Australia’s $110 Million Diabetes Technology Gap: Why 350,000 People Are Still Locked Out of CGM

News Analysis  |  July 2026

Australia is spending more than $110 million a year on potentially avoidable diabetes hospital costs while an estimated 350,000 people remain locked out of subsidised continuous glucose monitoring technology. The 2024 Parliamentary Inquiry recommended expanding access. The 2026 Federal Budget did not fund that expansion. This delay carries a heavy price in both health outcomes and health system costs.

The report, developed with input from the Australian Diabetes Society, Diabetes Australia, NACCHO and other clinical and consumer organisations, links restricted CGM access to an estimated 15,720 potentially avoidable hospitalisations each year. It warns that continued delays risk worsening health inequities and increasing avoidable healthcare costs.

The Parliamentary Inquiry recommended expanding subsidised CGM access. The Government response noted that recommendation. The 2026 Health Budget still did not fund the expansion. This means the gap identified by the inquiry remains, and the cost of that delay is now measurable in avoidable hospital admissions.

I have lived with Type 1 diabetes for 34 years. I have worn a continuous glucose monitor since they were first invented and made available in medical trials in Australia. For the past year, I have used Automated Insulin Delivery technology that links my CGM to my insulin pump so the system adjusts my insulin in real time, automatically.

Last year I travelled to Canberra to advocate on diabetes technology access, including automated insulin delivery for people with Type 1 diabetes. Those conversations were about safety, severe glucose risk, overnight protection, family anxiety, mental load and the difference modern diabetes technology can make when people can actually access it. This new report focuses mainly on CGM access, but the principle is the same: when diabetes technology can reduce avoidable harm and improve daily safety, access should be based on clinical need and lived burden, not income, postcode, insurance status or diabetes type.

I am one of the lucky ones. I have private health insurance that helps me access AID technology, and I qualify for subsidised CGM through the NDSS. Even then, it is still expensive. The consumables, the sensor replacements, the pump supplies, they add up every month.

Most Australians do not have top-level private health insurance. Many cannot afford it. The 350,000 people currently excluded from subsidised CGM access are being locked out of the foundation technology that makes safer, modern diabetes management possible. When the NDSS does not cover your CGM and your health insurance does not cover a pump, the cost of modern diabetes care becomes prohibitive.

A national report, released in June 2026, lays out the full scale of that gap. The Cost of Inaction: Australian voices on equitable access to diabetes technology was developed with input from nine leading diabetes organisations, clinicians, policy experts and consumer representatives.

What Is CGM and AID? Understanding the Difference

Key distinction: CGM is the immediate access gap identified by the report. AID is a separate but related access problem for many people with Type 1. CGM is not the same as AID, but CGM is the foundation that makes AID possible. Without subsidised CGM and affordable pump access, neither technology is within reach for many Australians.

Who Is Missing Out on Subsidised CGM?

Immediate CGM access groups (Cost of Inaction report focus)

• People with insulin-treated Type 2 diabetes who can face serious hypoglycaemia risk but are excluded from subsidised CGM access through the NDSS.
• Women with gestational diabetes who manage a high-risk pregnancy that can require fast, careful glucose decisions. No CGM subsidy is currently available for this group.
• Adults with insulin-dependent Type 3c diabetes caused by pancreatic conditions such as pancreatitis, cystic fibrosis or pancreatic surgery. People who lose insulin production because of pancreatic disease or damage face insulin dependence but are often left out of public understanding and funding debates.

That is roughly 350,000 Australians. People who face serious daily glucose management risks but do not have access to the same subsidised monitoring technology that is already available to most people with Type 1 diabetes.

Related technology access gap

Separately, many Australians with Type 1 diabetes cannot afford insulin pumps or Automated Insulin Delivery technology. Insulin pumps are not subsidised through the NDSS. Access usually depends on top-tier private health insurance, which is out of reach for many, or on limited eligibility programmes. This is a related but distinct gap that also needs to be addressed.

Technology access gaps do not fall evenly. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities experience diabetes at disproportionately higher rates and face additional barriers to care: limited access to specialist services, higher transport costs, lower rates of private health insurance, and less continuity of support. These are the same communities least able to absorb the cost of privately funded diabetes technology. The Cost of Inaction report, which NACCHO helped develop, makes clear that expanding CGM access is an important opportunity to reduce avoidable harm and ensure people can access the same standard of care regardless of where they live.

“This report makes clear that the cost of inaction on diabetes technology access is being felt every day by Australians living with diabetes and right across the healthcare system.”

Professor Sof Andrikopoulos, CEO, Australian Diabetes Society

The $110 Million Question

The report estimates more than $110 million in potentially avoidable hospital costs linked to restricted CGM access. The 2024 Parliamentary Inquiry recommended expanding access to CGM and exploring subsidised pump access for Type 1 diabetes. The Government response noted those recommendations. The 2026 Budget included no new funding for diabetes technology. Two years of delayed action is costing the health system more than $110 million a year in avoidable hospital costs.

Professor Glen Maberly from Sydney University, who sees the impact of diabetes firsthand across Western Sydney, summed it up: “When the evidence shows better outcomes for patients alongside reduced pressure on the healthcare system, expanding access should be an obvious next step.”

Susan Carbone, a Credentialled Diabetes Educator advising NACCHO, said access to modern diabetes technology remains inequitable and that expanding access is “an important opportunity to reduce avoidable harm.”

What You Can Do Today

Reports are only as powerful as the action they inspire. Nine leading organisations have put their name behind this one. The clinical evidence is clear. The economic case is strong. What is missing is the public voice.

Here is what takes 30 seconds:

Copy the email below, paste it, and send it to your local Member of Parliament.
Find their details at aph.gov.au/Senators_and_Members

Practical Support While We Advocate for Change

If you are living with diabetes and trying to understand the technology options available, navigating CGM, pumps and AID can feel overwhelming. The book Tech Tamed offers manufacturer-neutral guidance on understanding diabetes technology without the anxiety. It is designed as a practical companion while advocacy for systemic change continues.

The Bottom Line

This is not a left or right issue. It is a safety, prevention and equity issue. CGM is already subsidised for many Australians with Type 1 diabetes because government recognised its value. The question now is whether people with insulin-treated Type 2 diabetes, gestational diabetes and insulin-dependent Type 3c diabetes should continue to be excluded when the clinical case, equity case and health system case are clear.

The immediate ask is practical: fund a staged expansion of subsidised CGM access through the NDSS. The broader technology gap must also be addressed, including pump and automated insulin delivery affordability for people with Type 1 diabetes. No Australian should be left behind because they have the wrong diabetes type, the wrong postcode, or the wrong income.

“Timely action to expand access to diabetes technology would improve health outcomes for thousands of Australians while helping build a more equitable and sustainable healthcare system.”

Professor Sof Andrikopoulos, CEO, Australian Diabetes Society

This article was informed by the report “The Cost of Inaction: Australian voices on equitable access to diabetes technology,” a national report developed with input from the Australian Diabetes Society, Diabetes Australia, NACCHO and other leading organisations working on diabetes technology access in Australia. The report was facilitated by London Agency with the support of Abbott.