E&OE TRANSCRIPT
TELEVISION INTERVIEW
ABC AFTERNOON BRIEFING
MONDAY, 24 AUGUST 2020
SUBJECTS: Aged care crisis; The Labor Party; JobKeeper and JobSeeker; State borders; Vaccines.
PATRICIA KARVELAS, HOST: Jim Chalmers, welcome.
JIM CHALMERS, SHADOW TREASURER: Hi Patricia.
KARVELAS: The Aged Care Minister Richard Colbeck has apologised for not being able to recall information at Friday's Senate inquiry. Why do you think he needs to resign?
CHALMERS: He's clearly not up to the job. It's one thing to apologise for not knowing how many older Australians had passed away because of COVID in these homes; it's quite another thing to have been responsible alongside the Prime Minister for not having a genuine workable plan in place to deal with these issues. We spent all of Question Time today asking the Government about this so-called plan in aged care, asking why they didn't heed the warnings after the earlier mistakes made in aged care homes, and how many of these 328 Australians who have been lost to this virus in these homes, how many of those deaths could have been avoided if they actually had a proper plan in place. The royal commission says there wasn't a plan. That's been very costly in terms of lives lost.
KARVELAS: The Prime Minister said today that the number of severely impacted facilities has been reduced to three. Is the plan that's in place now working? Do you concede that it's been successful?
CHALMERS: I don't think any objective observer of what's happened in aged care in the last few months could say that (a) there's been a plan, or (b) that it's been successful. We've lost 328 lives. The Prime Minister on some days takes responsibility, on other days tries to engage in these weasel words, pretending it's somebody else's fault. The fact of the matter is the Commonwealth is responsible for aged care. They didn't have a workable plan. They didn't act swiftly enough to learn some of the lessons from what had happened in earlier months. As a consequence of that, aged care has become really one of the defining the debacles of the Government's response to this COVID-19 virus.
KARVELAS: The problems in aged care stretch back decades, Jim Chalmers. How do you think the system should be reformed in a longer-term sense?
CHALMERS: I think you're right to point out that these issues aren't new. This is a Government that's been in office now for seven years. They put in place a royal commission which has come out with some interim recommendations around the use of physical and chemical restraints, around the home care waiting lists, around all kinds of issues like that, getting people under 65 out of homes. It's made some interim recommendations and the rest of the recommendations I think we'll get in February of next year. There'll be a lot that we can learn from the conclusions of the royal commission. But in the near-term, one of the key conclusions out of the royal commission has been that the Government didn't have a plan for what's unfolded here. There is a crisis in aged care. It did exist before but it's been turbocharged now by this diabolical virus. The point that we are entitled to make is when the Commonwealth is 100 per cent responsible for aged care and the royal commission says there wasn't a plan, well why wasn't there a plan and how many lives has that cost?
KARVELAS: Okay. Your colleague Bill Shorten spoke to my colleague David Speers on Insiders several weeks ago, and pointed to the profit motive of aged care providers. Do you think that's the problem, that they exist for profit?
CHALMERS: Whatever the model is, it isn't working perfectly. We'll have discussions around the royal commission's recommendations, when they're available, about the optimal mix of public and private. We haven't come to a concluded view there. But the points that Bill was making are very similar to the points that Julie Collins, our spokeswoman, and others, have been making which is that aged care isn't working to look after and cherish older people who have done so much for this country, and need and deserve better treatment than they're getting.
KARVELAS: They absolutely do, but do you think that one of the reasons it's failing is because it's based on a profit motive, and that that's inconsistent with looking after older Australians?
CHALMERS: I'll be guided by the royal commission. I'll be guided by Julie Collins. I'm not prepared to make that conclusion definitively. But clearly the model as it stands has not been providing the care that people need and deserve. Clearly, there is a case -
KARVELAS: And is one of those reasons because of the profit motive? Is that the conclusion you're coming to? That that imperative to actually make money, to make profit, to be a business, is what butting up against running a good service? Is that the problem here?
CHALMERS: That's a conclusion for the commission. It's a conclusion for Julie Collins and others. But clearly as I've said now a couple of times, there is an issue with the model. We haven't struck the right balance. We haven't got the right mix of provision because people aren't getting the care that they need and deserve. That's obvious. As this crisis unfolds, as the debate is carried on, we'll make a contribution via our spokespeople.
KARVELAS: Just before I move on to the economic issues you're going to be dealing with this week, what do you make of Joel Fitzgibbon's suggestion, entry into the debate, in relation to a future split in the Labor Party?
CHALMERS: I don't agree with it. If the point is that we've got different constituencies in different parts of the country with different interests, then yes that's true, but that's always been true, more-or-less. Our job is not to sharpen the differences between people, but to find common cause and find what unites us, to build a big constituency for change in this country. That's what my focus is. Everyone's contribution is welcome. It's valued. It's listened to. But I think our time is better spent working out how we can unite the country behind a common cause; how we can solve some of these diabolical issues in the economy in particular -
KARVELAS: Have you told him to pull his head in?
CHALMERS: No, it's not my job to do that, Patricia. I don't -
KARVELAS: Have you shared your views that he should perhaps not be saying these things at this point?
CHALMERS: No, I haven't Patricia. As I said, I respect the views of my colleagues. Everyone's opinion is welcome. I don't necessarily share that one, that we're heading in that direction. The point I'm making Patricia is that our job, as it has always been in the Labor Party as a party of government is to represent all Australians in the bush, in the cities, in the suburbs. To do that we need to find common cause. We need to find what unites us and build a big constituency for change around that.
KARVELAS: Alright. Labor's calling on the Government not to reduce the rates of JobKeeper and JobSeeker payments in September. What do you want instead? When should they be tapered out?
CHALMERS: The point we've been making is that you want to make sure that your response to this recession is tailored to the conditions in the economy. We've been making the fairly obvious point that when the Government announced these changes to JobKeeper, it was before Victoria had got substantially worse, it was before the lockdowns that you're experiencing in Victoria. It warrants another look. It warrants a reconsideration of the best rate and the best way to provide that support into the economy. We want to see it tailored to what is happening. We know from Treasury numbers in the papers today released by the Government that in the labour market, unemployment is expected to get worse before it gets better. The Government expects 400,000 extra Australians to lose their job between now and Christmas. The Government is hell-bent on withdrawing that support out of the economy. It makes no sense to do that without a plan for jobs to replace it. We've argued for the Government's plans to be reconsidered. We think that's common sense.
KARVELAS: Do you think that the closure of state borders, particularly when we look at some of these border closures of states with zero cases to other states with low numbers of cases, should stop? Do you think that needs to be reviewed? Is that something that you think's important?
CHALMERS: The states have those arrangements under constant review, as they should. They should be listening to the best medical advice as it evolves. That's what they've been doing. In many ways, when it comes to Annastacia Palaszczuk or Mark McGowan, that's been the secret to their success as leaders as during this crisis, to listen to the advice, to pay attention when that evolves, and to do the right and responsible thing by their people. That's the approach that we think should be supported. For example in my home state of Queensland, months ago Josh Frydenberg was calling for the borders to be opened. That could have been a recipe for disaster for jobs lost and lives lost. We need to make sure that we're backing in the Premiers when they're making good decisions based on the right advice.
KARVELAS: Okay. Obviously it's having severe economic impacts. We had the QANTAS boss intervene last week and say that this is a serious issue. Obviously, as the economic spokesman for Labor, do you think there is an urgency around trying to lift some of these hard borders, particularly in cases like WA? Queenslanders can't go to WA either, but there's not a lot of community transmission in Queensland. Does that seem justified?
CHALMERS: My position Patricia is that the absolute worst thing for the economy would be another outbreak of the virus. We've seen that in Victoria. Our priority needs to be doing the safe, cautious, right and responsible thing because that at the end of the day will do more to protect the economy than opening the borders too early. Nobody wants these lockdowns and these border closures to exist any longer than is absolutely necessary. But what's been proven in the last little while is that they have been necessary. When you spend as much time with the business community as I do, the thing that people really nervous about is another outbreak of the virus. Those leaders are doing the right and responsible thing in making that their number one priority. If they do that and we can limit the spread then we can get the economy back on track.
KARVELAS: Just finally, a story has broken this afternoon. I'd love to hear what you think. Is it irresponsible of the Sydney Archbishop Anthony Fisher to suggest Catholics shouldn't take the Oxford vaccine - of course it hasn't been rolled out yet - because it's made using stem cells from what he says are aborted foetuses?
CHALMERS: First of all the point that you just made in your question, that we shouldn't be getting ahead of ourselves and that we don't have access to this vaccine, is an important point, if not the most important point. My personal view is if and when a vaccine is available and rolled out that as many people as possible should get vaccinated. That's my personal view and I say that as a Catholic. That's the best outcome for Australia. The vaccine is really what will get us to the other side of this diabolical health problem with all of the economic consequences it brings.
KARVELAS: Are these comments unhelpful then, given, yes, you have to get the public on board to actually accept taking the vaccine?
CHALMERS: They jumped the gun a bit. I think that's the first bit. We don't have access to it. We don't know exactly what the final vaccine will look like. They jumped the gun. Whether or not they are unhelpful, I'm not keen to get into that. My personal view which I'm happy to share is that the more Australians that vaccinated when the vaccine is available, the better. There will always be some exceptions but we need to make sure it has broad coverage. That's how we protect each other and that's how we protect the economy as well.
KARVELAS: Jim Chalmers, lovely to speak to you. Wear a mask. Keep safe.
CHALMERS: Thanks Patricia.
ENDS
