Two different health policies with two very different priorities have been unveiled by the major parties.
The question is, which one matters more to voters?
Labor on Sunday pledged a $2 billion boost for public hospitals, returning to the 2011 agreement the previous Labor government did with states and territories.
The coalition hit back with its plan to reform private health insurance, stamping out junk policies and creating gold, silver and bronze categories to help consumers work out what they are and aren't covered for.
It's a plan Labor leader Bill Shorten laughed off as a joke.
"If (Prime Minister Malcolm) Turnbull says that colour coding is health reform, I think he is insulting Australians."
But in the battle of the health policies, it was the coalition that had the upper hand on Sunday.
Mr Shorten couldn't have made himself an easier target, conceding he would walk away from replacing the $57 billion he's long accused the coalition of cutting from public hospitals.
It appeared to prove the coalition's argument all along, that the $57 billion was an unfunded, pie in the sky spending promise.
Health Minister Sussan Ley took her revenge.
"What they've announced today really puts an end to their own despicable scare campaign on public health.
"It was never funded. It was never deliverable."
While public hospital funding is an important issue for many, half the Australian population now has private health insurance.
Many are unhappy - about the skyrocketing fees, the confusing policies and the many exclusions.
It's a source of frustration millions of Australians are reminded of regularly when hefty fees are deducted from their bank accounts.
And that's what's likely to get their attention.
Share
