Marion Scrymgour (Lingiari, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

SCRYMGOUR () (): My question is to the Minister for Aged Care and Minister for Sport. How do the Albanese Labor government's investments help aged-care workers earn more and keep more of what they earn, and how does this compare to other approaches which would leave people worse off?

Anika Wells (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Lingiari for her question and for her efforts to lift the standard of aged care in this country. Before the last election, we promised more nurses who would be better paid in order to better care for those who need it most in this country. We said, if elected, a Labor government would put our money where our mouth is, and we've done exactly that with $15 billion for increases to aged-care workers' pay. Under the Albanese government, registered nurses are now taking home an additional $196 a week, or more than $10,000 a year, and personal care workers are now taking home an additional $141 a week, or $7,300 a year. Rachel, who's a Northside home-care worker who came to visit me at my mobile office in Zillmere, told me that that is having a transformative impact on workers like herself. After almost 10 years of low and stagnant wages, the car park of her workplace looked terrible. People had basically unroadworthy cars; no-one could afford to fix them. But, with pay rises like this, people have been able to get their cars fixed or even get more reliable cars, and that is a good thing.

I was asked how the government's support for aged-care workers compares with other approaches that would leave people worse off. I can tell the member for Lingiari that the coalition have never supported a pay rise for people like Rachel. In 2019, when the now Prime Minister stood with aged-care workers to back their pay rise, the coalition railed that a dollar-an-hour increase would destroy the economy. And, when we proposed to deliver Labor's tax cut for aged-care workers, the coalition's impulse was to call for a snap election over it. And, when we decided to expand fee-free TAFE so that aged-care workers could upskill without digging into their household budgets, the coalition called that 'wasteful spending'.

So, if pay rises, tax cuts and affordable higher education aren't the coalition's priorities, I—and, frankly, the people I represent—wonder what is, and I've been keeping an ear out. Imagine my surprise when I recently heard the opposition make a billion-dollar promise using the exact same words—they would put their money where their mouth is. We know where that money and where those mouths are going to end up: at a waterfront restaurant at about 11.59 am on a Friday—a $10 billion plan for some sparkling mineral water, a medium-rare steak and some heretofore unspecified entertainment. When we say we're putting our money where our mouth is, we mean we are delivering on a $15 billion pay rise promise for aged-care workers to improve their lives and the lives of those they care for. When those opposite say they're putting their money where their mouth is, they mean a $10 billion plan for you to shout the bosses' lunch.