Aged Care During COVID-19

Senator VAN (Victoria): Thank you to Senator McCarthy for moving this motion. There is no doubt that in the current environment any death relating to COVID-19 is tragic and that older Australians are the most vulnerable to its impacts. In this debate, we mustn't forget the tragic losses that families, friends and loved ones are experiencing due to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, for the sixth time in this sitting period, the Australian Labor Party have come into this chamber and set up a debate that seeks to shift blame away from their own failings in aged-care policy. For the sixth time this sitting period, the Australian Labor Party have come into this chamber and tried to protect their Victorian mates from accountability for their systemic failings. Is this just another union protection racket for the Victorian Labor Party? There have been failings in quarantine that have seen community transmission spread right across the state and force the most severe lockdown conditions in Australia and failings in governance that have seen the wrong departments running the hotel quarantine, the refusal of Australian Defence Force resources and the catastrophic underresourcing of contact tracing.

For the sixth time this sitting period, the Australian Labor Party have come into this chamber and ignored the facts from the government by continuing to argue there was no plan in place. I'm very pleased to say that on 24 August the Liberal Prime Minister, Scott Morrison, provided a detailed response to the Leader of the Opposition about the plan. Those opposite in this chamber have clearly not followed what has already been said in the other place. As such, for the benefit of those opposite, I would like to seek leave to table the Prime Minister's answers.

Leave not granted.

Senator VAN: I expected that, because they don't want to listen to the answers. It is clear that those opposite do not want to listen to facts. They do not care about the facts or good policy. For those opposite, this is about politics, grandstanding and trying to get a news grab. Well, shame on you.

I'll tell you what, on this side of the chamber we do care about facts. We do care about the truth, and no matter how often the Labor Party want to deny the existence of a plan, the evidence is clear.

An opposition senator interjecting—

Senator VAN: Give me leave to table it, Senator. I've got it right here for you. You can read it any time. I'll drop it around to your office. There was always a plan, and you know it. The fact that you won't give me leave just proves it.

Senator Green: I have a point of order. If the senator could direct his comments through the chair, that would be appreciated. And I note that the document he is seeking to table is a matter of public record. It's not necessary—

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Senator Bilyk): That's not a point of order, Senator Green. Senator «Van» , could you direct your comments through the chair, please.

Senator VAN: As I said earlier in my comments and as I have said on three occasions, all my comments so far have been through the chair. It is curious—through you, Chair—that each time those opposite decide to bring this debate on, there is not one Victorian senator leading the charge on their side. Where are they? What are they hiding from? They're just not about to take any accountability for what's happened in Victoria. Not once have I heard one Labor senator even mention the word 'Victoria'. This is despite the alleged failing of aged care in their home state. I note that Senator Walsh has been the only Labor senator to be brave enough to come into this chamber and debate this issue; although I do note she did not mention Victoria once. I do wonder where the rest of her Victorian ALP Senate colleagues are? We saw Senator Carr earlier, so we know where he is. Senators Kitching and Ciccone—not there. I haven't heard anything from Senator Rice—she is attending virtually—on this issue. We have had Labor senators from the ACT, New South Wales, Queensland, Tasmania, Western Australia and now the Northern Territory but no Victorians. Is it because, as Victorians, they're too ashamed of Dan Andrews to come into this place and defend his appalling record? There is nothing more hypocritical than every senator on that side failing to call out the Victorian government for their disastrous handling of this pandemic. Considering this remarkable situation, I welcome the opportunity to talk fact and refute their unjustified attacks on the minister for aged care and their spurious allegations.

Senator Rennick, let's talk facts. When Labor left office, total aged-care spending was $13.3 billion. This year, under the Liberal-National coalition government, it is $22.6 billion, increasing to $25.4 billion by 2022-23. In case your maths needs refreshing, that is an increase of over $1.2 billion each year. When those opposite were thrown out of government, there were 60,308 home-care packages across the country. Under this government, we will see that grow to 164,135 places by 2022-23. That is an increase of 170 per cent. At the same time, corresponding funding will also increase by 258 per cent.

One thing about those opposite that annoys voters in Victoria is their ability to say one thing and do another. Let's consider the last election, where the Labor Party had so much new spending, it would have resulted in an extra $387 billion in new taxes. But let me just check. How much of that was promised for aged care? Zero, absolutely zero, none—the hypocrisy! Those opposite had a plan to increase taxes on everything yet they didn't have a plan for aged care. This is despite the Leader of the Opposition reminding us last week at the National Press Club that he had been shadow ageing and senior spokesperson back in 2001. Yet those opposite come in here all high and mighty and decide to lecture us on issues they have clearly ignored.

I tell you what: this government takes aged care seriously. This is a government that values older Australians, a government that realises that the system isn't perfect and that the test of a government is what they do. The Morrison government is a government that is getting on with fixing the problems in the system. We have a Prime Minister who knew that there were significant issues in aged care when he took the job and that is why this government called a royal commission in October 2018. We knew that the royal commission was going to find issues; that's its job. Those opposite need to be reminded of the words of the Prime Minister when he announced the royal commission. The Prime Minister said:

I think we should brace ourselves for some pretty bruising information about the way our loved ones, some of them have experienced some real mistreatment.

He also said:

I think that's going to be tough for us to deal with, but you can't walk past it.

I can say proudly, right here, we are not walking past it. We are tackling it head-on.

There is no doubt that the royal commission's interim report was damning. There is no denying that. But that's why we called a royal commission—to shine a light on areas and to get to the bottom of the problems. It is a reminder that perhaps the government should call a royal commission to investigate the quarantine failures or the contact-tracing failures in Victoria. That would shine some light on why we now have such high community transmission in Victoria which has spread into aged care. The aged care royal commission was highly critical of the inaction of successive governments towards the aged-care industry. We acknowledge that, and we are actioning responses as quickly as we can. We're acting on the recommendations that have already been made and we will act on further recommendations. Work continues to progress through the Aged Care Workforce Industry Council. We continue to progress reforms and invest in the critical skills that our aged-care sector needs.

But where is the commitment from those opposite? In every area in this portfolio, they dither and point-score and yet, time and time again, they have failed. They have provided no policy and no commitment to additional funding, but they come in here, day after day, throwing mud at Minister Colbeck, who was appointed some seven months after the royal commission and some five months before its report was handed down. He is diligently working through the challenges of this sector. Those opposite reek of total hypocrisy.