Dean Smith (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Senator Paterson, in his contribution a few moments ago, shared with us how disappointed he was. I'm going to share with you how confused I am with regard to what Labor's position is on aged-care issues generally. Also, specifically, what are they talking about with regard to the royal commission? Do they support it, and will they be active in promoting proper consideration of aged-care issues?

I think it's important to expose the very serious mistruths and lies that are being told regarding what is actually happening with aged-care funding in our country. What Labor wants you to believe is not the truth. In fact, Labor wants you not to go back and look at its own past behaviour on aged-care funding and, importantly, on how aged-care funding works in our country.

There can be no doubt that the royal commission is necessary, because what we have seen is a tremendous failure of the system. There can be no denying it. With the rates of compliance failures and the closure of homes, no-one can deny the importance of a royal commission. But what Labor is seeking to do is undermine the worthiness of that royal commission and distract people's attention from the very important work that that royal commission must do—and, I'd argue, must do quickly—to turn this issue, the proper care of older Australians, into part of its rhetoric and preparations for the next election.

Let's be clear: the royal commission is broadly supported across the Australian community. The Women With Disabilities organisation has supported it. The Council on the Ageing has supported it. The Federation of Ethnic Communities Councils in Australia has supported it. The coalition supports it, and I dare say many Labor members and senators support it. But the confusion that Labor seeks to build and spread across the community undermines their decency with regard to what the royal commission is seeking to do, and that is to build an aged-care system that properly cares for ageing Australians in an environment that is rapidly changing. The aged-care needs of this country over the next five to 15 years will be very, very different to the aged-care needs that dominated this country over the last 10 years. We saw that in the work of the Productivity Commission in 2010, and we have seen that in the Living Longer, Living Better legislative package. Aged care is a dynamic and important issue for our country. It deserves constant attention by policymakers and, importantly, I'd argue, it requires strong bipartisanship or tripartisanship across the parliament if the needs of older Australians can going to be properly met.

Senator Paterson shared with us some media commentary yesterday by Bernard Keane and Crikey which made the case very clearly that the coalition had not cut aged-care funding. Let me share with you some media from today that demonstrates very, very clearly that aged-care funding has not been cut by this coalition government—and you can read it for yourselves in the Sydney Morning Herald. It is an article by Eryk Bagshaw entitled, 'Has the federal government cut funding to aged care?' What does that media report say? It says:

Even as a proportion of the total economy, which accounts for immigration and other factors, spending on aged care increased from 0.73 per cent in Wayne Swan's fifth budget as a Labor treasurer to 1.05 per cent of GDP in Mr Morrison's May budget.

Labor has repeatedly targeted a 2015-16 budget measure that shows the government would achieve $1.2 billion in "efficiencies" over four years, but focusing on one measure in the sixth largest area of government spending is misleading and ignores a funding increase of more than $1 billion every year since Labor was in office.

That's not Senator Smith's contribution or Senator Scullion's contribution, but the work Eryk Bagshaw in the Sydney Morning Herald.

What would Labor do in the future? We don't know what Labor would do in the future just yet, so let's have a look at what Labor has said in the past. Going into the last federal election, Labor said: 'I will not sugar-coat it; Labor is not in a position to reverse those cuts.'