Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Aged Care, Disabilities and Carers) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is directed to Senator Santoro, the Minister for Ageing. Does the minister recall being asked on 21 June about a couple who were jailed for defrauding the Commonwealth as nursing home operators in 1999? Didn’t this couple continue to remain owners of those homes, despite being jailed, and receive over $90 million in public subsidies after their convictions? Didn’t the minister undertake to provide additional information on how the government monitors the ownership and control of approved aged care providers? Why has the minister taken four months—and counting—to report back to the Senate like he promised to do in June? Can the minister also explain how it is possible for convicted fraudsters to continue to own nursing homes and receive over $90 million of public money in subsidies?

Santo Santoro (Queensland, Liberal Party, Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I mentioned to the Senate in reply to the earlier question referred to by Senator McLucas, the best advice that I had at the time—and it is still my advice—is that the issue referred to by Senator McLucas is being considered by the authorities. As such, I think it would be inappropriate for me to make any further comment. However, I can advise the Senate in relation to key personnel for the benefit of those senators who are interested. The Aged Care Act 1997 sets out requirements for approved providers and their key personnel. Key personnel are those persons responsible for the management of the approved provider’s business and aged care services. Approved providers are required to notify the department of changes to their key personnel. A person convicted of an indictable offence is disqualified from being a key personnel of an approved provider.

Approved providers are required to notify the department of any changes to their key personnel. Under the Aged Care Act 1997 it is an offence for a disqualified individual to be a key personnel of an approved provider. If the department receives information that a person who was known to be a disqualified individual appears to be participating in the management of aged care services, the department investigates the matter thoroughly. Where necessary, the department refers the matter to the Director of Public Prosecutions, who decides whether the evidence is sufficient to support a prosecution of the matter.

To the best of my advice, I can inform Senator McLucas and the Senate that those processes have taken place in relation to the case referred to by Senator McLucas. I will again seek clarification and further information on that, given that Senator McLucas has raised it again today, and, if the situation is different to what I have just advised the Senate, I will inform the Senate at the earliest opportunity.

Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Aged Care, Disabilities and Carers) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Didn’t the minister tell the Senate on 21 June that the government investigates and acts on allegations of disqualified individuals operating nursing homes? Given this compliance activity, can the minister indicate how many investigations have occurred since 2001 and how many disqualified individuals were found to be operating nursing homes?

Santo Santoro (Queensland, Liberal Party, Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question that Senator McLucas has asked me is of a technical nature. It would require gathering information. Obviously, that information is not immediately available to me; otherwise I would provide it to the Senate. However, given that Senator McLucas has raised it, I will take it as a question on notice and make sure that an answer is available at the earliest possible opportunity, which will be at the estimates hearings in a week and a half’s time.