Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

During the Senate estimates process in recent times—indeed, on Monday 24 May 2021—I had occasion to ask some questions of the rural and regional affairs committee. I was asking questions about Community Chef, which was funded in 2009 under the infrastructure program. The official at the time said to me:

It sounds like a community aged-care program. Are you sure it is in the infrastructure program?

I responded by saying:

It was under Minister Albanese as minister for infrastructure. He entered a joint venture with the then health minister Dan Andrews in the state of Victoria.

I, like the official, was gobsmacked that it was somehow funded under the infrastructure program. The department, rightly, given the passage of time, took the questions on notice. The reason I asked these questions was that I had heard a whisper that there had been untoward behaviour in relation to the funding of this organisation. What we had was funding by the federal taxpayer of some $9 million towards this program which was co-funded by organisations from the state Labor government and also local government. What it was doing was, in fact, prejudicing the viability of a private firm known as I Cook Foods.

In recent times—indeed, just yesterday, 21 June—media outlets, such as the ABC and others, started to disclose some of the consequences and issues surrounding this matter. At the time that this organisation was being established, health officials in Victoria sought to close down I Cook on the basis of allegations that somehow a slug had been found in I Cook's food preparation area and that I Cook was responsible for the transportation of listeria from their food production to a lady in an aged-care facility who unfortunately later passed. The full results of listeria testing at the factory were then withheld from I Cook Foods for several weeks whilst its contracts were being bid for by a rival council operated outfit named—you've guessed it—Community Chef. I Cook were stunned by what was known about the company's innocence before such drastic action was taken. Namely, the Victorian health department closed the show down on the basis of allegations, when it is now relatively obvious on the evidence provided to us by the media that there was, in fact, no case to answer by I Cook.

Mr Cook could have done substantial jail time if he had been convicted. Indeed, the allegations in relation to I Cook show that the patient only consumed food from the hospital, with all food provided by the Knox Private Hospital's sole caterer I Cook. That was the allegation by one Professor Brett Sutton. The department of health spokesman said evidence of the parliamentary inquiry showed that four samples from I Cook had the same genetic sequence that they had found in Mrs Painter, the lady who unfortunately passed. The list goes on in relation to the evidence provided to the committee by Professor Sutton and others.

It now transpires that it appears—and I stress 'appears'; I don't make the allegation. I just make the observation that it is now being asserted that Chief Health Officer Brett Sutton signed and issued the order to close I Cook Foods, and the consequence of that order was that the government-owned, loss-making competitor to I Cook Foods, Community Chef, secured the business of food supply to aged-care homes and other facilities previously supplied by I Cook Foods. By the way, since it was set up by $9 million of federal government funding under Mr Albanese, Community Chef has run at a $30 million loss, funded by taxpayers. Previously food preparation and meals were supplied by I Cook in a private venture that did not need a $30 million subsidy from the taxpayer. But the evidence now to hand, as reported in the media—and this is vitally important—is that some hours before the closure order was issued, that very allegation upon which the closure order was issued proved to be incorrect. The elderly woman who died, allegedly as a consequence of eating food supplied by I Cook Foods, had not eaten any food supplied by I Cook Foods. Based on those facts, as reported in the media recently, it would appear that the order to close I Cook Foods may well have been illegal. From the facts currently available, there is every reason to suggest that there may have been a conspiracy conducted by health officials in Victoria to close I Cook Foods for the purpose of commercially benefitting the government-owned, loss-making enterprise Community Chef.

Given media reports that Victoria Police are now investigating corruption claims around the I Cook Foods closure, the question then arises as to whether or not the Chief Health Officer of Victoria has been interviewed and whether or not he is assisting the police in their investigations. At what point in time did Professor Sutton become aware that the closure order was based on a false allegation? This is a very serious business. A family company has been brought to bankruptcy and closed down as a result of health orders, and the department knew, on the evidence, that they should not have closed it down. So at what stage did they officially become aware that the allegations against I Cook Foods were false? At what stage did the person who signed the closure authority become aware? When should he have become aware? Why was the fact that the closure was inappropriate not acted upon immediately by the authorities?

The questions remain. Before the closure statement was signed by Brett Sutton, why did he issue the closure order? After the issue of the closure order, why did he not retract the closure order? Before the litigation of I Cook Foods in the Magistrates Court, why did he not intervene to have the litigation withdrawn? When he gave evidence to the Victorian parliamentary inquiries into the I Cook Foods matter, why did he maintain that the closure order was valid before the parliamentary committee? After Brett Sutton gave evidence to the Victorian parliamentary inquiry, why did he not advise—he still has not advised—the parliament that the closure order has proven to be invalid? One has to give the benefit of the doubt to Mr Sutton that he may not have been aware of all the factual circumstances when he signed the closure order, but he must have become aware somewhere along the way. To the best of my information, knowledge and belief, Mr Sutton has not corrected the evidence that he gave to the Victorian parliament. By now, he must be fully aware of the fact that the evidence that he gave was not necessarily as accurate as he may have believed at the time or as it should have been at the time. If Mr Sutton had been aware of the false allegation against I Cook Foods, can he explain how, as the Chief Health Officer and the person who authorised the closure, he was not made aware of that? Somebody must be responsible for this egregious offence against I Cook Foods as a business, against the family, more importantly, and against about 35 employees who lost their jobs as a result of the closure.

The I Cook Foods matter and the signing of the false and likely illegal closure by Brett Sutton goes to the very heart of the integrity of the operations of the Victorian health system and to whether or not a conspiracy existed to close I Cook Foods. In the circumstances, Mr Sutton needs to answer these questions immediately, on the public record and with absolute clarity, because without such clarity there will remain very real questions about the integrity of the evidence that was provided to him, about the evidence he provided to the parliamentary committee in Victoria and about the signing of the closure order, which I understand bears his signature.

These matters were the basis of my questions on 24 May at Senate estimates. I was clothed with some of this information at the time, seeking information from officials. Understandably, they could not provide all the information being sought, given the passage of time, but one has to ask the question: why did Mr Albanese and Mr Andrews engage on this joint venture which saw the demise of a private enterprise business? It also begs the question why the Chief Medical Officer at the time signed the closure, which, might I add, was based on evidence which was, allegedly, that a slug had been found in the food preparation area of I Cook Foods, and which is now being referred to as 'slug-gate'. It would appear as though the slug and the photograph taken of it were in fact planted and manufactured evidence. I hope that is not the case, but the allegations surrounding this are now becoming exceptionally serious.

A business has gone broke, 35 people have lost their jobs and high-up officials in the Victorian health department seem to be complicit in the demise of this business. There are a huge number of questions to be answered. These questions are fundamentally important. They go to the integrity of public administration and why a public authority would seem to be so desperate to see the demise of a private sector operator and the establishment of a public authority manufactured by Mr Dan Andrews, as health minister at the time, and Mr Anthony Albanese, as infrastructure minister at the time. They put so much effort, so much taxpayers' money, into an enterprise which has been running at a huge loss and has seen the demise of what was otherwise a profitable business. Lots of questions need to be answered, and I hope they are answered as a matter of urgency.