Greg Hunt (Flinders, Liberal Party, Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Hansard source

I gave you a fair chance. That is to say this: where we do agree is that we don't want to see the incredible work of those who have been supporting and assisting—carers, nurses, cooks, cleaners and personal care workers—be lost, because the vast majority of people in the Australian aged-care system are doing an extraordinary job. The vast majority of people in that aged-care system are helping to save and protect lives. That is something that's it's critically important we acknowledge right from the outset.

Having said that, let me turn to some of the claims made before the royal commission and our response to the royal commission. Firstly, I think it's very important to understand that, in home care, funding has gone up at a time when there's been a 28 per cent increase on our watch in the over 70s, but our home-care packages have gone up by 230 per cent in that period. That's more than seven times the rate of increase compared with what it was under the previous government. Our funding has gone up by 360 per cent or 12 times the rate of growth than that which it was on a per capita basis under the previous government. That is a very, very important thing to understand. It's the largest increase in home-care packages and home-care funding in Australian history. It's gone from 60,000 packages to 195,000.

I also want to deal with something that I think is somewhat beneath the opposition, and I am surprised that they would go there. I would make the point that, with our elderly Australians, no matter where they are, there will be, very tragically, the passing of those people. Ninety-eight per cent of those who are seeking home care or home support have been offered packages or received support. But, of those that are seeking higher packages, the loss of life is 4.7 per cent in any one year. The loss of life in the general population for the same age group is 5.6 per cent—significantly higher. So it's a dangerous, false and misleading comparison which is utterly shown to be inaccurate by the facts. I think that that is fundamental. Any loss at any time is agonising. The actual rate of loss is lower for those, and 98 per cent of those that have been assessed as in need of home care or home support have either received or been offered that support. So I think that's a fundamental part.

Then, in terms of the overall increase, one very important thing that we have seen is that we've gone from $13 billion when the opposition was in government to, over the course of the budget period, $24 billion, $25 billion, $26 billion and $27 billion. That's a doubling of funding over this course of time.

An honourable member interjecting—

I will deal with exactly that point that's been raised on alleged cuts. And I will quote from the budget papers. I note:

The Government will refine the Aged Care Funding Instrument to better align the funding claimed by aged care providers with the level of care being offered. This measure will allow $1.6 billion—

except this is from the 2012 budget papers. This is exactly the thing that the member opposite has just claimed was a savage cut. But those were their words, with an identical outcome, from what was a demand-driven process, where there was change in that demand under ACFI—so, exactly their words, almost exactly the amount, yet a completely different representation of it.

That brings me to the royal commission. This Prime Minister called the royal commission when no-one else had done this, on our side or on the other side. He called the royal commission to deal with what has been a generational problem. So, that was done, shortly after he came into the role. We said at the time that there would be challenges and that it would reveal things that would be difficult and shocking. But it should never undermine the extraordinary support that has been given by our carers across the country. Already we've said that there will be five pillars to our response, and we thank all three of the commissioners, including Commissioner Tracey, who has passed, for their groundbreaking and critical work, which has laid the pathway for fundamental reform in a way that has never been done before.

Our response to that commission is across five pillars. The first is home care, where already we've set out that there will be an additional 500 audits. But, more significantly, we will take very transformative processes forward as part of the budget response. In particular, we're focusing on fraud and quality, as well as on that transparency, but above all else the capacity to assist people with places. The second is quality and safety right across but particularly in residential care, with 1,500 extra audits, $32 million, an Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission with regulatory powers for chemical and physical restraint, the appointment of a senior restraint leader and extension of the pharmacy program to 2025. The third pillar of the response is residential aged-care facilities, services and sustainability, with $280 million immediately put into this, including $190 million to extend the viability supplement, $760 per resident in metropolitan areas and $1,145 per resident in rural and remote areas. So, this is a major initiative, along with $90 million as part of that for the targeted support fund for providers facing stress.

Then, importantly, there is workforce and skills: 18,000 places, with $91 million immediately made available to ensure that we can have better-trained staff and more staff and assist them in their journey of protecting older Australians. The final pillar is governance. This is all part of the interim response, and that is that we will respond by 31 May, as we've said, using the budget as our principal vehicle. Already we've allocated over $30 million for governance and training of 3,700 leaders in the field, to make sure that there will be a new aged-care act. But when we step back, there are three principles that we take. One is about respect, the second is about care and the third is about dignity. We said that in an ageing society, which has become a reality, where we've made these investments but we've gone to the next step, we knew this commission would present challenges. We knew it would be confronting. And we didn't shy away from it. We did what no-one has done before, because we wanted to make these changes.

Those five pillars are our guidelines and our framework. They're the steps we put in place. But as we go forwards, they become the guiding framework for our response during the course of the budget. They set the path for the coming years. We've said five pillars, a five-year plan, as set out by the royal commission, and we're committed to that. So, it's our watch, and it's our time, and it's our change that we will work on, and we look to work constructively with the opposition, and I invite the opposition to work with us on that front.

See this speech in context