Paul Scarr (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

At the outset, could I just say I think the Minister for Aged Care and Senior Australians was absolutely crystal clear in his answers today and he was absolutely consistent with the media release which he put out on 14 January 2020, which was published on 15 January 2020, and is still on his website. You can read it. This is what he says:

I acknowledge today’s statement from the Chair of the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety, the Honourable Gaetano Pagone QC.

The Government has consistently refuted claims that our intention is to privatise the assessment process for aged care. That assertion is incorrect.

And, as the minister clearly stated again today, consistent with the media release which he put out on 15 January, there is a discrepancy between the minister's stated position and how it has been reported in some circles. The minister was crystal clear in his response to that issue.

I'd like to take note of the comments made by Senator Polley, which were simply incorrect to say the government has cut funding to the aged-care sector. The fact is the amount of funding across the aged care system 2012 to 2013 was $13.3 billion. That has now grown. It hasn't been cut; it has actually grown to $21.4 billion in the 2019-20 budget year, up to an estimated $25.4 billion in 2022 to 2023. So the amount of funding for aged care has been increasing, not decreasing; not cuts, but increases. And, since the 2018-19 budget, the government has invested in providing 44,000 new home-care packages at a cost of $2.7 billion. When you drill down into the numbers, you actually see the reality. You see the truth of the situation, and it doesn't reflect well on those opposite, either with respect to their time in government or how they're misrepresenting the facts.

The fact is: under Labor in 2012 to 2013 there were 60,308 home-care packages, just over 60,000; under the coalition government in 2022 to 2023 that will increase to 158,000 places, a substantial increase. When you drill down even further into the figures, this is what you see: in 2012-13 the actual home care funding under Labor was $1.157 billion; in 2018-19, under the coalition government, it had increased, not decreased, to $2.469 billion, a substantial increase.

Why? Because, under the Leader of the Government in the Senate and under our Treasurer, we are managing fiscal policy in a prudent fashion. That enables us to provide for the most vulnerable in our society, and we can continue to provide for them. The 2019-20 home care funding estimate was $3.43 billion. There was an increase from $2.469 billion in 2018-19 to $3.43 billion in 2019-20. Then it is increasing again in 2020-21, up to $3.833 billion. More funds are being spent. More places are being provided.

Finally, I would like to address what I consider to be the tawdry assertion, which I don't think reflects well on those opposite, trying to connect fatality rates of those on waiting lists with those waiting lists, as if the fact they're on the waiting list is actually causing the fatality. That's the premise. That's the insinuation, and it's a grubby insinuation coming from those opposite. It doesn't reflect well on them, for two reasons. First, they well know—or they should know better than I do as a relatively new senator in this place—that there are mechanisms for those people who are in danger and have urgent need to be escalated up the waiting list. I personally advocated for people in that situation to ensure they can get assistance sooner. Second, the data indicates that the rate of older people passing away is similar for people on the waiting list for a home care package to what it is for the general population in Australia. That's what the evidence suggests. That's the evidence. (Time expired)