E&OE TRANSCRIPT
DOORSTOP
CANBERRA
MONDAY, 17 SEPTEMBER 2018
 
SUBJECT/S: Scott Morrison’s cuts to aged care; Royal Commission into the aged care sector; Peter Dutton’s eligibility; Newstart
 
JIM CHALMERS, SHADOW MINISTER FOR FINANCE: Older Australians deserve much better than a Prime Minister who cuts funding to aged care and then lies to them about it. If Scott Morrison is going to finally take responsibility for the mess that is aged care, he should start by fessing up to the impact that his almost $2 billion in cuts have had on quality in the system. One of Scott Morrison's very first acts as Treasurer in the 2015 mid-year update was to cut almost half-a-billion dollars from aged care. He followed that up six months later with a $1.2 billion cut to aged care in his very first Budget.  Almost $2 billion worth of cuts in six months alone, among the very first acts of Scott Morrison as Treasurer. Scott Morrison is the architect of the cuts that have been made to the aged care system, and it's past time now for him to fess up to the impact those cuts have had on quality in the aged care system. 
 
Scott Morrison said yesterday that it was a lie to say that he had cut funding to aged care. So I direct him to two documents, both with his name on them. The first one is the mid-year update of 2015, with his name on the front: The Honourable Scott Morrison MP, Treasurer. On page 172 of that document, it says: "The Government will achieve savings of $472.4 million over four years in aged care provider funding." And then we get to the 2016 Budget, his first Budget. Again, his name on the front in black and white. These are the cuts that he's denying - page 101 of Budget Paper 2, it says: "The Government will achieve efficiencies of $1.2 billion over four years." Almost $2 billion of Scott Morrison's cuts to aged care right there in black and white in his own Budget documents.
 
The Prime Minister needs to come clean about the impact of those $2 billion of cuts on the aged care system in this country. If Scott Morrison can't be upfront about the impact of his cuts, then he can't be taken seriously when he says he will now fix the aged care system. If he can't fess up about his cuts, he can't be taken seriously about his attempts to fix the system. The Government has had report after report after report telling them about the mess the aged care system is, but they've been too divided, too dysfunctional, and too unstable to do anything about it. If the Government spent as much time standing up for older Australians as they have spent standing over each other in leadership ballots, older Australians would be better off. 
 
Older Australians have been treated very shabbily by this Government and also by a number of aged care providers. It's entirely appropriate now that we get to the bottom of the abuse and the cover ups in the system, and in that context, Labor support a Royal Commission into the aged care sector. That is a reasonable way, a responsible way, to get to the bottom of this abuse and these cover-ups in the interests of older Australians and their families who love them.
 
JOURNALIST: Could this Royal Commission be even worse than we're expecting? We're expecting some pretty grim stuff.
 
CHALMERS: We are expecting some very grim stories out of the aged care system in Australia, and it breaks your heart to think about the impact of some of this abuse and some of these cover ups on older Australians and their families who care about them. It's not possible to speculate now the full extent of what will be uncovered by that Royal Commission. It will be, no doubt, a series of brutal stories, just like we're seeing in the other Royal Commission at the moment, but time will tell what those stories entail and what the Government will do about it. 
 
JOURNALIST: Will you be contributing to the Terms of Reference? Will you bring your ideas forward about the Terms of Reference?
 
CHALMERS: We always seek to play a constructive role in getting to the bottom of these sorts of issues, and no doubt our spokesperson Julie Collins, our leader Bill Shorten, and others, will have an opinion on what those Terms of Reference should contain. The Royal Commission should be a broad one. It should look at the abuse and the cover ups in the system. It should look at issues around workforce. It should look at a whole range of issues about how these companies are run and governed. They would all be legitimate inclusions in the Terms of Reference, and we'll have more to say about that.
 
JOURNALIST: A number of question marks hanging around Peter Dutton's eligibility. Would you support a no confidence motion if that ended up happening?
 
CHALMERS: We have no confidence in Peter Dutton.  Scott Morrison has absolutely no choice now but to refer Peter Dutton's case to the High Court. It is completely untenable for Scott Morrison to continue to run a protection racket for Peter Dutton. We all know what's going on here. The extreme part of the Liberal Party, of which Peter Dutton is a part, still calls the shots in a deeply divided, dysfunctional and unstable Liberal Party. So Scott Morrison, out of weakness, is running a protection racket for Peter Dutton. The Prime Minister has no choice but to refer Peter Dutton to the High Court. There are serious questions about Peter Dutton's eligibility. This is just one of the reasons why this Government is defined by instability and illegitimacy. We've got a Cabinet minister unable to confirm that he can make decisions on behalf of the Australian people as a member of that Cabinet, and we've got a Prime Minister who's unable to even explain to the Australian people in the first place why he's sitting in the big chair and why they knifed Malcolm Turnbull.
 
JOURNALIST: There's a report out today about Newstart and the benefits of increasing the allowance. What's your position on that?
 
CHALMERS: We've made our position very clear that Newstart is too low in this country. What we want to do is go about it in a very responsible and considered, measured way in Government, with the full resources of Government, tapping some of the best minds in this area to work out all of the various interactions of Newstart and other Government payments, and see what if anything can be done about it.