not just in this state, but in this nation, because these are rules that apply nationally – clearly are not working for Cohealth. That is something that the federal government should fix. Funding arrangements under the Medicare system, the Medicare benefits schedule, mean that they are not working for Cohealth and are matters that require attention and a resolution by the Commonwealth. That is who needs to step in and provide a lasting fix to the funding model for the continued provision of general practice services in community health settings in Victoria.

Whether it is Cohealth or others, if community health providers and the boards of community health organisations are demonstrating that they have got issues with the federal government’s funding model, we join them in saying the federal government should fix it. We join them in saying this because we know that the cohorts that our community health sector provides the most support and benefit to are often the most disadvantaged and vulnerable in our community. While I am not as familiar as other speakers are with this particular community health service and the work that it does, it would stand to reason it is performing a similar function to the contribution that others have made and what other community health providers do that I am familiar with.

If the Medicare funding model does not fully recognise the particular complexity of the general practice and primary care services that are required to be provided in these settings, then it is incumbent upon the level of government that is responsible for the provision and funding of those services and the funding arrangements that allow those services to continue in our community to step in and do something about it. They need to understand that maybe they do need to think about different ways of funding these types of health services and systems, just as they have taken decisions in other contexts to provide additional or alternative funding streams to support the ongoing provision of primary health care.

One of the things obviously that we have had an issue with in this country for several years, particularly given the way that previous federal Liberal governments took the knife to Medicare, is the issue of bulk-billing rates across the community. What we have seen from the federal Labor government since it was elected is both an unfreezing of the Liberals’ freeze of the Medicare schedules and significant new investments being made in the Medicare system to encourage more bulk-billing. This includes a tripling of the bulk-billing rebate and an additional quarterly 12.5 per cent incentive payment for eligible services that is commencing on 1 November.

I am not familiar with the decision-making of the Cohealth board and the factors that they have taken into account in deciding to close their GP services in December. I hope that those decisions and calculations have taken into account these changes that are about to commence, because they are significant and they are material. They may not be enough to support the particular complexity of the client base that the community health sector provides. If that is so, then more work needs to be done. But there are changes that are coming by way of provision of increased incentive payments to support bulk-billing by general practices at the primary healthcare level, funded by the federal government. We hope that they help support more bulk-billing in our community. Whether they are enough or not for Cohealth is a question that only the Cohealth board can answer. If it is not, then I implore the federal government to sit down with this community healthcare provider and find a way to support the ongoing provision of general practice as a part of this community health network.

 Renee HEATH (Eastern Victoria) (17:05): I rise to speak in support of Dr Mansfield’s motion 1118 today in regard to supporting Cohealth. On the odd occasion – and it does not happen very much – the Greens and the coalition join up, and that is because there is a Labor Party that is so far detached from reality – that cannot even read a motion properly – that it causes two completely opposing parties to say, ‘Hang on, I think you’ve got something wrong.’ There is no better evidence than the selective cherrypicking that Mr Batchelor just displayed, saying that this has all got to do with the board of Cohealth and that Cohealth have made this decision. But he has failed to even mention that number 5 in this motion says:

since 2019 cohealth has requested support from the Victorian Government to rebuild their Collingwood health centre, alongside a fully funded build of 50 co-located community homes …

He did not mention that at all. He just said, ‘Oh, no, this isn’t our responsibility. This is Cohealth that shut that down.’ Another thing he forgot to mention was number 7 in this:

Infrastructure Victoria –

one of their own bodies –

has recommended that the Victorian Government –

not the federal government, the Victorian government –

increase community health funding to three per cent of their health infrastructure budget …

He did not mention that at all. The fact is that if this government had not handled the budget so dismally – if we were not paying $1 million in interest alone on our repayments of the state debt that this government has racked up on the public’s credit card – it would be absolutely no problem to fulfil this ask of just $4 million. In fact, that is the amount of interest repayments we have had to pay since lunchtime today. Since coming back from lunch today, we have paid more than that amount of money in interest repayments. So when there is a government that is so dismal in balancing budgets, that is so unable to get their own infrastructure funds under control and that has not been able to stamp out corruption on their own Big Build projects, then we are going to end up in a situation like this. But what I am asking is that the government stop gaslighting Victorians and stop saying, ‘Oh, this is up to Cohealth. Oh, this is their issue,’ and actually just take responsibility and stop selectively cherrypicking the details on this as they want to.

There are a couple of things that he said that I thought were quite interesting. Mr Batchelor particularly said the Victorian government understands the very important role that community health plays. Well, it is okay to say that, but if you understand the role, then fund it. The second one is that he said this is a decision the board of Cohealth has taken. Well, if that is the case, why didn’t you respond to number 5 and number 7 of this very motion? Ms Watt said that she was also surprised, that it was offensive to her and that it was so upsetting to her. Well, she had better go to her government then and advocate for the people that she says she is standing with to make sure that this funding is replaced.

The health crisis in Victoria is out of control, and here we are talking about some of the most vulnerable and disadvantaged people not being able to access their health care. Up to 12,000 people, or slightly more, will be affected by this. I remember when I worked at the community health centre in Collingwood. The most lovely people, who relied on those services, would come in. That was around 2015 to 2017, when I was working in the community clinic in Collingwood. I absolutely loved it. There were people coming in that were vulnerable, who could not afford regular health care. They would come in and they would bring what they could. I remember when I would be brought a block of chocolate as thanks because these people could not afford to pay. These are the people that are going to be affected by decisions like this.

Mr Batchelor also said that health care is the product of an arrangement between state and federal funding – that is correct. But if our budget is so far out of control that the state cannot match federal funding, it is our state that misses out. We have seen this in education. We have seen this in health. We have seen this in many funding arrangements that require matched funding from the state. Victoria used to be the economic powerhouse, and now we are continually behind. So the truth is, if a state continues to run its economy into the ground, we are going to see more cuts like this. Rather than funding health centres, rather than building hospitals, that money is going to be redirected to interest repayments, and that is an extremely devastating place to be in in the state of Victoria.

This government has to stop using basic responsibilities as a political handball. They have now been in government for over a decade, and they are still blaming people like Jeff Kennett for their dysfunction. Well, it is time for them to get their priorities in order and start funding the things that matter: education, health and roads. These things are the very basics of what taxpayers rightfully expect from their government. So I commend the motion to the house. Thank you so much for bringing it here today.

 Jacinta ERMACORA (Western Victoria) (17:11): I want to speak on the Greens’ Cohealth motion. From the outset I want to say that the Allan Labor government understands just how essential access to affordable primary health care is for Victorians. At a personal level, I worked in a community health centre as a social worker in the past and saw just how effective early intervention can be in maintaining people’s health and in providing services within communities that are local and relationship based. We deeply value the role of independent community health, like organisations like Cohealth – organisations that have long been the backbone of our state’s approach to equitable health access.

Here in Victoria, community health organisations are unique. They are founded on the principle that health care should reach people where they are, in their communities and in settings that understand their circumstances and needs. These organisations deliver care to those who might otherwise fall through the cracks, and when I say fall through the cracks, they might otherwise end up in tertiary health care, with much more serious health conditions and much more expensive health conditions than what they might have had by approaching a community health centre. This is for people that are facing homelessness, addiction, poverty, chronic illness or disadvantage, but it is also for broader community members. It is quite a diverse mix of people who enjoy getting their comprehensive health needs met in the context of a community-based health centre. They are places of trust, inclusion and social connection, and they have earned the respect of the communities they serve.

The system receives accolades for its service, with the Victorian Healthcare Association’s (VHA) report into Victoria’s community health service model stating:

In Victoria, a key component of the primary care system is the community health service model. Victoria’s community health services have a proven track record of delivering accessible and affordable primary care services for people with complex and chronic health needs, especially those who face barriers to accessing mainstream health services.

On Friday 17 October 2025 the VHA called on the federal government to step in and provide further support to community health services across Victoria. This is because it is important to acknowledge that Victoria’s community health organisations are funded through multiple levels of government and across multiple departments.

Specifically, when I worked in community health, I was a consumer advocate. It was nothing to do with health – I am squeamish – but I worked in a community health setting. There were obviously GPs, there was podiatry and there were a whole range of funding services that came from all over, both different state departments and different federal departments as well. They do remain proudly independent in their management and governance structures, a strength that allows them to be responsive, flexible and community-driven. That independence is part of what makes them so effective. But it also means that they are vulnerable when federal policy settings change.

The recent decision by Cohealth to close its general practice component is a deeply concerning example of how Commonwealth funding arrangements can have direct and real impacts on vulnerable patients. It is important to note that this decision was not about Cohealth’s ability to secure accommodation or operational space. It was about the federal primary care funding model, a model that simply does not meet the cost of providing high-quality, bulk-billed care to the most disadvantaged Victorians. The Commonwealth has a critical role to play in ensuring organisations like Cohealth can continue to deliver bulk-billing GP services. They must be supported to navigate financial pressures and operational challenges, because these are not ordinary GP practices, they are safety nets for people with nowhere else to go.

This is why the Victorian government, alongside other states and territories, has consistently lobbied the Commonwealth to strengthen the Medicare system and make bulk-billing viable again. We know why bulk-billing has become unviable. It is because we have had a long period of conservative government who openly did not agree with the principles of the Medicare system and undermined it by freezing various elements of the financial structure of the Medicare system, making cuts to other elements and then making rules about who is eligible based on where they are working from a GP perspective as well, which impacted the community.

There is quite a big task ahead for the federal government to clean up the mess left behind by the previous coalition federal government. I do thank them for the changes that they have made so far. We did strongly advocate for measures such as the tripling of the bulk-billing rebate and the introduction of an additional quarterly 12.5 per cent incentive payment for eligible services, and they will begin on 1 November. These are positive steps, but there is more to be done to restore Medicare back to where it was before the coalition were in charge.

These are positive steps, but there is more work to ensure that the most vulnerable Victorians are not left without access to primary care. I must say this is another example of a complete refusal to understand what equality and equity means. As I have already said, some people have complex conditions and have additional needs that cost more to deliver. So sometimes in order to provide the same service to one person, it costs more than it does to another. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that, if your value set is reflected in a commitment to equality and equity.

While the federal government’s funding model has created the pressures that led to this closure, the Allan Labor government remains absolutely committed to supporting Cohealth and its clients. Our support continues through many programs we fund to assist Victorians who face complex health and social challenges. Cohealth continues to deliver specialised services funded by the Victorian government, particularly for people living with alcohol and drug dependency and for their families and loved ones. The closure of the GP component of the clinic will have no impact on access to state-funded alcohol and other drug, AOD, programs. These essential services will continue, and our Department of Health is working closely with Cohealth to ensure that the clients experience continuity of care and support throughout this transition period. Our government’s record of support for Cohealth is strong. In the 2025–26 financial year alone the Victorian government will provide Cohealth with $68.3 million in funding across the Department of Health and Department of Families, Fairness and Housing. This includes $14.9 million for programs delivered under the community health program and more than $6 million for family services, child protection and homelessness support. These are real investments that make a real difference, helping Cohealth to continue providing wraparound care that supports not just individuals but families and whole communities.

Our commitment extends beyond Cohealth. The Allan Labor government is building a stronger, more accessible primary care system across Victoria. This year’s budget delivers $27 million to continue operating 12 urgent care clinics across the state, ensuring all Victorians can access free health care when and where they need it most, taking the pressure off emergency departments. Many of those have now taken up funding from the federal government – which they should – but we were not going to let people down. So I fully support the Allan government’s commitment to primary health care, and I do not support this.

 Sarah MANSFIELD (Western Victoria) (17:21): Can I start by thanking my colleagues from across the chamber for their contributions. In particular I would like to thank Ms Watt and Mr Ettershank for sharing the experiences of communities in their electorates in the Collingwood and Fitzroy and Kensington areas respectively. I think they provided a really rich description of the importance of these services in those communities. Can I also thank Dr Heath and Mr Mulholland, who made it very clear that the closures of these clinics and the closure of the Collingwood facility should absolutely not be coming as a surprise to this government or the federal government. There has been years and years of advocacy, which has been ignored, that has led to the closure of these clinics. The government is well aware that these clinics have been in financial trouble for some time and has done nothing about it, so to say that this has all come as a surprise I think is a little bit disingenuous. So I thank them for their contributions.

Can I thank Ms Crozier, who I think did a really good job of describing the importance of holistic care and the type of care that is provided by Cohealth. I have not actually worked at a Cohealth facility, but I have worked in a similar sort of space as a GP, and I can tell you it is so different being in a place where you are not under the same time pressure, where you can give people the time that they need, where you can walk down the hallway and grab a social worker and say, ‘Look, this person needs some support with housing,’ or you can get the podiatrist and say, ‘Look, this person has been walking around without shoes on. Their feet are burnt from the hot bitumen; they really need some foot care and some shoes.’ I mean, that is a very different sort of environment to work in, and I think Ms Crozier did a great job of describing the sort of care that is provided by these clinics.

Some of the contributions did conveniently leave out the fact that one of the issues raised in the motion is the state of the Collingwood site – the infrastructure. This infrastructure spending is squarely in the state government’s remit and is something that has been ignored. There was also a comment made about alcohol and other drug services being unaffected, which is a surprise. Hopefully that is the case, but it is my understanding that it is a key service provided by these GPs. They are often prescribers and are important referrers in this space.

The other thing that I think was left out and missed in all of this is that Cohealth is not the only community health service that is in trouble. As I noted, Infrastructure Victoria has warned of the need to invest in community health infrastructure. It needs a significant increase in investment. Community Health First has for several years highlighted the need for a significant uplift in the state spend on the non-GP services provided by community health, so Cohealth may well be the canary in the coalmine. But what is clear is that there is widespread support for Cohealth and these communities across the chamber, so the question is: why is the government not stepping in? We are calling on them to provide a $4 million rescue package to give the time to come to a long-term, sustainable solution for the communities in these areas, because it is patients in these communities who will bear the brunt of these closures. It is patients and communities who should be the government’s top priority here.

Motion agreed to.