MATTERS OF URGENCY
Senator COLBECK (Tasmania) (17:15): The coalition won't be supporting this amendment because this is an attempt to divert attention from what is actually happening to people on the ground right now through the measures of this government. If the Greens want to put up their own motion, then they're quite free to do that as a part of everyday business. They could have put up a motion in the terms that they've proposed as a part of this amendment.
The reality is that the issue that we're dealing with as part of the substantive motion is also contained within the Greens' motion, and that is the lack of override that's available to assessors under the new aged-care assessment tool, which is all of the government's making. They might try to pretend that it belongs to somebody else, but I can tell you, as a former minister in the portfolio who commenced the process, that it has got nothing to do with anyone but the Labor Party.
It's their tool that takes away the capacity of human assessors to make an assessment of the care needed for senior Australians. The reference was made in the last presentation with respect to the Inspector-General of Aged Care. Her evidence at estimates was absolutely damning of the Labor Party, and to hear the Secretary of the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing talking about the sad reality of the way that aged care is being handed out was shameful.
The fact is that we are now rationing aged-care home-care packages again, which is exactly the opposite of what the royal commission, which we all remember so well, said to do. The aged-care royal commission interim report said this cruel lottery for home-care packages must stop. That's what the coalition did.
The coalition put $7.2 billion into home care in its response to the royal commission in 2021, and that saw 100,000 Australians come off the waiting list for home-care packages. The home-care package waiting list was reduced from 128,000 to 28,000 people in about the middle of 2022. The fact that there are now over 100,000 people back on that list is shameful, and it's got nothing to do with anything but the way the government is managing this system.
We cannot support this amendment. This is about what the government has done with respect to the assessment tool and their management of home-care packages. The fact that there are now over 100,000 people waiting to get an assessment is a further indictment on this government.
Hard work was done by the coalition in allocating 118,000 packages over three years to get the waiting list down—which is what the royal commission asked us to do—to 28,000. The fact that that effort, that investment, has been wasted by Labor is shameful. To hear the minister at question time trying to suggest that we've taken money out of aged care was a disgrace.
It was dishonest and demonstrates again that you cannot believe a thing that this government says. It doesn't matter what they're talking about or when they're talking about it. You cannot believe a thing that this government says, particularly with respect to aged care.
Senator Polley: How was the cricket, Richard? Senator COLBECK: Yes, that's right. Go personal, Helen.
It's typical of the Labor Party. Just go personal. When you've lost the argument, go personal.
You do it all the time. You've got no shame at all. The Labor Party has absolutely no shame at all.
Senior Australians, which are who we're talking about, can't get a home-care package. Over 100,000 of them are waiting. The waiting list is blowing out; it got to 130,000.
It's shameful what this government allowed to happen, after all the hard work that was put in by everybody involved to get the home-care waiting list back down. The fact that there is now no human involvement in the assessment of aged-care packages, except for putting in the data, is an absolute disgrace. Quite frankly, I don't know why the government just doesn't do something to fix it.
The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT ( Senator Hodgins-May ): I let the chamber know that the time for debate will expire at 5.23. Senator Polley.