Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Hansard source

My answer has not changed from the one I gave earlier. The changes we are talking about here are about providing sustainability and viability for the sector. It is not about it becoming unviable or providers moving out of the sector. This is all about ensuring sustainability of the sector. Providers already have arrangements in place for these matters. We should be mindful this is now all happening at once. That these changes will all happen to a providers' client base at the same time is, as you know, not correct. As people come in, the existing arrangements providers have will continue. Yes, it may mean there will be more contributions coming in. The government, through all of the structures we have talked about this morning, sets the framework. We say, 'If you would like this, you will need to pay a contribution of that.' That is sorted out between the provider and the client, and they already have existing arrangements for that. I don't imagine you are saying the government should take on all or any of the debt that might be incurred in this instance in the future. Is that what you are arguing for—that the government should essentially become the underwriter? If that was the case, there would be no incentive for providers to pursue any money owed to them. I don't think you are arguing for that. What we're saying is that within the existing arrangements that providers have for pursuing money that's owed to them, or reaching an agreement with their clients about what services might be offered at what cost, we would expect that to continue. We would probably expect the transition taskforce, if there is a genuine concern from providers about this, would raise this through that forum. The department remains ready, willing and able to talk with providers if this is an issue about which they can share what they believe the problem is so that everyone can respond to it.