Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

ator McCARTHY (—) (): I table an addendum to the explanatory memorandum relating to these bills. The addendum responds to matters raised by the Scrutiny of Bills Committee and the Community Affairs Legislation Committee.

Janet Rice (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I move amendments (1) to (5) on sheet 1934 together:

(1) Clause 8, page 10 (lines 12 to 14), omit the paragraph beginning "The Inspector-General must also conduct", substitute:

The Inspector-General must conduct 2 reviews of the Commonwealth's implementation of the recommendations of the Aged Care Royal Commission. Before conducting those reviews, the Inspector-General must publish 2 reports on the progress made by the Commonwealth towards implementing those recommendations.

(2) Clause 18, page 16 (after line 32), after subclause (2), insert:

(2A) The Inspector-General must, as soon as practicable after giving the notice, cause the notice to be published on the Inspector-General's website unless the Inspector-General is satisfied that doing so would adversely affect:

(a) the proper conduct of the review or any other review under section 17; or

(b) the preparation of a draft review report or final review report.

(3) Clause 18, page 17 (line 4), after "any", insert "other".

(4) Clause 29, page 26 (lines 6 to 15), omit subclauses (1) and (2), substitute:

(1) The Inspector-General must prepare 2 reports on the progress made by the Commonwealth towards implementing the recommendations of the Aged Care Royal Commission, which must set out the measures and actions in response to each recommendation taken by the Commonwealth before:

(a) for the first report—1 January 2024; and

(b) for the second report—1 January 2025.

(2) The Inspector-General may also prepare a report on any other matter relating to the Inspector-General's functions.

(2A) A report under this section:

(a) must be published on the Inspector-General's website; and

(b) must be given to the Minister:

(i) for the first report under subsection (1)—on or before 1 June 2024; and

(ii) for the second report under subsection (1)—on or before 1 June 2025; and

(iii) for a report under subsection (2)—as soon as practicable; and

(c) may be given to any other person who, in the Inspector-General's opinion, has a special interest in a matter to which the report relates.

(5) Clause 72, page 58 (line 5), omit "subsection 29(2)", substitute "subsection 29(2A)".

These amendments are regarding additional reporting and more regular reporting by the inspector-general on the implementation of the royal commission recommendations. We're doing this because we feel that there is an opportunity, in setting up this inspector general post, to make sure that regular reporting occurs. There is a need for more regular reporting than is currently in the legislation. As the Older Persons Advocacy Network outlined in their submission:

OPAN recommends the Inspector-General should be empowered to make additional reports to Parliament where recommendations are not acted upon or progress against Royal Commission recommendations is impeded or stalled through the actions or inactions of Commonwealth agencies.

Given the size of the disparity between the current and future aged-care systems identified by the royal commission, OPAN recommends these reports should be like Closing the gap reports—that is, they should identify priority reforms, set targets, report progress and track implementation, including progress towards older people having a genuine say in their care and the design and delivery of aged-care policies, programs and services.

We know the royal commission into aged care was a watershed moment and a landmark report. There are recommendations that it's so important are acted upon and it's so important that we track progress towards their implementation. We put forward a number of recommendations to address this in our additional comments to the community affairs committee's inquiry into this legislation. And while the government hasn't adopted the full range of our recommendations, we understand that they have been willing to adopt an amendment to the legislation on this point.

The amendment that I'm moving today on sheet 1934 is going to require reviews in 2024 and 2025 of the royal commission recommendations by the inspector-general. In understanding that the government is supporting this amendment, I do particularly want to thank the aged-care minister and her office for the collaborative approach that they've taken in discussions on this piece of legislation. This is an important piece of legislation. We think these amendments improve it just one bit more, and we're glad to see it improved and passed.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Noting the significant proportion of the royal commission recommendations that were due to be implemented within five years, the coalition considers it prudent that the inspector-general provides interim reports on the status of the implementation of those recommendations. We believe that it should occur annually and be tabled in parliament up until that five-year comprehensive review and reporting to the implementation, which is due in March 2026.

The coalition is supporting the amendment, as moved by the Australian Greens, as we believe it is important that the Department of Health and Aged Care and the government are held accountable for the changes they make through this independent body.

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

While the inspector-general was established as a recommendation of the royal commission, it's valuable oversight function should outlast the implementation of the royal commission recommendations. Under the current bill the inspector-general must conduct two reviews to evaluate the implementation of the royal commission recommendations, and these reports will be due by 1 March 2026 and 1 March 2031 respectively.

The inspector-general also has the discretion to report more frequently if they believe it's necessary and, as appropriate, can discontinue reporting when it is no longer necessary to continue reporting on these recommendations. It was the intention of the Minister for Aged Care to direct the Inspector-General of Aged Care using powers provided under section 17 to provide such reports. However, the Albanese government values transparency and accountability and recognises Senator Rice's amendment to legislate a requirement for an annual review to be given to the minister and published on the inspector-general's website by 1 June 2024 and 1 June 2025. The government supports this amendment.

Dorinda Cox (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that Australian Greens amendments (1) to (5) on sheet 1934, moved together by Senator Rice, be agreed to.

Question agreed to.

Matthew Canavan (Queensland, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I flagged in my second reading debate contribution, I have some clarification questions on this bill and the inspector-general more broadly and how aged-care services are being regulated. Just to remind the minister, who may not have been here at the time, I've had the very sad news in my area in Central Queensland in recent months of an aged-care home—the Mount Morgan aged-care home—about to close. I've had people at that home contact me. They're understandably very upset at the situation. That aged-care home is apparently shutting because they can't receive a long-term exemption from the government's 24/7 registered nurse requirements. As I outlined in my speech in the second reading debate, there is just no way the town of Mount Morgan is going to get enough registered nurses to maintain 24-hour, seven-day-a-week staffing. It's a town of 2,500 people. I have written to the minister, but I would just like to ask: is the government considering loosening some of the strict conditions for exemptions? It is now my understanding that the exemptions only last for a year, so that's not a long-term solution for Mount Morgan. As I say, it doesn't matter how long it takes; you're not going to get the four, five or maybe six registered nurses necessary to fill a 24-hour, seven-day-a-week requirement. So what is the government doing to respond to cases like that of Mount Morgan? I believe there are at least 29 other aged-care homes around the country that might be in a similar position.

This is having a real-world impact on people's lives. Just to give one short example, Marlene Sealey, who has contacted my office, is an 83-year-old woman who visits her husband, who has dementia, six times a week at the moment in Mount Morgan. But, because of this strict decision of the government, her husband will have to move 30 or 40 minutes away to Rockhampton, and of course Mrs Sealey, who has no drivers licence, will not be able to visit him as often in the last few years of his life.

So I just wonder: is the government actually considering these heartfelt individual cases in its rollout of this requirement, and can it give some hope to people like Mrs Sealey that there will be a more liberal interpretation for small country towns like Mount Morgan, which just aren't going to be able to meet the strict requirement as laid out at the moment?

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator, for bringing that to my attention. I've just sought some advice on it, and I am aware that the minister is across your letter and will no doubt deal with it in the most sensitive of ways—for the family involved as well. I am advised that Mount Morgan were eligible for exemption but declined and have been offered workforce assistance but also declined. But I do understand that there will be further interaction between you and the minister.

Matthew Canavan (Queensland, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you. I really appreciate that information and especially the minister's attention to the issue. Just briefly, I will more clearly outline this. Please correct me if I'm wrong. I said in my speech that I might be wrong on a lot of these things; I don't pretend to be an expert on aged care. But my understanding is that the current exemptions that the government has can only go for 12 months, so Mount Morgan could only have got a 12-month exemption. Is that the case? If it is the case, that, to me, is not a long-term solution for a town like Mount Morgan, for the reasons I've outlined. There is just no way it's going to be able to fill a 24-hour, seven-day-a-week registered nurse requirement, no matter how long you give it. The question I'm flagging is: is there consideration of giving more long-term exemptions? I recognise that might mean greater oversight of those places, but I would love to hear that there's a determined effort to keep these homes open and to work with a small country town like Mount Morgan on what we can do to keep this home open and keep people like Mrs Sealey close to their loved ones, even if it means being a little flexible on the strict requirements that the government currently outlines.

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am advised that they can reapply in 12 months time, but I'm also aware that this is an incredibly sad situation, Senator, and I am conscious that the minister does want to work closely with you on it.

Matthew Canavan (Queensland, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you for that. I'll leave it here. I'll just make a quick comment. I appreciate that. I would just say, though, that requiring a centre to apply every 12 months for an exemption probably isn't giving them the sort of long-term certainty they would need to maintain continuity of service, to invest in their infrastructure and to give employees, if nothing else, the certainty of a job in the long term, to keep staff around. I appreciate the attention that has been provided to this, but I would humbly suggest that there may be a need to think of a longer-term exemption for categories like this in smaller towns, keeping in mind that there are probably other ways we can make sure that standards are maintained, that oversight is provided and that we don't unnecessarily close centres which are otherwise providing high levels of service. To my understanding, the Mount Morgan aged-care home has a high degree of community satisfaction, and there's no need for these requirements to be imposed on it. Thank you, Minister. I thank the Senate for its time.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Following on from the questioning from Senator Canavan, I am keen to understand what your understanding is for the reason why Mount Morgan has chosen to close? You said they were able to get an exemption and they chose not to; they were given workforce support and they chose not to. But was that the stated reason they chose to close?

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am advised that they made that decision. Obviously, I would need to find out further information as to why but I don't have that with me given I don't have examples of every reason why people may or may not have accepted taking this on.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Given you seem to know what the minister was doing in relation to your answers to Senator Canavan on this issue with Mount Morgan, I would probably draw to your attention that the reason stated by Mount Morgan was the onerous administrative requirements for them to report for every 30 minutes that they are unable to have a registered nurse on site, that they have to report to the agency or to the department was the reason why Mount Morgan decided they were forced into a situation to have to close because they just did not have the resources or capacity to be able to do that. I acknowledge the concerns raised by Senator Canavan that are being replicated around Australia at the moment for the heavy-handed and punitive approach that this government is taking to supporting aged care. To more general questions, Minister: When will the office of the inspector-general be permanently established?

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was just checking for you on the Mount Morgan situation but I am advised that it is on proclamation of this bill.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Obviously there is an interim inspector-general in the role at the moment. When do you expect the appointment process for the inspector-general to commence?

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The inspector-general cannot be appointed until the legislation commences. The minister can appoint an acting inspector-general pending appointment of the inspector-general by the Governor-General, and the process to appoint an acting or statutory inspector-general can commence once royal assent has been obtained to ensure arrangements are in place for establishment.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

How many staff will the office of the inspector-general have?

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It will have 21 full-time equivalent staff.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What is the ongoing funding for the office of the inspector-general over the forwards?

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In the October budget, $39 million.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

To clarify, in the October budget was there $39 million put aside for four years of the forward estimates for this particular authority?

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am keen to understand what mechanisms will be in place where the minister or the government can provide direction to the office of the inspector-general or is it a completely separate independent statutory authority? Are there circumstances under which direction can be given to the authority?

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm advised that the minister can direct a review but she can't tell them how to do it.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Can I take it from that answer that the only opportunity for the government or the minister to direct this authority, once it's established, is in relation to undertaking a review?

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That is correct.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Can everyone request a briefing or advice from the inspector-general? If not, who is able to ask for briefings from the IG?

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would expect that they would be able to, Senator. If you're wanting to seek a briefing, I would imagine you'd be able to receive that.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Can I confirm that that is correct? You've said that you assume that that would be the case. I'm just interested to understand whether that actually is the case. Maybe I should rephrase the question: is the inspector-general able to provide briefings at their discretion, or is there some capacity for the government or the minister to have involvement in who would get briefings?

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is an independent statutory authority, so yes, but the decision would obviously have to be the inspector-general's.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

So I can take it that an aged-care provider, as an example, would be able to get a briefing from the IG?

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would expect that it would be the inspector-general's call on that or on any request for a briefing, given the independence of their position.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Can I seek clarification? You keep saying you 'expect'. I'd be keen to understand whether it is the case or not.

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is the case.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Would you be able to advise whether the interim inspector-general—is he interim or acting? How do we describe him?

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Interim.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Did the interim inspector-general participate in the sustainability roundtables that were recently held and chaired by the minister?

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Sorry, I just missed that question. Could you repeat it, please?

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am wondering whether the interim inspector-general has participated in the sustainability roundtables that have recently been held by the minister.

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My understanding is no.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Will either the interim inspector-general or the permanent inspector-general, should this bill pass this place and it be established, be expected to provide advice in relation to sustainability?

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

McCARTHY (—) (): Yes.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is there a requirement for the advice to be tabled in parliament?

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Not in the interim.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Can I just confirm: the interim inspector-general can provide advice to the minister in relation to sustainability, and there is no requirement for that information to be tabled or made publicly available? Should I infer from your answer that, once the permanent office has been established, advice provided to government would have to be tabled?

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That's correct.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In relation to the new Aged Care Act that's under active consideration, will the new Aged Care Act refer to the role of the inspector-general and the office of the inspector-general? If so, what role will the inspector-general have in relation to oversight over the delivery of the new aged-care system?

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm advised that the bill is still being drafted, so I am unable to answer that question at this point.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

USTON (—) (): Recently, at the National Aged Care Provider Conference, it was noted in a presentation, 'Delivering education and raising awareness of the roles and functions of the interim and statutory officers'. When you refer to 'delivering education' what is the training that is being referred to here?

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We don't anticipate training, but there should be education. Again, it's a statutory office, and that will no doubt be left with the inspector-general, in terms of how they conduct their office.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

So does the interim inspector-general or will the permanent inspector-general have any oversight in relation to data, particularly referring to, for instance, the implementation of the 24/7 requirement from 1 July 2023? Is that something that they would have any oversight of or requirement to report on?

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, they'll have oversight of all Commonwealth administration.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In addition, can I take it from your answer that the impact on the new reporting requirements will also be something that the IG will get to report on, particularly as they relate to the questions that were asked by Senator Canavan on the reporting every 30 minutes that a registered nurse isn't on site?

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This will be the responsibility of the independent inspector-general—however they wish to choose to pursue the concerns of individual aged-care facilities, including what has been raised by Senator Canavan.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Finally, in relation to the memorandum of understanding that the government signed with a number of unions, I'm interested to know whether the inspector-general will have the opportunity to review that memorandum, which compels international nurses to sign up to unions if they wish to work in Australia.

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If the independent inspector-general chooses to do so.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm seeking to get a bit of clarity of understanding around the government's idea of forcing workers to sign up for a union if they want to join the Australian workforce. I'm keen to understand whether you believe that's likely to have a detrimental intact on the number of people that are likely to take up the opportunity to work in aged care in Australia if they're from overseas.

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Sorry, I missed the beginning of it. What would likely have a detrimental impact?

Helen Polley (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Can I ask you, Senator Ruston, to speak up a little louder? It's hard to hear you, even from the chair. You have the call.

James McGrath (Queensland, Liberal National Party, Shadow Assistant Minister to the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That's because they're talking over her, over there.

The TEMPORARY CHAIR: Interjects are unruly.

Honourable senators interjecting—

The TEMPORARY CHAIR: It would be helpful, if people want to have a conversation, for them to leave the chamber. It has been very difficult to hear Senator Ruston. I've asked her to speak up into the microphone. You have the call, Senator.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was keen to understand the decision of the government in relation to this memorandum of understanding, which forces overseas workers to sign up to a union in order for them to be able to join the Australian aged-care workforce. I'm just wondering whether you have done any modelling or have any understanding in relation to the likelihood of that being a barrier for international care workers to choose to come and work in the aged-care sector in Australia.

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In this instance, it's not relevant to do that.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

So you're saying that asking questions about the impact on the aged-care sector is not relevant to this bill? I would suggest that that's probably a lack of transparency, but there you go. I think Australians probably do deserve to understand what the implications of the decisions and actions of the government are in relation to the aged-care sector, particularly when you consider the serious, serious pressure the aged-care sector is under in relation to workforce. I don't think there would be anybody in this place—I don't think there'd be anybody in this country—that wouldn't realise that workforce shortages are probably the biggest issue facing Australia's aged-care providers in their ability to deliver the kind of care that we all want to see for older Australians. Your dismissal of this, as a significant additional barrier that has been put in place and just adds an additional burden to aged-care providers at a time when they're doing it really, really tough, just goes to show the kind of contempt that those opposite have for the aged-care sector and, indirectly to that, the contempt they have for older Australians when they refuse to answer questions. They force aged-care homes, like Mount Morgan, to close because they think that it's easy to just have a one-size-fits-all, city-centric approach to this and then refuse to answer these really, really important questions, which I believe would actually provide the aged-care sector with some level of certainty and clarity about what the intentions of the government are. To refuse to answer those questions, I think, is really, particularly, disappointing.

As I said earlier, we believe that the independent statutory office of the inspector-general is a really, really important initiative. It was recommendation 12 of the royal commission, which we accepted, which suggested to established this independent office. We will be supporting the passage of this bill because we do believe that it's in the best interests of the aged-care sector. But I will put on the record how terribly disappointing it is that this government is refusing to provide clarity of detail around the issues facing the aged-care sector and completely dismissing the aged-care sector and the older Australians it looks after.

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Firstly, the senator has incorrectly focused on my answer there, when I referred specifically to this bill. This is an important bill for the parliament and also for our country in terms of establishing the Inspector-General of Aged Care. What the inspector-general chooses to do will obviously be their role as an independent body. There is certainly no lack of wanting to see the workforce improve and increase right across the country, not just in aged care but in every form of employment that we require in businesses in states and territories across Australia. I want to put that on the record for the senator.

Inspector-General of Aged Care Bill 2023, as amended, agreed to; Inspector-General of Aged Care (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2023 agreed to.

Inspector-General of Aged Care Bill 2023 reported with amendments; Inspector-General of Aged Care (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2023 reported without amendments; report adopted.