Paul Scarr (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of all answers given by ministers to questions without notice asked by opposition senators today.

In particular, I would like to address the issue of the report that appeared earlier today in the Australian that reported the government is in the process of considering assisting the repatriation of so-called ISIS brides. I listened very carefully to the answers from Senator Wong, representing the Prime Minister, on this issue, and they raised considerable questions in my mind as to whether or not something has already occurred in terms of the government facilitating the return of the so-called ISIS brides.

I want to quote from the article that appeared in the Australian today. It said:

Senior federal government officials are assisting the operation quietly in the background and intend to work with families of those in the camps and not-for-profit organisations to issue travel documents and obtain approvals from Kurdish-led authorities and neighbouring countries.

That quote is quite definitive in the sense of saying that there is something occurring in the background with respect to that cohort of Australian citizens who left Australia and went over to affiliate, to join with ISIS. I'm going to make a few remarks about ISIS in a moment.

The quote raises material questions in relation to whether something is occurring. And I noted, in my question, that the home affairs minister, or the spokesperson for the home affairs minister, said that the government is not providing assistance to this cohort. I also note that, as I understand it, the Prime Minister, in question time in the other place, said the report was not accurate. But I specifically asked Senator Wong whether any assistance, support or taxpayer funds had been used to assist the repatriation of the ISIS brides remaining in Syria, Iraq—the area with the control of Kurdish led authorities—since the last cohort came to Australia in October, I think it was, but certainly in 2022. The senator had to take that on notice, which begs the question, in my mind, as to whether something has actually occurred up to this point in time.

I think the Australian people have a right to know, because what we're talking about here is ISIS. And let me quote from the United Nations Human Rights Council document of 15 June 2016 in relation to ISIS:

ISIS has sought to erase the Yazidis through killings; sexual slavery, enslavement, torture and inhuman and degrading treatment and forcible transfer causing serious bodily and mental harm; the infliction of conditions of life that bring about a slow death …

And it goes on. So, we're talking about one of the most evil organisations that has ever been on the face of the earth, and we're talking about a cohort of people who left the safety of Australia, as Australian citizens, to join what was essentially a death cult. So, any proposal for people to come back to Australia, having wilfully abandoned Australia to go and join ISIS, is a question that needs to be raised in this place. I'll be very interested to hear what further information can be provided by Senator Wong in relation to what has happened between October 2022, when the last cohort arrived in Australia, and today's date.

Bear in mind that Australia has provided refuge to some of those Yazidis who came to Australia fleeing that sexual slavery, fleeing that trauma. We actually provided refuge to that wonderful community, many of whom are still dealing with the trauma they suffered and have lost loved ones. Some of them don't even know where their loved ones are. So, it would be despicable for people—adults—who knowingly left Australia, went overseas to join ISIS, to be provided with an opportunity to come back to Australia. I think we really need to know the answers in relation to this important question.

Varun Ghosh (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm going to address my remarks today to the question asked by Senator Ruston and the answers from Minister McAllister in relation to the aged-care debate and the delivery of home-care packages and the changes that are being brought it on 1 November 2025. But before we start with the government's reforms we need to go back to what we're dealing with here, which is one of the more complicated and difficult challenges that the Australian public are going to have to deal with in the coming decades. Our aged-care system is complex, and our population is ageing, and this makes for a real challenge.

We also know this is a government that's 100 per cent committed to ensuring the level of care delivered is up to standard, and we know it wasn't up to standard because of the royal commission into aged care. The interim report of that royal commission, in 2019, was titled Neglect; that was the aged-care system the Liberal government presided over and that is the aged-care system that now requires deep renovation and change, and the Albanese government is tackling that change. The final report of that royal commission was entitled Care, dignity and respect, and that is the approach this government is taking to this issue. The second thing we know is this is going to present a fiscal challenge over the long term to Australians in the context of an ageing population. The third thing we know is that the complexity of the system, the failure to plan long term and the ageing nature of the infrastructure mean there are going to be delivery challenges.

But what we saw from the opposition today here and in the other place was a political two-step—an attempt to disguise their failures by notionally supporting reforms and then to try and take little political points here and little political points in the other place to take attention away from the fact that theirs was a government that shirked the issue. Those little political games show that it's still an opposition that doesn't understand the significance of the challenge, and Minister McAllister's answers today showed that this is a government that not only understands the significance of the challenge but also understands how important it is to be rigorous in the way it approaches it. These are reforms that we need to get right and that need to stand for a long time.

While the opposition can't help but take political points, we are getting on with the business of trying to fix the aged-care system. What does that look like? It looks like whole-of-system reform. It involves resourcing aged-care providers properly. It involves providing them certainty of funding. Those two things are essential to ensure that they can plan and operate to the standards we expect in terms of the care of elderly Australians.

What is this government also committed to? It's committed to supporting the aged-care workforce. That includes delivering an additional $17.7 billion in wage increases promised by the Fair Work Commission. That supports carers, nurses and allied healthcare professionals. That's because the government understands that, when you have a stronger workforce, a workforce that is paid properly and is treated with dignity and respect, those changes flow through to the system overall and ensure that elderly Australians are paid better.

In terms of the packages that are being delivered, this government has fast-tracked 20,000 packages in the next eight weeks, and, when the new system comes in on 1 November, has guaranteed to deliver 63,000 packages to 30 June 2026. That's the underlying promise. In terms of the way that will be delivered, it will be delivered under the new reforms for a single assessment process. The current system requires multiple assessments by different providers and separate assessments as aged-care needs change. A single assessment process that is simpler to access, provides the right care levels and allows those care levels to change as needs change over time is not only going to be faster and drive down wait times but going to be more efficient. That's the other thing that's very important here because of the fiscal pressures many of these changes are going to put on our system.

What do we see overall? We see a government that is grasping the nettle and an opposition that shirked the issue for 10 years while they were in government and now tries to take little political points while supporting the overall reform. If we had a mature opposition they would be more constructive, but they can't help themselves. Instead we have the Albanese government forging a path with others in this place to try and reform the healthcare system and ensure that it serves older Australians in the long-term and provides them with the necessary care.

Leah Blyth (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Stronger Families and Stronger Communities) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I also rise to take note of all answers to all coalition questions today. It's very interesting to listen to those opposite talk about political pointscoring and an opposition that is more interested in playing political games. I would say that, on this side of the chamber, all we are focused on is elderly Australians. They deserve this government to fulfil the election promise it made of home-care packages being released. And I think it's important to say that, again, under this Labor government, nearly 90,000 older Australians are currently waiting on the national priority system for a home-care place that they have been assessed as needing. There are another 121,000 older Australians waiting to be assessed for a home-care place. That's more than 200,000 older Australians waiting for access to home-care support under Labor.

It's also important to note that Labor have released zero new home-care places this financial year, and they only released 41,215 home-care places over their entire first term in government. There was the announcement today, after two days of sustained questioning in parliament, that the coalition has forced the Albanese Labor government to release thousands of home-care packages to older Australians who have been left to wait far too long. For some of these Australians, they have been waiting longer than 15 months. In fact, it is heartbreaking to say that, tragically, 5,000 older Australians have died in the past year while waiting for care. So after our Senate committee inquiry last week, where the sector confirmed that it had capacity to provide the services associated with the care packages, today Labor have recanted and have finally agreed to release 20,000 home-care packages immediately.

This is a small dent in the list of some 200,000 Australians that are waiting for their care packages, but it is a good start. And it is a start that we've got to by the crossbench working with the coalition to push Labor to do the right thing here for older Australians. Labor promised 83,000 new packages from 1 July 2025. That was the promise that they took to the Australian people, and they claimed all sorts of excuses—that the sector wasn't quite ready and all sorts of different reasons why it couldn't happen. The priority waitlist has blown out, with a more than 400 per cent increase in just the last two years, while wait times for care packages have tripled under this government. So today, when the coalition supported the amendments to the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 for the immediate release of 20,000 home-care packages, the government voted against it here. Let that sink in for those older Australians that this government claims to care about. They weren't even going to fulfil their election promise for the 83,000 packages.

We welcome that the government has announced today that it will release a further 20,000 home-care packages by the end of the year and a further 43,000 by the end of the financial year. This takes them to the full 83,000 packages originally promised to be released from 1 July. The coalition was proud to stand up today for older Australians across the country who this Albanese Labor government has abandoned. This situation should never have happened. The money was in the budget, and the capacity was there; it was only this Labor government that stood in the way. This is a black mark on the government as they were withholding support from hundreds of thousands of older Australians who desperately needed it. And, as I mentioned, 5,000 older Australians have died waiting for the support that they had been assessed as needing. This is a crisis of the government's own making. We are proud to have forced the government into providing the additional 83,000 packages for this financial year. (Time expired)

Corinne Mulholland (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to take note of answers to questions from the opposition and I'll start with the answers to questions from Senator Ruston on aged care. What we saw in question time today, in terms of aged care, could only be described as a little bit of a rewriting of history in this place by the opposition. What we know is that the opposition had a decade in government to do something about aged care and home-care packages, and what we saw under that government was hundreds of thousands of older Australians waiting—some dying—on a waiting list to get a home-care package delivered. Those opposite turned their backs on older Australians. The Liberals and the National Party had nine budgets to do something about aged care and home-care packages, and they did nothing. They took no action on the royal commission's initial report in 2019 and no action on the royal commission's report in 2021. It took a Labor government to get elected in 2022 to deliver real outcomes and real actions for the sector. So for Senator Ruston and the opposition to come into this place new converts to the need to take action on aged care having ignored the issue while they were in government is a bit cheeky, isn't it?

I'll now turn to home-care packages. Cheekiness aside, the government has been pleased to get on with the job of reforming aged care. It's what Australians expect of us, it's what Australians voted for and it's exactly what they will get—a government that will work, not whinge. We are pleased that this government has been able to reach agreement to ensure that the aged-care bill can pass the Senate. This bill is vital to delivering the new Aged Care Act and the Support at Home program. The new program will allow older Australians to live at home for longer with support. We know that's exactly what they want to do. I'm pleased that the government will fast-track 20,000 home-care packages over the next eight weeks for older Australians, and a further 63,000 packages will be allocated from 1 November. I'm pleased that we could achieve this with bipartisan support so these packages can flow to older Australians. It will deliver better support for older Australians to receive the care that they need to live a full and enjoyable life for longer at home, which is what we know they want.

Now I'll go to the energy transition raised by my good comrade from Queensland Senator Canavan. I'm always impressed by his ability to come into this place and maintain the rage against the energy transition. We saw Senator Canavan and his colleagues at the LNP convention in Queensland recently falling over themselves to vote against their party's own commitment on net zero and, in turn, they undermined the Leader of the Opposition and her position on net zero. But from what we heard from reports on the Midwinter Ball I don't think there's a whole lot of love lost in that relationship at the moment. What we heard from the Leader of the Opposition is that dealing with the National Party is a lot like dealing with fundamentalists.

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

Senator Scarr?

Paul Scarr (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Acting Deputy President, I understand that there's a protocol not to disclose confidentiality with respect to jokes at the Midwinter Ball.

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

There's no point of order.

Corinne Mulholland (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They were reported in the news.

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

Senator Mulholland, please continue.

Corinne Mulholland (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will. I will take that interjection. It was reported in the newspapers, so maybe take it up with the journalists.

What they have done now on net zero is break through to a new realm. Last time it was Senator Canavan in this place quoting the Australian Workers Union. Today, he was in here invoking former Greens leader Bob Brown. They have gone so far off the reservation that they are over in the same paddock as the Greens. We are in a post-truth world. I know this. But it's getting a bit weird now. It's getting a little bit weird. It's always very interesting to hear those contributions from my good Queensland colleague Senator Canavan.

I always love to touch on just exactly what we have been delivering here, which is 18 gigawatts of renewables, wind and solar, to the grid, 45 per cent additional capacity for wind and solar— (Time expired)

Andrew McLachlan (SA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The motion that was moved by my good friend Senator Scarr was to take note of all the answers to coalition questions, and the first answer on which I wish to address some comments to the chamber was in relation to aged care; it was the question asked by Senator Ruston and responded to by Senator McAllister. Senator McAllister made mention that she enjoyed—I'm fairly sure the verb was 'enjoy', but she acknowledged, at least—the bipartisan approach to the aged-care legislation that has entered this chamber and been debated today. Can I also congratulate her on the excellent way she has led and navigated the passage of the bill.

I'm taking a slightly different approach to take note—raising the standard!

It reminds me, I was thinking, of one of my favourite poems, and Robert Frost is often quoted: 'The afternoon knows what the morning never suspected.' As to aged care, I always think that any society is judged by the way it looks after its elderly and those that are disabled. We have enormous challenges, with an ageing population, to ensure that they are looked after in the manner that they should be, and it is an excellent focus—that we are now funding as many people as we can to stay in their homes. For one, it releases the pressure on aged-care facilities, but also it allows them—if you ask any person who is elderly, the vast majority will say that they wish—to live their remaining years at home.

As a result of this political process, or the journey of the bill through the Senate, what we have achieved is: 83,000 home-care places have been delivered, which we'd been promised, including 40,000 of these places before the end of the year and 20,000 right now. So I also extend congratulations on her efforts and accomplishments to Senator Anne Ruston, my fellow senator from South Australia, who has prosecuted this bill and the sector unrelentingly.

I would like to address some comments to my other good friend Senator Richard Colbeck. I know that he came under intense scrutiny as a minister of the Morrison government, but he did set up the structures post the royal commission upon which the current government is building. His efforts in this sector should be acknowledged, and his legacy will be looked upon favourably as the years progress. He enhanced safety and accountability through initiatives. He had workforce initiatives. He grew the funding and the layers of accountability of the sector. And one of the happy consequences of that is that the current government can build upon those achievements.

In the remaining time available to me, I will turn my comments to the question from Senator Canavan to Senator Ayres. Now, I am one of those senators who are not fearful of targets; I also believe in the rollout of renewables, as long as they have social licence. I'd reflect on the exchange that occurred in the chamber between the questioner and the minister answering by saying that a new form of industrialisation is not going to be easy. There are going to be many trade-offs. But we can't live in denial that we have to seek out a renewable future, and it's going to involve a different set of policy settings, but also great understanding of the impact on communities.

Question agreed to.