The Claim
“Broke an election promise by cutting well over $15 billion per year from health funding.”
Original Sources Provided
✅ FACTUAL VERIFICATION
The claim asserts the Coalition broke an election promise by cutting over $15 billion per year from health funding. This requires verification of two elements: (1) whether an election promise was made, and (2) whether $15+ billion per year in health funding cuts were announced.
The Election Promise:
On September 6, 2013, on the eve of the federal election, Tony Abbott explicitly promised: "No cuts to education, no cuts to health, no change to pensions, no change to the GST, and no cuts to the ABC or SBS" [1]. This statement was recorded in an SBS News interview and has been widely documented [1][2].
The 2014 Budget Health Funding Changes:
The Sydney Morning Herald reported on May 13, 2014: "Despite promising before the election not to cut money for health, the Coalition will dramatically shrink the Commonwealth's share of hospital funding, cutting its annual contribution by $15 billion by 2024, with the deepest cuts beginning in 2017" [3].
The Senate Select Committee on Health confirmed in its 2016 final report that the 2014-15 Budget unilaterally cancelled the National Health Reform Agreement (NHRA) that had been signed by all states and territories in 2011. The government's own budget papers projected this would "save over $57 billion between 2017-18 and 2024-25" [4].
The Parliamentary Budget Office estimated that if the Gillard-era NHRA funding formula had been maintained, states might have received an additional $56 billion for hospitals for the period July 2017 to June 2025 [5].
However, ABC Fact Check assessed similar claims and found them "misleading" because the cuts were not scheduled to take effect until July 2017, and the Coalition government had not detailed its plans beyond that date. The fact check noted that "something cannot be taken away if it was never given in the first place" referring to the fact that Labor's NHRA funding commitments were projections for future years that had never been budgeted [5].
Missing Context
The claim omits several important contextual elements:
1. The mechanism of the "cuts":
The $15 billion figure represents reduced projected spending compared to the NHRA formula, not an absolute reduction from current funding levels. The 2014 budget replaced the NHRA's activity-based funding formula (which included 9% annual growth) with indexation based on CPI plus population growth (estimated at 4.5% annually) [4][5].
2. Timeline of implementation:
The deepest cuts were not scheduled to begin until July 2017, three years after the budget announcement [3][5]. The immediate 2014-15 budget included over $200 million in cuts to hospital reward payments for performance targets [3].
3. Partial reversal:
In April 2016, the Turnbull government negotiated a COAG agreement that partially restored funding, providing an additional $2.9 billion between 2017-18 and 2019-20 with growth capped at 6.5% per year [4].
4. Budget context:
The 2014 budget was delivered amid concerns about rising deficits and government debt, with the government characterizing the changes as "savings" rather than "cuts" [6].
Source Credibility Assessment
The original sources include:
- Sydney Morning Herald: Mainstream Fairfax Media publication, reputable but generally center-left editorial stance
- Business Insider: Business-focused publication, generally factual reporting
- Croakey: Health policy blog, tends toward advocacy for increased health funding
- YouTube: Video sharing platform, credibility depends on content creator
The SMH and Business Insider sources are credible mainstream media. Croakey, while knowledgeable about health policy, has an advocacy orientation that may influence framing. The YouTube source cannot be assessed without knowing the specific content.
Labor Comparison
Did Labor do something similar?
The health funding issue traces back to the Rudd-Gillard Labor government's National Health Reform Agreement (NHRA) of 2011. The NHRA was designed to increase the Commonwealth's share of hospital funding from 45% to 50% from July 2017, with activity-based funding replacing block grants [4].
Labor's NHRA was itself a significant reform that shifted federal-state health funding arrangements. The Coalition's 2014 changes unilaterally abrogated this agreement.
The Senate Health Committee noted that the NHRA "had been signed by governments of all political persuasions" and its unilateral cancellation "did serious damage to Commonwealth-state relations" [4].
There is no direct equivalent of the Coalition's $15 billion hospital funding reduction in recent Labor history. However, Labor governments did face criticism for other health-related cost-cutting measures, including the proposed $7 GP co-payment (which was proposed by the Coalition but never implemented) and various efficiency dividends across health programs.
Balanced Perspective
The breach of promise is well-documented:
Tony Abbott's September 6, 2013 statement that there would be "no cuts to health" was an unambiguous election promise, made on the eve of the election [1][2]. The 2014 budget's hospital funding changes directly contradicted this commitment.
However, the framing requires nuance:
"Cuts" vs reduced growth projections: The $15 billion figure represents the difference between projected funding under Labor's NHRA formula versus the Coalition's CPI+population indexation formula. Actual Commonwealth hospital spending continued to increase in nominal terms, rising from $13 billion in 2012-13 to $16.8 billion in 2015-16, with projections to reach $20.7 billion by 2019-20 [5].
Budget repair context: The 2014 budget was explicitly framed as a "budget repair" exercise following the Global Financial Crisis stimulus and perceived structural deficits. The government characterized these as "savings" rather than "cuts" [6].
Never fully implemented: The most significant reductions (from July 2017) were never fully implemented as originally announced. The 2016 COAG agreement partially restored funding, and subsequent budgets modified the arrangements.
State responsibility debate: The Coalition argued that public hospitals were primarily a state responsibility and that the extent of Commonwealth funding "blurs these accountabilities and is unaffordable" [4].
Comparison across parties:
Breaking election promises on health spending is not unique to the Coalition. Both major parties have made pre-election commitments on health that were subsequently modified or abandoned due to budgetary pressures. However, the Abbott government's 2014 budget was particularly notable for the scale of the proposed changes and their direct contradiction of explicit pre-election promises.
PARTIALLY TRUE
6.0
out of 10
The claim is partially true but requires significant qualification. Tony Abbott did explicitly promise "no cuts to health" before the 2013 election, and the 2014 budget did announce changes that would reduce projected hospital funding by approximately $15 billion annually by 2024 compared to Labor's NHRA formula. This represents a clear breach of the election commitment.
However, the $15 billion figure represents a reduction in projected future spending under a specific formula, not an absolute cut from baseline funding. Commonwealth hospital funding continued to increase in nominal terms. Furthermore, the deepest cuts were scheduled for 2017 onwards and were never fully implemented as originally announced, with partial restoration via the 2016 COAG agreement.
The claim is factually accurate in its core assertion about the broken promise and the announced funding reduction, but the framing as simple "cuts" oversimplifies the complex indexation changes and projected-vs-actual spending distinctions.
Final Score
6.0
OUT OF 10
PARTIALLY TRUE
The claim is partially true but requires significant qualification. Tony Abbott did explicitly promise "no cuts to health" before the 2013 election, and the 2014 budget did announce changes that would reduce projected hospital funding by approximately $15 billion annually by 2024 compared to Labor's NHRA formula. This represents a clear breach of the election commitment.
However, the $15 billion figure represents a reduction in projected future spending under a specific formula, not an absolute cut from baseline funding. Commonwealth hospital funding continued to increase in nominal terms. Furthermore, the deepest cuts were scheduled for 2017 onwards and were never fully implemented as originally announced, with partial restoration via the 2016 COAG agreement.
The claim is factually accurate in its core assertion about the broken promise and the announced funding reduction, but the framing as simple "cuts" oversimplifies the complex indexation changes and projected-vs-actual spending distinctions.
📚 SOURCES & CITATIONS (6)
-
1
Abbott Promises No Change To GST, No Cuts To Education, Health, Pensions, ABC Or SBS
Video of Opposition Leader Tony Abbott promising no cuts to education, health, pensions, the ABC and SBS, and no change to the GST.
AustralianPolitics.com -
2
Then and now: the Abbott government's broken promises
On the eve of the 2013 federal election Tony Abbott promised no cuts to education, health, or the ABC and SBS, and no changes to pensions. Fairfax Media looks at how those promises fared in the Abbott government's first budget.
The Sydney Morning Herald -
3
Federal budget 2014: Commonwealth to slash share of hospital funding
Billions of dollars will be slashed from already-strained public hospital budgets under plans that could lead to huge increases in waiting times for surgery and emergency treatment.
The Sydney Morning Herald -
4
Senate Select Committee on Health - Chapter 3: Commonwealth hospital funding
Chapter 3 Commonwealth hospital funding The 2014 budget did serious damage to Commonwealth-state relations and the confidence with which states could plan and manage health services. It did this by abrogating an agreement about public hospital funding whi
Aph Gov -
5
Fact check: Has the Government cut billions out of public hospitals?
Labor has used the second week of the election campaign to highlight the Government's record on health spending. Opposition health spokeswoman Catherine King said the Liberals had been "a disaster when it comes to health". "They have cut billions out of public hospitals," she told ABC radio. ABC Fact Check investigates.
Abc Net -
6
Fact Check: Has the Coalition cut $14 billion from public schools?
Labor says Scott Morrison cut $14bn from public schools while treasurer. Is that correct? RMIT ABC Fact Check investigates.
inkl
Rating Scale Methodology
1-3: FALSE
Factually incorrect or malicious fabrication.
4-6: PARTIAL
Some truth but context is missing or skewed.
7-9: MOSTLY TRUE
Minor technicalities or phrasing issues.
10: ACCURATE
Perfectly verified and contextually fair.
Methodology: Ratings are determined through cross-referencing official government records, independent fact-checking organizations, and primary source documents.