My question is to the Minister for Aged Care and Senior Australians, Senator Colbeck. I refer to the minister's letter answering questions taken on notice in Senate question time yesterday in relation to the Earle Haven nursing home in Queensland, operated by People Care Pty Ltd, which recently closed with over 70 elderly residents evacuated to other aged-care facilities and a public hospital. The minister's response today confirms that, prior to the evacuation of residents, People Care had at least seven sanctions, including for failing to provide residents with a safe environment and failing to provide adequate nutrition and hydration. In addition, People Care had been the subject of 22 complaints since 1 January 2018. With this history of sanctions and complaints, how is it that People Care was allowed to keep operating the Earle Haven nursing home, putting the health of over 70 older Australians at risk?

Thank you, Senator Watt, for the question. Quite simply, it is because, as sanctions, which are a function of the quality system that we operate in this country, are applied, corrective action is taken to deal with the sanctions. Sanctions aren't necessarily a mortal process in the quality system. They are actually a mechanism by which the quality agency goes in, conducts reviews of the activities within a service, says to the service, 'You need to take corrective action,' goes back, and assesses the corrective action that's been taken. Once the corrective action has been taken to resolve the issues, the sanctions process is closed. On each occasion in previous circumstances, that's exactly what happened. So the agency went in, corrective action was taken to resolve the issues and then the sanctions process was completed. That's what happens in all circumstances where there are issues that are found in aged-care facilities across Australia. That is actually how a quality system works.

The process is: an inspection is undertaken, defects or faults are found, corrective action is taken by the facility under the supervision and direction of the quality agency and, once those processes are completed, the sanctions process is closed. That's happened, as you've noted, on a number of occasions.

Senator Watt, a supplementary question.

Is the minister aware that the operation of the Earle Haven nursing home had been subcontracted to a company called Help Street, whose owner was the subject of an Australian Securities and Investments Commission ban for unpaid debts?

Thanks, Senator, for the supplementary question. As the events of 11 July unfolded, I did become aware of those matters. I wasn't previously aware of those issues that you've raised with respect to the subcontracting arrangements and also the directors who were involved. In fact, that's one of the reasons that I've instigated the inquiry that I had. It's those sorts of issues, through subcontracting processes, that I want to get the answers to because, as we have all agreed in the chamber, we want to prevent those sorts of things occurring. I wasn't aware and I don't think anyone was necessarily aware of all of the details that Senator Watt— (Time expired)

Senator Watt, a final supplementary question.

Given the history of sanctions, complaints and corporate wrongdoing, why did this Liberal-National government allow residents of Earle Haven nursing home to be put at risk in this way?

Senator, I completely reject the premise of your question, because what you're trying to do in this circumstance—

Senator Watt interjecting—

Actually, you belled the cat yourself last night.

Senator Watt interjecting—

Order, Senator Watt! Senator Cormann, on a point of order?

Interjections are always disorderly. The level of interjection is completely and utterly unacceptable. A question is asked and it's immediately followed by a barrage of interjection, preventing the minister from answering the question. Clearly, the senator's not interested in the answer; he's just interested in political points.

Senator Wong?

On the point of order: whilst Senator Watt is doing his best, he's certainly nowhere near Senator Doug Cameron on the barrage yet. I think Senator Cormann is demonstrating his sensitivity over a minister who's struggling.

I'm not sure if, with all due respect to our former colleague, that's the best example. Interjections are always disorderly. I had just called the senator to order. I call Senator Colbeck to continue his answer.

The thing that concerns me about where Labor and Senator Watt are trying to go with this issue right now is that they're trying to make it about something that it wasn't. They're trying to go to something about what it wasn't. They're trying to suggest that people knew in advance what might happen at Earle Haven—those terrible circumstances that happened at Earle Haven on 11 July. But Senator Watt belled the cat himself last night in his adjournment speech when he said:

… the paramedics, people from Gold Coast Health and every single person who got involved in this emergency effort.

(Time expired)