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

I made the government’s view quite clear in my substantive response to Senator McLucas’s second reading debate speech. I will make one additional comment, and that is that the amendments that are in fact before the Senate at this moment really do not have anything to do with the substantial amendment that we are making to the legislation. This has absolutely nothing to do with it because we are talking about something totally different in the substantial amendment. Senator McLucas of course knows that we are in the process of preparing substantive legislation that will address all of the issues that she has addressed in her amendment to the main amendment of the government. I can certainly undertake to Senator McLucas that we will consider her views, but we are still very carefully considering the views of the sector, including the views of advocates, of residents, of relatives and of providers, and we will continue to do that. Undoubtedly those views will be sensibly reflected in the substantive legislation that will be coming before the Senate and the parliament as a whole in the near future.

I suppose we can go into a semantic debate as to what is an unannounced visit. The current legislation requires that some notice be given. As I mentioned in my substantive reply to Senator McLucas’s second reading debate contribution, most reasonable people would suspect that five minutes is in fact, for all intents and purposes, an unannounced visit. Nevertheless, I do take Senator McLucas’s point on board about the definition of ‘unannounced’. I will take further advice from both the department and the sector and I will consider that advice in the context of the legislation that is being drafted.

In terms of whether we will hit the 3,000 unannounced spot checks, the department has advised me that that will happen—3,000 per year. It is obviously my intention, as it has been ever since I became minister, to keep the Senate and the parliament as a whole informed of developments on a very regular basis. Senator McLucas and the Senate can expect me to keep on talking about the performance of the government when it comes to issues such as unannounced spot checks, including the numbers, which I am assured by the department will be achieved.

In terms of spot checking against all of the 44 outcomes, again I have explained in very great detail why the government and the sector believe it is impractical to in fact check against all 44 outcomes. I will just let my earlier comments stand. I do not find Senator McLucas’s further contributions to be persuasive to the point where I should accept their validity or the amendment.