Lucy Gichuhi (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the minister representing the Minister for Senior Australians and Aged Care, Senator Scullion. What is the Liberal-National government doing to ensure that older Australians are receiving the best quality of aged care possible?

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Minister for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the senator for her question. Our government treasures our senior Australians for all they have done to make Australia the great country it is. Our senior Australians deserve to be treated with respect and dignity, and that's why our government is making a record investment in aged care. The government investment in aged care is going up by a billion dollars a year over the forward estimates. In 2017-18 alone, aged-care spending is estimated to reach $18.6 billion. Over the next five years, it will grow by an additional $5 billion to $23.6 billion. That's $5 billion more to ensure our senior Australians receive the very best care possible.

Despite the lies and falsehoods being spread by those opposite, the fact is that we are investing a record amount into aged care. The government is increasing the number of home care packages available from 87,000 in 2017-18 to 151,000 by 2021-22. This will include a 34,000 increase in high-level packages by 2021. On top of the immediate rollout of the 14,000 additional aged-care packages and the 6,000 additional packages announced in MYEFO, the government is bringing forward $90 million to support aged-care providers, with significant funding rolling out this financial year. Of this, $40 million is available to support aged-care services in regional, rural and remote locations to improve, maintain and expand their infrastructure, ensuring that senior Australians in these locations receive exactly the same support as those people who need these services in the cities. We're also providing $50 million to support residential aged-care providers and their staff to improve quality standards of care across the sector. Our government is absolutely committed to making sure we deliver first-class care to our senior Australians.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Gichuhi, a supplementary question.

Lucy Gichuhi (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What reforms is the government implementing to improve the quality of care that older Australians receive?

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Minister for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Our government is implementing a reform package that is significantly improving the aged-care providers that are delivering to senior Australians. We're establishing a new tough cop on the block—an independent aged-care quality safety commissioner who will now have at hand more than $300 million to police the sector, providing a one-stop shop for all aged-care consumers, their carers and their loved ones on quality of care and services. We will ensure genuinely unannounced visits by auditors.

We're introducing new aged-care quality standards that clearly spell out what consumers can expect from an aged-care service. Supported by a new charter of rights, we're continuing to support advocacy services for senior Australians that will address elder abuse in aged care, with $31.7 million to be provided to the Older Persons Advocacy Network to 2020. We put all aged-care providers on notice: if you're not delivering the highest quality of service, then you have to— (Time expired)

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Gichuhi, a final supplementary question.

Lucy Gichuhi (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Why has the government decided to call a royal commission into the aged-care sector?

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Minister for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As the Prime Minister's indicated, there are thousands of operators; facility and care providers; nurses and other clinical staff; volunteers; cleaners; cooks; and therapists out there improving the lives of senior Australians every day. However, following intensified policing and inspections of this sector by government authorities, information has come to light that makes the case for a royal commission into the sector compelling. For instance, findings of a serious risk against service providers have risen by 177 per cent over the last year, referrals to the Aged Care Quality Agency have risen 188 per cent over the last year and non-compliance notices are up by 185 per cent.

The royal commission will look at the aged-care sector as a whole without bias or prejudice. It will make findings on the evidence. And as the Prime Minister has also said, it will then be up to the government and parliament to act on these findings together.

Anthony Chisholm (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to Minister representing the Minister for Senior Australians and Aged Care, Senator Scullion. This morning, The Australian reported on a leaked email revealing that five hours after Prime Minister Morrison denied cutting $1.2 billion from aged-care funding, staff from Treasurer Frydenberg's office emailed the offices of Minister Hunt and Minister Wyatt, scrambling for information about the cut. Is the government denying Prime Minister Morrison's cut, despite it being printed in budget papers bearing his name, to cover up the fact that he just forgot about it?

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Minister for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Well, it's not surprising that they were scrambling, looking for a cut that didn't exist! We were looking and searching, 'Where is the cut?' So we said: 'No, no, you have to explain; you see, the Labor Party have put out this disingenuous information, "Oh, no, that was a cut—that was a cut." We now know that there have been no cuts in the aged-care sector.' So, can you blame the Treasurer? When we get a bit of information he has to check it. Yes, there probably is an email trail that says, 'We will seek them here and seek them there.' Well, it didn't take long. The senator should have said, 'If Labor tells you something, you've got to be very, very careful about it; don't be sucked in by the partisan politics.'

But I have to say about whatever scrambling there was to try to work out what this information was, that as soon as someone explained to everyone on this side, 'Look, that's only disinformation from Labor,' we went, 'Oh, okay, we can relax a bit and get on with business.' Because they know—everybody on this side of the parliament knows—that the investments we have made in aged care, the investments we've made in infrastructure, the investments we've made in the legislative framework and the investments we've made in an aged-care cop on the block have absolutely eclipsed anything they've ever done.

This is all new; none of those processes were here when we got here—not a sausage! We've introduced every single element of this. We've introduced this. There is absolute silence from the other side, and you should be silent and you should be ashamed by your complete lack of action in looking after our most vulnerable Australians. Really, it is so nauseating to sit on this side, because we know how little you've done. You've done absolutely nothing, so don't lecture us!

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Chisholm, a supplementary question.

Anthony Chisholm (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The article also reveals:

… the Coalition has been considering a review of the ACFI, which would save between $3.3bn and $5.4bn over four years on top of the $2bn shaved off in 2015 and 2016 when Mr Morrison was treasurer.

Can the minister guarantee that the government has not considered further cuts to the Aged Care Funding Instrument?

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Minister for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There were no cuts to the Aged Care Funding Instrument.

Helen Polley (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister to the Leader (Tasmania)) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There were!

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Minister for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, there were not! The amount there was actually a prediction of where it might go. Oh, come on!

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Collins on a point of order?

Jacinta Collins (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr President. The point of order is on direct relevance. The question is: can the minister guarantee that the government has not considered—not considered!—further cuts to the Aged Care Funding Instrument? Answer the question, minister!

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the point of order, Senator Cormann?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Vice-President of the Executive Council) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the point of order. Senator Scullion was being directly relevant because he was asked about further cuts. The minister pointed out that given there hadn't been any cuts then there couldn't be any further cuts, which was being directly relevant to the question.

Senator Jacinta Collins interjecting—

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Collins, can I hear other contributions? You were heard in silence. Senator Wong, on the point of order.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The point of order is direct relevance. There is a temporal issue here. Whatever his view about the initial, we're asking about what else was considered. I think it's fair for him to come to the question. If he wants to avoid giving the guarantee then I think that would be clear.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister has been speaking for nine seconds. It is difficult to rule on direct relevance nine seconds into an answer.

Senator Jacinta Collins interjecting—

Senator Collins, please remain silent while I'm ruling. On that ground, I think the minister needs to be given time. On the second point, you restated the second part of the question. The minister is also allowed to address the earlier part of the question that was asked. So, at this point, I'm not going to say the minister is not being directly relevant nine seconds into his answer.

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Minister for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr President. The Aged Care Funding Instrument, historically, under that lot opposite was being rorted. They dealt with it by saying, 'We're going to try to fix it up,' and they notionally made sure that they didn't invest $1.6 billion where they otherwise might have—just an efficiency divided that reasonable legislators would take. We took the same view. There were efficiency dividends of $1.2 billion—

Opposition senators interjecting—

In exactly the same way that those opposite did it—but it is not a cut. We are not handling rorts. We do not support providers who overcharge—nor did you. So I don't really understand the point they were trying to make. We will make sure that First Australians get the very best services possible.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Chisholm, a final supplementary question.

Anthony Chisholm (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The report notes that the government's own review of the instrument found:

Funding volatility and the lack of predictability with the aged care forward budget estimates has been a major issue for both the government and the sector.

Will the Prime Minister take responsibility for the impact of his cuts on the aged-care crisis?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Vice-President of the Executive Council) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Did he just ask for the Prime Minister? I represent the Prime Minister.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'll take that from the table, Senator Cormann. I will allow the minister to answer that part of the question that falls within his part of the portfolio responsibilities, which is the traditional way of dealing with those.

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Minister for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Over the last couple of days, we have made it abundantly clear that there are no cuts. So I don't understand the premise of the question. There haven't been any cuts. I'm genuinely not sure now whether this is incompetence or mischief. It's hard to tell on this. I've explained to this them so many times. With the reiteration of such a disingenuous process, I think that they know. I think they're putting politics over people once again. We don't want to do that. We want to get on with the business.

I would appeal to those opposite: instead of partisan politics, why don't you do what you did last sitting week and come in here and support the innovative legislation brought in by this government? That's what you did literally a week ago. We've been driving this. We've been showing innovation and making the investment. Up until last week, when we called a royal commission, you were completely behind it. Continue to support the government doing a great job in—(Time expired)