The first scorecard update: what the parties have promised, and what remains unanswered
There was no shortage of agreement at the healthcare debate on 31 October that Victoria's health system needs attention. Establishing what the parties are prepared to do about it was a somewhat more complicated exercise.
AMA Victoria has now published its first assessment of the parties' positions against our ten commitments for the next Victorian Government. It draws on published policies, statements at the debate with RACGP Victoria, and correspondence received.
The first thing members will notice is the abundance of “Partly committed” ratings. This is not an indication that the parties have reached much the same position. Our ten commitments contain considerably more than ten individual proposals, and a party may support some, leave others unanswered, and oppose another, all within the same heading.
The differences are worth examining.
Hospital access: Labor has announced a $1.5 billion package to expand 12 emergency departments, recruit 1,500 health workers, and deliver 250 additional beds. These are substantial measures, but the announcement focuses on emergency department capacity and waiting for treatment. Our commitment also addresses patients who cannot be admitted because there is no staffed inpatient bed available. Improving one does not necessarily resolve the other.
The Greens have proposed more staffed hospital and rehabilitation beds, alongside expanded community health services. They have also backed a parliamentary inquiry into rural and regional healthcare, one of AMA Victoria's specific election commitments. Their proposal to redirect funding from existing hospital services towards prevention and community care needs further explanation, particularly given their commitments to additional hospital capacity.
Mental health: the Coalition has promised a $50 million workforce fund and $5 million to plan a new Parkville facility with up to 50 youth inpatient beds. Both are relevant to our priorities, although funding to plan a facility is not quite the same thing as funding to build, staff, and operate it.
Practice viability: the Coalition has promised to abolish the GP payroll tax, while the Greens supported an exemption at the debate. That is welcome, but our commitment also seeks relief for private specialists, whose practices face many of the same pressures.
Prevention and reform: the Greens have committed to preserving VicHealth and allocating 5% of the health budget to prevention. Labor has relevant prevention and digital initiatives, but its plans to absorb VicHealth and expand pharmacy prescribing remain at odds with our positions. Broad agreement that pharmacy prescribing deserves greater scrutiny is not, by itself, a commitment to change course.
One Nation has put forward proposals covering regional specialist training, transitional and rehabilitation capacity, and connected clinical records. These address elements of our commitments, although its positions on several other priorities remain unclear.
These examples explain why the scorecard needs more than ticks and question marks. Some partial commitments represent substantial proposals that fall short of our asks. Others rest on much narrower measures. The ratings alone cannot convey those differences, which is why the accompanying explanation matters.
We have credited specific proposals and relevant measures already underway, while distinguishing announcements from delivery. A question mark means we do not yet have a sufficiently clear position, not that a party necessarily opposes the commitment.
We have written to Labor, the Coalition, the Greens, and One Nation seeking responses by Friday 20 November. Their replies, together with further policy announcements, will inform our final assessment in the week before the 28 November election. We will assess the available evidence whether or not a written response arrives.
The West Party has separately confirmed its support for all ten commitments following consideration by its council. We particularly appreciate the party taking the time to consider our proposals in full and provide a clear response. That is exactly the sort of engagement we hope to encourage through this exercise. We welcome responses from other parties and candidates and will report their positions alongside the scorecard.
This is our assessment of the information currently available, and we recognise that we may not have captured every relevant commitment or fully understood the intent of every proposal. Parties may reasonably disagree with how we have interpreted their positions. We welcome corrections, clarification, and further information, and will take these into account as the scorecard is updated.
The ratings may change as more information comes to light. But the distinction we are trying to draw remains important. There is, after all, a considerable difference between agreeing that healthcare needs improvement and committing to the measures that might actually improve it.
Assessment as at 9 November 2026. Parties and candidates can contact AMA Victoria with their responses.