The Cost of Control: What a Permanent CDC Means for Health Funding

When “public-health reform” looks a lot like budget rewiring

The Albanese Government has committed more than $415 million to build a new federal health bureaucracy called the Australian Centre for Disease Control (CDC).
Supporters call it “modernisation.” We call it what it is: a permanent layer of control that Australians are paying for — without knowing what we’ll get in return.

Follow the money

According to the government’s own factsheet,

  • $90.9 million was allocated in 2023–24 to run the interim CDC,

  • $251.7 million more over four years (2024–25 to 2027–28) to establish the permanent agency, and

  • $73.3 million each year from 2028–29 for ongoing operations.

That’s roughly half a billion dollars before the CDC even starts work — with no line-item clarity on how it complements or duplicates existing State and Territory systems.

The Australian Parliamentary Budget Office confirms these funds sit outside hospital or preventive-care budgets, but it’s still unclear which programs will absorb future costs once the CDC expands.

A growing global bureaucracy — and its price tag

Overseas examples show how quickly these agencies grow.
The UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) was formed in 2021 with a promise of efficiency. Three years on, its annual spend has stretched into the billions.
In the United States, the CDC’s 2024 budget tops US $10 billion.

Australia’s version may start small, but bureaucracy rarely stays that way.
Without strict oversight, “coordination” soon becomes “control.”

Risks Australians can’t ignore

  1. Duplication & Waste – States already run disease-surveillance programs. A new Canberra office risks doubling up rather than improving outcomes.

  2. Money Away from Frontlines – Every dollar tied up in administration is a dollar not spent on nurses, regional clinics, or preventive health.

  3. Endless Expansion – Once statutory powers exist, agencies rarely shrink. The CDC Act includes no sunset clause and only a five-year review.

  4. No Clear Performance Metrics – The Explanatory Memorandum lists intentions, not targets. Australians have no way to measure value for money.

Why this matters

Health policy isn’t just about science — it’s about stewardship.
Australians fund the system; we deserve to know who benefits, who decides, and who’s accountable.
The CDC’s creation changes that equation: centralising decisions, funding, and data in Canberra, far from the communities it’s meant to serve.

This isn’t opposition for opposition’s sake. It’s about honest governance — making sure “national coordination” doesn’t become a blank cheque for bureaucracy.

Key References

Next
Next

The Unseen Deals: Why Transparency on Foreign Partnerships Matters