SENATOR THE HON ANNE RUSTON

SHADOW MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND AGED CARE

DEPUTY LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION IN THE SENATE

SENATOR FOR SOUTH AUSTRALIA

TRANSCRIPT

INTERVIEW WITH SALLY SARA RADIO NATIONAL BREAKFAST

Topics: Ombudsman report on aged care assessments; human oversight of assessment decisions; respectful public debate and political violence.

E&OE……………………………………

SALLY SARA: We're turning to the opposition now. Anne Ruston is the Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care and a Liberal Senator for South Australia. Senator, welcome back to Breakfast.

SENATOR RUSTON: Thanks for having me.

SALLY SARA: Let's start where we left off with the Minister, and that is on the Ombudsman's report into this automated tool for aged care. What do you make of the findings that the Ombudsman has handed down?

SENATOR RUSTON: We've been raising pretty much all of the concerns that have been raised by the Ombudsman for a very long time. We have been telling the Parliament and telling the government for a long time. I'm pleased that we have now got another independent source, because don't forget the Inspector-General has also made comments very similar to what the Ombudsman has said. We've now got an independent report that the government can't ignore.

So we're really hopeful that now the government has this independent report, it will actually listen and see that its algorithm process is fundamentally flawed. It says that any reasonable person would not think the system is fair and wouldn't have confidence in it, and that they haven't been transparent in what they've told the public and told their department that this algorithm does and doesn't do.

So, you know, it's a very damning report. It's a very damning report. We can only hope that the government, now that they've got this, will actually take notice of the Ombudsman, because they certainly haven't been taking notice of Parliament.

SALLY SARA: What do you think about some of the features that are mentioned? I was just mentioning to the Minister these text boxes for assessors to type in information that then doesn't get considered by the tool. What do you think about the design?

SENATOR RUSTON: Well, the Ombudsman doesn't actually go into the specific design of the algorithm, but does draw a very clear distinction to say that the algorithm may or may not be flawed, but people shouldn't have any confidence because of all the other things that are fundamentally flawed with the process. But you make a really good point. What's the point of saying that you've got a human involved in the process when the information the human provides is not being considered in the assessment? So all these text boxes have no bearing on the determination of the computer when it decides what somebody's assessed care needs are.

SALLY SARA: What needs to happen?

SENATOR RUSTON: Well, I think, first and foremost, the government needs to actually put proper human override back in. They put in an escalation pathway last week, which was a slight improvement, but it was only a Band-Aid on a symptom. It wasn't solving the problem. They could actually reintroduce proper human override where, if the decision's wrong, an assessor can immediately say the decision's wrong and get that decision changed, instead of making somebody go through this convoluted review process that takes another three months and doesn't necessarily change the decision.

But they also need to go back and look under the bonnet of this algorithm. It appears to be fundamentally flawed because of the number of bad decisions that it's spitting out. They need to go back to the drawing board and actually have a look, get rid of the algorithm and start again and rebuild it. I think, you know, the Coalition doesn't have a problem with using technology to help an assessor as a tool in their assessment process, but no computer should ultimately make the decision. That should—

SALLY SARA: Reside with a person. You're listening to Radio National Breakfast, and you're hearing from Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care Anne Ruston. Yesterday, there was a suspension of normal business in the House of Reps to allow members to put forward messages of support to independent MP Helen Haines, who was severely injured last week. What's changed in Australian politics, in your mind, do you think?

SENATOR RUSTON: Well, I mean, I think, first and foremost, we should always have and encourage robust public debate, particularly about our policymakers, because Australians deserve to understand how their money is being spent and what the implications of their policies are. But that debate has to be respectful. And any situation where a dispute results in violence is just completely unacceptable in any circumstance, in this Parliament and anywhere in Australia.

But we have seen a significant escalation. I suppose we only have to listen to the AFP and ASIO about the escalation of risk in Australia for these sorts of attacks. We all need to question how we go about our public debate. In this place, we set the standard for the nation when it comes to debate. So whilst we should never shy away from robust debate, we need to make sure that it's always respectful.

SALLY SARA: Can the language and the intensity of debate here in Parliament House affect reactions outside?

SENATOR RUSTON: Well, I mean, quite clearly, overall, the public discourse in this nation is heating up in a way that we all don't like. And what we saw last week was just the most horrific response to somebody. I don't know what the reasoning behind the attack was, but it was something that I think shocked a nation, and of course my thoughts are with Helen, her family and her community.

But I think we do need to set a standard in this place. A standard that says what we do here sets the tone for what the rest of the nation thinks is acceptable. So there is a huge responsibility on politicians not to shy away from robust debate. I don't want anyone to think that we shouldn't be having strong debate. Governments need to be held to account for their decisions, and that's our job, and we should keep doing it. But you can be robust and strong and still be respectful.

SALLY SARA: Yes. Yesterday, Angus Taylor, the Opposition Leader, said that he disagreed with the view that there's a causal connection between robust parliamentary debate and political violence. Is he right?

SENATOR RUSTON: Well, I think it goes back to the fact that robust debate is absolutely essential for holding the government to account. I think the Australian public expect their politicians in opposition to hold their government to account, to ask questions, and quite rightly, the public expect answers to those questions. So I think there is definitely an argument to say that strong debate should be absolutely supported. But at the same time, that debate, like in any circumstance, needs to be respectful. And I genuinely believe that we set a standard for how we expect Australians to speak.

SALLY SARA: Anne Ruston, thank you for coming into the studio this morning. I appreciate it.

SENATOR RUSTON: Thanks, Sally.

ENDS