Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee, , 1:29:22 to 2:28:03
The committee examines MYEFO budget measures and questions departmental expenditure on leadership training for senior executives.
Topics: Government spending, Procurement
Speakers: Hon Anne Ruston, Julia Atkinson, Greg Pugh, Speaker 19, Dorinda Cox, Blair Comley PSM, Hon Malarndirri McCarthy, Jasmine Snow, Liz Hefren-Webb, Rachel Blackwood, Sonja Stewart
where do I find the funding allocation for the 83,000 packages that were to start being released on the 1st of July 2025?
>> I feel like we've already um answered it. Yeah, sure.
>> Uh, thanks Senator. So, it is the same answer uh that Senator sorry that Miss Stewart uh gave before and which we've given previously in this um in this committee as well. So, we go back to the fact that there was a $4.3 billion announcement. >> That $4.3 billion is predicated around the support home program being funded to achieve a specific weight time for services.
>> Okay, just slow down. slow down here. In every other instance when you have made an announcement about the release of home care packages and I can go back through every budget line through your time oh sorry not your time sorry you've been the current government's time our time in parliament uh in government there has always been an allocation in the leadup to the following year I accept into the longer term you know you you you can talk about stuff but there was 83,000 packages were announced to be start to be released on the 1st of July 2025 Um it was not anticipated until after the 1st of July 20 uh after the 1st of June 202 that there was going to be a deferral in the time for those new package or for the new support pro home program and those packages um to be released. So up until that early first week of June 2025 it was always anticipated that we were going to start the roll out of 83,000 packages in 202526. Where is the funding for that? >> It's it's not $4.3 billion somewhere off into the never never maybe here there or everywhere else. In every single time that a government has ever made a commitment to provide packages, there has been a funding allocation. I can provide table every document of every budget paper since forever. There's always an amount that is stated for it. Where is the money for the $83,000 packages? If it's in the $4.3 billion, how much of the $4.3 billion was allocated to the $83,000 packages released in 2526?
>> So, Senator, uh probably to your first point, there is a fundamental difference in the way that the support at home appropriation is structured relative to the way the homeare packages appropriation was structured. Home care packages were funded on an annual basis or an ongoing basis under support at home. The construct is around how much money do you need over a set period of time to achieve getting a set number of people into a place and only waiting for a set number of months. And so this goes back to what I've said previously and what uh Miss Stewart said previously as well. those commitments that are bookended around getting people down to a 3-month wait time by the 1st of November 2027, getting the additional 83,000 places washed through uh in the first year of the program. Uh and then having uh the level of growth uh in the program to meet demand uh which Miss Stewart mentioned previously was I think 300,000 over the uh 10 years. They are the constructs that define how much money goes into each allocation. So the question around how much for the 83,000 there is no uh definitive figure based on the interplay of each of those component pieces.
>> Well the greatest amount of respect that sounds like the greatest letter of rubbish I have ever heard in my life. You've promised 83,000 package. Well, sorry, Senator McCarthy, you've promised 83,000 packages. Um, clearly to come up with 83,000 packages there, there has to been an expectation to say that you're going to reduce weight lists to what the 3 months by 20 end of 2027. There has to have been a series of modeling and expectations sitting behind that. Um, so are you able to shed any light about the fact that your government announced that it was going to release 83,000 packages, but according to Mr. pew. There's no money attached to it. And in a minute, I'm going to come back to >> Sure. >> Senator, I can certainly uh inform the committee that we are incredibly committed to this generational reform uh
that's taking place in terms of age care right across the country. Now, Miss Stewart uh did make reference uh to the funding in terms of the 83,000 uh uh places uh in terms of the budget. Uh, so I would refer you back to the response by Miss Smith.
>> Thank you, Senator. >> Miss Stewart, sorry. >> Yeah, thank you. Um, okay. So, we've got 83,000 packages that have got no funding allocated to them apart from somewhere in some amorphous mass of money that is trying to achieve something by the end of 2027, which is what the advice or evidence you've just just a month or so ago in my EPO um there is a line item the the myo for 2526 um that says the government is supporting thousands Australian blah blah blah blah about uh to to provide an additional 63,000 which obviously is the 20,000 that occurred in um home care and then obviously additional 63,000 which are being released as support at home packages. Um and this builds on the 20,000 home care packages that released before the age. This represents the total additionally investment of $947,800,000 in 2526. So what changed between your evidence 5 minutes ago and the fact that we now have a budget item that's been included in my EO and there was no line there was no line item anywhere else about the funding for this. But now all of a sudden there is. But you telling me that apparently we don't have funding allocated to these packages, but it seems to be in my effort.
>> Uh so thanks Senator. So just a couple of points of distinction. At no point did I say there is no funding attached to the 83,000. What I said was it is wrapped up in the 4.3 billion appropriation over the forward estimates period and that was based on the announcement that were made in previous my budget context when we had a commencement date of 1 July 2025. I'm not sure if my colleague Mr. Siggonov is at the table. Uh but if not, I can tell you some of the primary drivers that relate to the announcement around the 947.8 million. That was because the 83,000 were originally meant to wash through the program through the first 12 months and then through the legislative requirement through the AOLA debate bill through through the debate on the AOLA bill, sorry. Um there was a commitment to bring forward 20,000 of those uh as home care packages and I've given evidence in this um forum before that the average cost of a home care package uh is higher than the average cost of a support at home place but there are uh eight classifications for support at home relative to four for HCP. So it it um you know that that nets out. However, uh the other component piece of that announcement was that we were bringing forward the 63,000 support at home places. So whereas the original release schedule would have had that ready to go by the 31st of October 2027, the legislative requirement was to bring that forward to the 30th of uh sorry uh 31st of October 2026. The legislative requirement brought that forward by four months. Are you dead
serious that you're telling me that your interpretation despite the government's commitment that there would be 83,000 packages released in 2526 that because the government failed to get their age care act in place by the 1st of July as they promised that there was never any intention of honoring the 83,000 packages in 2526. that somehow this was just going to kick it out for 4 months to 20 October 2026. When when was that announcement made that the the commitment to 83,000 packages in 2526 was not going to be
>> Uh I that's that's not my evidence at all. What I said was that 83,000 were committed to be pushed through the program in the first year of the program.
>> No, that's not what the announcement was. The announcement was in 2425 or November 2024 that 83,000 packages would be released um in 2526. Um and you know that was in my EO is in the minister's statement. Um I think we've talked about it in estimates estimates and so I'm just keen to understand how you cannot say that it is not a broken promise that a commitment was made for 83,000 packages in 2526 because of the failure of the ability to implement a new program that somehow that promise is is not a broken promise um and that you can kick it down the road by 4 months. Um, and as we're sitting here today, you have done everything you can, and I mean, I'm not saying it's your fault. You've only been giving me the information you've got in front of you. That the opakeness of the funding through this um will not allow us to see how much money was allocated to those 83,000 packages prior to the change in the time frame, despite the fact that is stated in my EFO. Um, you said that the $4.3 billion was to sort of like reach some thing at the end of 2027. You say there's no capacity for you to tell me how much of that $4.3 billion of the transition funding for support at home was going to those packages. And now we find out that you actually have provided funding ongoing for the remainder of the packages. You're talking about packages being brought forward when they were always committed to that time frame. Quite frankly, can you understand why Australians who have been made commitments to um about the delivery of services including 83,000 packages would be sitting here today scratching their heads as to what actually you're doing? So, is there any way that you can provide me with any clarity because it appears to me that the you've got you said the money for the 83,000 packages is in the 4.3 billion. There is now an appropriation that is specific and committed for 63,000 of those 83,000 in the myo in December 2025. So, where's the duplication? Is it an additional $947.8 million that is now being required to deliver those in over and above what was originally committed?
>> I think Mr. Pew was in the middle of his answer from what I could gather. Um, Senator Ruston, so if we can give him
some time to put it on the record and to
to clarify his evidence. um what I heard from him was that that was not correct in relation to what he said. So if we can I I'll hand the call to him to clarify his [clears throat] statement.
>> So just one point of distinction we're talking about that 4 month period where there was a deferral and so the fact that there is 947.8 8 million that's been announced as a measure in the my info papers means that it is additional funding and I've given my evidence around what the primary drivers are for that. The rest um I think we've been through three or four times. So that's that is the way that the appropriation works. That's the interplay with the my info announcement. So that is the information that I'm able to provide.
Can I just um >> could I uh just um provide some evidence about our um the department's activities to meet the commitment around the 83,000 um packages because I think that's quite important in that we are are working with the sector to deliver that. So I think um I would like to put that on the on the record that um there was a commitment for 20,000 additional packages to be delivered by the 1st of November 2025 and that has happened and then 20,000 to be released between the 1st of November and the 31st of December 2025 and then a further 43,000 between the 1st of January 2026 and the 30th of June 2026 and a total of 6,615 out of the 43,000 have been released in Jan. January 2026. So, I just wanted to uh put on the record that we are meeting that government commitment around the release of the packages. Um, thank you.
>> Thank you, Miss Stewart. Uh, Senator Russen, did you want to continue? Oh, I
Back to this, where is the appropriation for the 20,000 packages that were released as home care packages between, you know, in um October last year
>> as in the 20,000 that were brought forward into the deferral period. They will be contained in the >> Is that what you're Sorry, you're talking about the 20,000 that were released during the deferral period. So
between the 1st of July in the Yes.
>> Yeah. So those 20,000 Yeah. the they will be in the my info papers and they'll be in the health pays the portfolio of additional estimate statements but I don't have those in
>> You know what would be really helpful Mr. Pew? I mean the these are estimates and I'm quite entitled to prosecute the budget. It appears to me that there are hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars washing around in this area and there is absolutely no transparency at all about where this money is and what it is going to. So I would suggest to you if given that you obviously very have been very involved in this that you should know where they are. I cannot find I have been through the myo papers. I've been through the budget papers. I've been through the myo papers. I cannot find any clarity. You are not giving me any clarity today in your answers. And now you say to me, "Oh, they're in the budget papers." Well, could you perhaps tell me where in the budget papers cuz I can't find them.
>> So, I can uh do we have them?
>> I've got my info paper. The measure is outlined on page 249. >> In appendix A, which is policy taken, decisions taken since the 2020 PIO. Um, if you give us a minute, we can go to the portfolio additional estimate statement to find the relevant line item. Um,
>> okay. So, Mr. Comley, what I'd love then, if you can do that, could you tell me where the 20,000 packages that were released in the deferral period are, where the 20,000 supported home packages have been funded for the period from the 1st of November to the 30th of uh 31st of of of December. I'm assuming that's >> the myo um
>> 249 improving in home age care support.
>> Okay.
>> In terms of where you'll find it in the portfolio additional estimate statement. Can I suggest that we um we just take that offline to find you the relevant page where you'll have listed the the funding u made available for inhome age care support which is under the age care program. So I >> we can do it live in front of you or perhaps we can come back with that so we can direct you to the right line item in the budget papers.
>> Yeah, if you're happy to do that. We'll be coming back from a break.
>> Yep. you know. Yeah. So, >> just some clarity about where the money is for everything that's been promised, committed or otherwise would be really good. Um, because I'm trying to understand, you keep talking about, you know, it's it where there are no savings. it it's an additional cost but I don't understand how something could be an additional cost if it's already been announced and can accounted for because so I asked you I think on a couple of times in estimates how much s what was the savings for the deferral period because you obviously weren't you didn't release any packages during that time so none of the 83,000 packages were released until the when we forced the issue at the when the act the caller act went through so then there was a period of time when nothing was released and we asked what the saving was and we were told and the treasurer stood up and said that the cost of the deferral period of 4 months was actually going to be I think $900 million. I can find nowhere any explanation about how you can come up that it was going to cost $900 million not to release any more packages. So I I suppose my frustration here and what I'd love you to be able to clarify for me if you can is where how can the treasurer stand up and say that there was going to be a cost of deferral of $900 million and yet you can't even tell me how much was budgeted for for this process because it's tied up in some amorphous amount of It looks like you're playing tricky but you may not be. So, I'd really love you to be able to explain to me why I shouldn't think and the rest of Australia shouldn't think that that this government has been been very tricky with hundreds of millions of dollars, if not billions of dollars. So, happy for you to take it on notice and come back in some explanation. I think you understand where I'm coming from. Um, so can I just ask how many um people are currently receiving support at home? divided into those that are having
>> Oh, sorry. This is in terms of your
>> how many support.
>> Can I just clarify? Sorry. Um, is this in terms of the responses to your
>> Just to answer the question. I don't care whether it's in response to my letter or the response to my question
>> um in terms of the number receiving support at home.
>> Um, I can answer that one if we like. >> Yeah. Uh so as at the 31st of December there were 346,893 uh allocated support at home ongoing places
>> and how many of those are at 60%.
>> 36,400.
>> So that was the
>> and three.
>> Okay. So that's it. Okay. No problem. And how many people at the same period of time were in receipt of
>> Uh so that's that's the figure where our data doesn't allow us to compare that at this point in time.
>> You don't know how many people are receiving CHSP.
>> We can provide statistics about how many people will have received codes for CHSP. I'm going to invite my colleague Miss Atkinson to walk you through how the CHSP data set currently sits today.
Senator, so in a given year we can um we know how many people access a service through CHSP.
>> Oh, so maybe we start with how many people are are eligible through your assessment to be able to get access to CHSP.
>> I'm going to need Miss Blackwood to help me with that element of the data, but what I can give you now is um some periods of how many people access CHSP, and we'll come to that in a moment. Um so about 838,000 people every year access a service through CHSP and in the period between 1 July 2025 and 1 31 December 2025 about 457,053 people accessed one or more services under CHSP. period 1 July 2025 to 31 December 2025 over a six-month period. Yes.
>> Okay. So, it's sort of >> And so, what was the 838K? What was the period for that?
>> That's for a 12-month period, Senator.
>> Which 12-month period?
>> Uh, it's about that. Um, that would have been the the last full 12 months that we have data on. So, that would be the financial year 2425.
>> So, 24. So most likely July 24 to June
>> Yes.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So it it appears as if in the 6 months for in the next 6 months with there has been quite a marked increase in the number of people who have been accessing CHSP services.
>> It would be fair to say that there is a an increase uh in the what the data is showing us of how many people have accessed one or more CHSP service over
that time. This is the number of people, not the number of services accessed. I'm assuming
>> the number of people, so individuals who have accessed the program. [clears throat] So, some individuals will access several services, others may only access one. Some individuals may access a service for a short period of time or one off. Others may access that service ongoing over a period of time. So, you can hear there's some modularities uh in how uh what the characteristics of an individual are. when you roll that up to the national level over a 12-month period, um it's difficult to get a sense of um whether that what exactly is driving that figure um because it might be uh that more people are presenting for a service or it might be that some people are that well more people are presenting for a service but that could be that some people are using less of a service in CHSP uh etc. So that there's a lot of um variables underneath those figures. So
talk me through just briefly um how is able to access one of these services. What are the process that they need to go through given the new single assessment?
>> Sure. So uh to access a service in CHSP um somebody should uh seek to access um my age care. So they can do that through the my age care contact center or they can look at an online form. Um so uh that could be an older person or an older person with their supporter. uh the contact center or the form will collect a um minimum amount of data to determine um whether or not that person is in fact eligible for age care services and if they are eligible for age care services they will refer them to an assessment agency. Uh the assessment agency will then triage uh the individual. So they'll ask a little bit more information. They'll take the information they have, they'll ask a little bit more. And the purpose of that is to determine uh in the broad um is this a person with complex needs or a person with entry- level needs and that will assist the assessment organization to determine which assessor out of their workforce they should send out to that person.
>> And so whether they go off to support at home or whether they go to CHSP
>> in in the broad that is generally the intent. Um however uh it it may be that um at triage uh that the assessor goes out um and they may send an assessor who is not clinically trained on occasion um they may find that in having a longer conversation with that client uh they find that the person is more complex than what the triage indicated and on that case they would um that that that there would still be another pathway through which they'd be fully assessed.
>> Yeah. So, so just but just in effect um there's a single point of entry um an assessment um and so at that point largely it's determined whether the person's care needs are sufficient for them to need support at home or whether that will be adequately supported through the CHSP and a little bit of sort of crossover in the middle that may change. So that that's all good. Um so you you have no um ability to understand how many people are eligible to be able to get access. I mean you you've you've got the data on how many people have actually accessed a service. So you're saying it's 830 um 8,000 in the last four years data that you've got. But how many people would have been eligible to access a service? Because I'm my understanding is that there would have been a number of people who would have been um assessed as being eligible for CHSP who either haven't been able to get a service because there wasn't enough one available to them um you know just haven't done it etc etc. How many people have been through your assessment process and have been determined eligible to be able to access CHSP?
>> Yeah, I I don't have that specific data to hand. I'm just checking with the team. Um what I do have is the number of simple or home support assessments that were completed in the July to December uh six months of last year. So that
>> the assessments were completed Yeah, >> but I mean an assessment that's fine to tell me how many assessments were completed in 6 months, but there obviously those people who had an assessment in the previous 5 years or however long. I mean there must be an accumulating number of people who are eligible for CHSP. The only way they come off CHSP is they graduate to support at home or they go into residential care or quite frankly they they die. Um, so I'm just interesting to understand we've got a number of in a full year of 838,000 people who accessed CHSP services. What I need to know is if every person who has been deemed eligible for a CHP service decided to access one in a year, [clears throat] how many people would
>> So, Senator, I I understand the intent of your question and and why you're asking it. Um it it is a challenging question for us to answer given the data sets and the systems that we have available to us. Uh so we can see how many approvals um at any given time and I believe Miss Blackwood said we would have to um seek that data out. We don't have it in front of us. Um we can see how many people take up an approval um and receive a service. Uh what we can't see is um the decision- making that occurs in between those two um two actions. So,
>> so can you and say that again for me? >> You can you you've got access to
>> we can see how many approvals uh come out of the assessment system for particular
>> Okay. Can you tell me how many approvals
have come out? >> We can find that data for you. Um but we don't have it right in front of us and Miss Blackwood's team is looking into that for you now
>> because you must know how many. So, so are you telling me that you know how many people have been approved, but you don't know how many people fall out the other end of it because they no longer are in CHSB because some other circumstance takes them out?
>> Senator, there there is a range of other circumstances.
>> Yeah, I get that. I get that. But I'm
>> I'm trying to answer your question,
>> When they leave like
>> No, [clears throat] we do not. And and and the reason we don't is because we collect that data in different systems and always have it's a legacy issue with the program. It's a um it's a challenge with the data set that the department is aware of and has been taking action to remediate. Um so for the assessment system we collect that approval data through health systems uh in the my age care gateway. Um for uh actual delivery of service is collected through the commonwealth grants hub data exchange. Those two systems do not talk to each other. Um and we've been working on a long run process in which to better data match. Uh and one of the things that we have done recently, so as of January this year, uh the Commonwealth Grants Hub data exchange, um so as as a requirement under funding agreements for CHSP providers and under the new age care act, CHSP providers must now report to us uh age care ids of each and every person that they provide a service to and what pro service they provide. Now because we will start to gather that data that will again improve our ability to match um instances of approval to instances of service delivered. At the moment we don't have that data and it's only just started to be collect collected. We also don't have that interoperability between systems. So it will take us some time to collect the data and then to look at it and see what it's telling us. Um so I understand your frustration with the question. I myself have found it somewhat frustrating and it is a piece of work that we continue to kind of invest time in because we know that it's important. Uh but the fact of the matter is um we don't have a great handle on exactly what happens between that piece of data and that one. Uh and we know that there are a number of reasons why people might drop out between those two um points in time. Some of which are entirely driven by consumer choice.
>> So this this
um I'm just checking we are due for a break now. um to
>> okay no I can come back over you've got
plenty of time and I will allow that to happen but I'm conscious that I feel the lag in the room uh we will break now for a morning tea and return with outcome three on aging and age care at 11:15 >> Okay, we are resumeuming in outcome three uh aging and aged care. Um we are going to go to Miss Balo to um uh provide some answers in relation to uh questions that Senator Ruston had. So Miss Bowman-Smart, you have
>> Thanks, Senator. So you asked earlier about contract number 4216195. So that's a contract uh for membership of a Jeff Whan Learning Group. >> Uh Jeff Whan.
>> Oh yes. Yes, that's another thing. Yep.
>> Wh uh learning group. It's uh a a development program that runs learning groups for senior executives uh where they uh are involved in groups with uh colleagues who are from different governments across Australia from different departments including and also across New Zealand uh as a professional development exercise. So this is a 12-month membership for a senior staff
>> for a senior staff member. >> Yes. So, one person [clears throat] $11,770 and and what is the expectation in terms of the deliverable that the department is expecting to um achieve out of this particular person's um involvement in this program.
>> Yeah. So, so we look at these sorts of programs whether it be Jeff Whan, whether it be other sorts of leadership programs or individual coaching uh very much about how to ensure that our senior leaders are working to their full leadership potential. So, if they are experiencing um going through a period of development, how we can support that, how they can learn from peers and there'll also be expert speakers and things like that at the the learning group.
>> I know that's fine. But what what is your measurement in terms of like when you make a decision to spend $11,770 um dollars of Australian taxpayers funds on the professional development of one of your colleagues. Um I'm just interested to understand what is the metric that you run over that to say that you can stand there and say hand on
>> We would look at it through their performance agreements and their performance arrangements. [clears throat]
>> Okay. All right. And so how how many um employees are in the agency are able to access the kind of this this kind of program.
>> Uh so for our senior executives uh there is an allowance as part of their package of of a
>> this clearly isn't as part of their package. This is if it was part of their package would that show up on a tender document?
>> Uh yes it would.
>> So that that could have been paid for by
>> No. It it's their package is not paid this part of their package is not paid to them directly. It's it's an amount they can access that the department will pay for professional development services uh which can or or learning and development activities. So this would could have been paid for uh through through that mechanism as part of that sort of arrangement for staff below senior executive level. it is uh a decision made uh by their their manager looking at uh particularly for high potential staff where there is that opportunity to continue to to grow them and to accelerate their development. Uh and in this instance I believe it was for someone who was a non senior executive officer who who was uh this
one >> this one I mean obviously we don't want but too much detail we don't identify
>> on the cusp of if you like so how to [clears throat] support and accelerate
their development. Okay. So in terms of um the professional development entitlement that is part of the packages that are provided to the um offices of the department, what is the total quantum um that people if can access? So I'm assuming that you know employee A at as part of their contract would have $20,000 as an example that they were able to access. What is the quantum of the funding that is accessible by staff at the department for professional
development uh allowance only [clears throat] applies to senior executive
>> service members. So how much is that?
>> Uh it's $5,000.
>> No, no, no. But $5,000 per year
>> per person.
>> Per per person. And how many people are eligible?
>> About just under 200.
>> 200 people are eligible.
>> That is not usually fully spent every year, but that that's the amount uh that's possible. And it it there's some sort of some opportunities to sometimes bridge across two years.
So basically a million dollars a year of
>> up to
>> Yeah. Yeah. can be spent. Okay. Thank you. Um so um given I think you said Mr. um Professor Pervan's online.
>> That's right.
>> Do I'm happy to go to him first.
Professor Pan I believe is on our video conferencing. Is that correct?
>> He doesn't have any staff to get him put on. Poor man. No staff. >> Okay. I mean, I'm happy to.
>> Yeah. Apparently there's an issue with his VC. So maybe if you go to either pricing authority or quality and safety commission.
>> He is the independent pricing authority. >> Um so what what about um my friend miss
Um before uh Senator Russen takes uh your you through some questions, Miss Eron Webb, just wondering if you had an opening statement that you wanted to
>> Heb quality and safety commissioner. No, I don't have an opening state.
>> Great. Well, Senator Ruston, you have a