Wednesday, 25 May 2022

Motions

Emergency Services Telecommunications Authority

Ms CROZIER (Southern Metropolitan) (10:01): I rise to speak to my motion 773 regarding the very real crisis that has been plaguing our 000 system or, as it is known now, ESTA. I move:

That this house:

(1) notes:

(a) the Ashton review into the capabilities of the Emergency Services Telecommunications Authority (ESTA) and its call-taking failures does not adequately grapple with the serious, urgent and life-threatening issues at ESTA, appearing to not seriously or properly engage with deaths caused, in whole or in part, by ESTA’s failings;

(b) that the Ashton review instead provides a set of recommendations focused on ‘cultural reform’, ‘rebranding’, ‘partnerships’, ‘strategic road maps’ and ‘management plans’, which is management speak that fails to grapple with the life and death issues involved or to provide an urgent solution to ensure that the 000 call-taking service meets all benchmarks, provides adequate services and stops unacceptable delays and the unnecessary deaths of Victorians; and

(2) calls on ESTA to publicly release weekly performance reports from 1 July 2022.

I know that the government will say, ‘We’ve got the inspector-general for emergency management looking into the serious number of deaths that have occurred because of the 000 crisis’, but as the Ashton review points out in the executive summary:

For some time now, there has been significant concern around the effectiveness of ESTA’s capability and capacity to deliver consistent Triple Zero (000) services across Victoria.

We know that to be true because in 2016, when there was a thunderstorm asthma event and tragically so many Victorians died, there were concerns around the capacity of ESTA. What Victorians were told when COVID hit in January 2020, and then of course the numbers grew in February, was that Victoria could cope, that our health system was world class and it would be able to withstand what was coming our way. I grant that nobody could foresee what was to happen, but we were watching pictures from around the world and we knew that COVID was a very serious disease. At that point in time there were no vaccines, and it is quite remarkable how far the world moved and how quickly to get those vaccines developed.

I digress, because I make the point here that in the weeks after that the government put us into lockdown. Everybody understood the reason for that: we needed to prepare our health system. But over the last few years Victoria has gone into lockdown after lockdown—six lockdowns—with Melbourne being the longest locked-down city. We were constantly reminded that we needed to prepare our health system, but they did not prepare our health system. They failed to recognise that ESTA is a part of that system and came out saying, ‘Well, we didn’t foresee the modelling from the omicron wave’. They were relying on the modelling for COVID, but they did not foresee the omicron wave. You cannot use that as the excuse. The lockdowns, as I said, have caused so many issues across the system where people who have got health conditions are going to get sicker. Our elective surgery delays are going to cause people to get sicker. They are going to need emergency care, and that involves ambulance, that involves emergency departments, that involves hospital admissions and it involves, sadly, 000. Yes, there were some cases of people ringing 000 for trivial matters. That has always occurred, and I understand that frustration for many of the ESTA call takers. By no means, may I say, is this motion reflecting on those people that work within ESTA and 000 taking the hard calls and listening to people desperate: ‘When is the ambulance arriving?’. I have raised this in this house and through questions in the other house in terms of these Victorians who need an ambulance who cannot get through. They are ringing 000. They say, ‘We’ll ring back’, but they never do. They ring 000 again; they are ringing out.

The whole system has been in absolute crisis for not just the last few weeks or months, where the government has finally decided to put some money in and look at what needs to be done, but it has been in crisis for years. As I said, in 2016 there were issues identified. The government went ahead and had dozens and dozens of reviews and reports, costing $15 million. I mean, the consultancy reviews into ESTA are just extraordinary. I have raised that again. I have got a list here; it is pages and pages long of reviews and all sorts of things. The government, I might add, defies the house in refusing to release those reviews as per a motion that was put in here by me a few weeks ago to have those reviews. They refused to do it. I think that is a disgrace. This government is shrouded in secrecy the whole time. Why can’t we see these reviews? That is what the house voted on, yet the Attorney—well, somebody in place of her—said, ‘No, you can’t have them’. We need those reviews. I think the house and Victorians need to see those reviews.

This review that Graham Ashton, the former police commissioner, did looked at many of those issues and looked at the key challenges. We know that people are dying, for heaven’s sake. We have had too many Victorians that have died. The stories from people that have spoken out, spoken to me, spoken in public. Their distress and questioning of whether their loved one could have been saved if they could have got through, I think, is so telling about the extent of the failings. The government will say, ‘Well, those issues will be looked at by the inspector-general,’ and that report is due out later this year. This report that we got dumped on us Thursday—shamefully just two days before a federal election; I mean, really, this government knows no bounds in terms of trying to cover up its failings—is very telling. It is damning about some of the issues that it raises, and it does talk about some of those issues, the call taking and dispatch, and it makes recommendations:

working collaboratively with AV to ensure the required level of clinical input into the CTD system, including active involvement in ambulance CTD of resources

That is talking about these life-saving issues. That is talking about people who are desperate to get through, to understand the clinical nature of these needs. And this report acknowledges the work of the staff:

The Review noted that there are mental health projects underway at ESTA, however the mental health of CTD staff was portrayed as a prominent issue throughout the Review.

They are hearing about these very critical issues. I do not want to trivialise it too much, but the report goes on to talk about things around planning:

Small things matter in this regard, including replacing chairs when they are not fit-for-purpose and removing boxes from hallways and pedestrian traffic zones.

When we are talking about people dying and they are talking about things like that, surely that just says it all. These issues that this report looked into did not grapple with the serious nature of what is going on—that is, Victorians dying; that is the mental health impacts on the staff; that is the lack of preparation to have enough staff, enough surge capacity. At the first briefing—the only briefing I actually ever had from the chief health officer back on 6 February 2020; I remember it clearly, the date—I asked him about the surge capacity. ‘Where are we going to get the surge capacity?’. He said, ‘I don’t know’. The minister at the time—who has now left because she could not work with the Premier because of the Coate inquiry and all of those issues that came out of that—said, ‘We will have enough workforce in place’. That is what I was talking about when the government said, ‘We need to go into lockdown to prepare our health system’. The government was talking it up big—‘We’ll get retired doctors, we’ll get retired nurses, we’ll get retired paramedics into place to deal with this’. But they did not do any of that, and they did not prepare ESTA as part of that health response. This is an indictment of the gross mismanagement and incompetence, quite frankly, of this government’s handling of the whole COVID response, and we will be talking about that later in another motion this afternoon.

The critical issue here about this report and what it states in terms of some of the recommendations—rebranding it from ESTA to Triple Zero Victoria and looking at various things—is that it is not grappling with the serious nature of what has gone on. It is scathing about the government not being able to meet any of the metrics, and that is, again, no reflection on those who are working in it, even though the government would like to portray that, as I and others have said. No, it is not. It is not a reflection on them. Quite frankly, they did not get the support they needed from government, because they did not get the preparation. They did not get what was required. The government was asleep at the wheel. This is a part of the health response. This government has not understood that.

Of course you are going to get more people who are going to get sicker when they cannot be seen, when they cannot have their surgery, when they cannot get into their primary carer, when they cannot get their chronic disease monitored. People are going to get sick and they are going to die, and they have. They have died waiting for an ambulance—getting through to 000—which is why this motion is so important. They have died in the back of ambulances. The government cannot tell us how many have died coming off the elective surgery waitlist, but they have died, because family members have rung me and told me. Their family member has died because they could not get their elective surgery or they could not get transferred to a Melbourne hospital in time.

These failures are significant and profound. These failures are a direct result of the government’s incompetence and mismanagement. We have seen that in reports today where clinicians and hospital administrators have said that this issue has not been caused by COVID. It is years of mismanagement. It is years of underfunding. This government has been in power in this state for nearly two decades—nearly 20 years. They have not got it right—no-one has got it right; I acknowledge that—but they have never acknowledged the fact that they got it so wrong. No-one has taken responsibility for the tragic loss of lives. Now we have got legal action, a class action, taking place. I know. People have rung me and said, ‘Good. We’re joining that because the government won’t listen to us’.

David Edwards—the minister’s own constituent—Graham Ashton did not speak to him. He said yesterday that he had spoken to people affected. Well, he did not speak to him. He is one of those statistics, one of those Victorians whose father died because they could not get through to 000. Why did Graham Ashton not speak to them to understand from that aspect, from the very people that had been affected, how some of this could have been managed? The inspector-general has not spoken to them either, so what is he doing? These are the people that are affected, and they are very upset. They feel not heard, they feel so let down, that the government has not understood. As he said, ‘I don’t know if my father would have survived or not, but the fact that I couldn’t get through and the fact that the government hasn’t listened and hasn’t contacted me is so distressing’. So the pain—

Ms Symes interjected.

Ms CROZIER: Not by you, Minister. The minister interjects and says he has been spoken to by the government. Yes, I know he has been spoken to by Stephen Leane, but not by the minister. You have not picked up the phone and spoken to him. Again it goes to the dismissal, the arrogance, the hurt and the retraumatisation that these people are feeling because of the government’s lack of action. This is why this motion is so important.

Mr Ondarchie: The lack of accountability.

Ms CROZIER: Mr Ondarchie says, ‘The lack of accountability’. It is true, it is a gross lack of accountability.

Ms Symes interjected.

Ms CROZIER: Minister, under the Westminster system you probably should have resigned, and I have said before you should have resigned. You have washed your hands of it. None of you have taken responsibility for the gross failings.

Ms Symes interjected.

Ms CROZIER: That is ridiculous. People have died.

Members interjecting.

The ACTING PRESIDENT (Mr Melhem): Mr Ondarchie! Can I just remind everyone to go through the Chair and not to have that engagement across the chamber. Ms Crozier to continue her contribution, but through the Chair.

Ms CROZIER: I think it is extraordinary. I understand that the minister is very sensitive and testy about this because of the failings. There are so many mistakes. The government failed to prepare our health system. They failed to prepare ESTA. They have spent millions of dollars on reviews and consultancies. They will not even release that to the house; they are so arrogant. They have not spoken directly to those that are affected. That is the case. Putting money in just a couple of weeks ago is not going to take away from the lack of accountability that has happened over many, many years. In 2016 it was highlighted that there were problems. They put in a review that is going to rebrand it. It is going to have partnerships, strategic road maps, management plans, cultural reform—that is all very good, but it does not take away from the loss of those Victorians who have sadly lost their lives and those family members who are still traumatised by the lack of action and acknowledgement by the government.

I say transparency with this government is non-existent; it just does not happen. We need the information. We have not had that throughout the whole COVID crisis. We have asked for all the health advice to be released. We have never got that. The government says, ‘You have; it’s in the pandemic orders’. Well, we have never had it. We have never seen the advice. This is why it is important that ESTA, as it is now rebranded, publicly releases the performance reports from July 2022. We need to track and see the improvements that the government say are happening. The minister just interjected a few moments ago how good she is: ‘I’m doing it. I’m standing here. You’re not listening. You’re saying, “We don’t like what you’re doing”’. I mean, this is not about me. It is actually not about the minister. It is about the Victorian people and those poor Victorians who have lost their lives and those family members who want to see a greater degree of accountability. Transparency is important. That is why this motion calls for greater transparency. We need to see that weekly reporting.

There is so much more I could say about transparency, but in the interests of time I will conclude there. I know that those that have tragically lost children, lost parents, lost husbands and lost loved ones and friends want answers. Cover-up, spin and secrecy will not deliver that to them. There are far too many Victorians who have suffered as a result of the gross mismanagement and ongoing incompetence of the Andrews government.

Mr ERDOGAN (Southern Metropolitan) (10:20): I rise to speak against the motion before the house at the moment. Reflecting on the previous speaker’s contribution, I will add that there was quite a considerably inaccurate description of what is happening in the ESTA system and ESTA space and a poor reflection of the hard work that has clearly gone into the Ashton review and the steps taken by our government to support this vital service.

Obviously last week our government publicly released the ESTA capability and service review final report, as we committed to, alongside a clear response which sets out the government’s implementation plan to deliver a stronger, faster 000 service to all Victorians into the future. Today’s motion calls into question the work done by former police commissioner Graham Ashton and criticises a number of the recommendations that report makes. It was particularly unhelpful that Ms Crozier trivialised some of the improvements suggested in that report. She said she would not trivialise it, but that was exactly the way it came across, sitting where I was. So it is disappointing, because they were very important recommendations. Unlike those opposite our government thanks Mr Ashton for his work and supports in principle all the recommendations his report makes. The other suggestion in the motion is that the government is ignoring the current surge in ambulance call demand. I think anyone in this Parliament who has been paying attention will know that the pressure the pandemic has put on our health system, including ESTA, has been the primary focus of our government.

At the outset I would also like to make the point, as the minister has on many occasions, that this report is not an investigation into specific incidents or adverse outcomes. These matters are the subject of reports being undertaken by the inspector-general for emergency management and the coroner. The inspector-general will provide his report in the second half of this year, and this will also inform the coroner’s important work as well. I make this point because those opposite continue to be either confused or deliberately ignorant about what this report is about.

I feel as though, unfortunately, there is a politicisation of this—and it has been quite consistent for the last two years during my time in this chamber—and of our response to the global pandemic and the health measures we have taken to protect Victorians. Our emergency services have also been a victim of the same mischaracterisation by the opposition, but this government have not wavered on this report to take action to support ESTA, and we are taking action right now. In fact in the 2022–23 budget just a few weeks ago we delivered a budget that was about putting ESTA staff first. Our response to the Ashton report builds on the commitment and on the record $360 million investment in ESTA since October last year. Our focus is firmly on giving Victorians the confidence that when they call for help in an emergency we have an organisation and system in place that will ensure they get it. We know the stories of Victorians who have been impacted by the pressure of this pandemic on our health system. The minister and the Premier have also listened, alongside our ESTA call takers and dispatchers, as they do their very best to respond to the rising number of calls.

I want to make that point because Ms Crozier reflected on lockdowns and all the public health measures that we took to protect people and again mischaracterised them, which is very unfair because she seems to have forgotten that in 2020–21 we did not have vaccines. Our vaccine rollout was actually quite slow when you compare it to other developed nations, thanks to our federal government, who said it was not a race. They said it was not their job, but obviously the Australian people are smarter than that and they knew it was their job and it was a race to protect people, and they failed to do so. So in that climate our government had to take public health measures that restricted the spreading of this virus, which protected our most vulnerable and protected our health system.

So I think, again, to try and put a lens on today, when we have had such a great vaccination uptake by Victorians, to pontificate about what could or should have been done is very unfair and very unfair to the minister, because our minister is working very hard to improve this service. Before the pandemic the service was a well-run service, and in time it will quieten down, but obviously the global pandemic has affected our health system considerably. I think it is an important message that we do send to our dedicated call takers, dispatchers and other staff at ESTA, who work tirelessly for Victorians in the face of sustained, unprecedented pandemic-related call volumes.

Mr Ondarchie interjected.

Mr ERDOGAN: Mr Ondarchie is asking me if I believe the pandemic has had an effect on ESTA. Of course it has. It has had an effect on ESTA; it has had an effect on our health system. I think we cannot ignore the impact of the global pandemic on the system. I think all the systems, all the issues with our infrastructure, like I said, have been exacerbated by the global pandemic.

But I think it is important to understand that we value the call takers and the work that they are doing. It is difficult work. It is high-pressure work, and it is fantastic to see that our government is investing in real-time frontline workers. The minister most recently announced the amount of money we are putting into the system, and also obviously you can reflect that she has provided the breakdown of where the staff will be allocated—and I will touch on that a bit later. But the establishment of the review also acknowledged that there has been no major structural change to ESTA for nearly 20 years, and obviously the speed at which the funding has moved is quite a challenge.

Since Mr Ashton commenced his work we have obviously seen significant pandemic-led pressures come upon ESTA and its critical workers, as we have seen right across our system. The report does not look at specific incidents but does identify measures to address service and capability gaps impacting on ESTA’s service delivery, which become even clearer in consideration of pandemic pressure points. The report and our government’s response, which accepts all 20 recommendations, will help transform our 000 system for the future.

These are major structural changes that will deliver better support and training and stronger governance of the organisation. As part of these reforms ESTA will be guided by a new board of advisers, which includes members of ambulance, police and emergency services and our fire services, drawing on expertise from across the emergency services sector and strengthening the partnership between these agencies. ESTA will be brought into government, with the form and structure to be agreed as part of the work to be progressed in 2023. The proposed structural change will be subject to detailed consultation and legislative change; it is critical that we get it right. This will mean ESTA will be better supported and integrated into our emergency services sector to deliver a truly connected response. ESTA will also undergo a major rebrand, becoming Triple Zero Victoria, to better reflect its call-taking and dispatch function and build a more positive organisational culture right across its workforce.

The motion today seems to oppose these changes, which is strange given that the shadow minister, Mr Battin, claims that the opposition supports the implementation of all 20 recommendations. It is interesting that they have brought this motion in light of those statements by Mr Battin. Mr Davis has even called into question the integrity of Mr Ashton himself, which just shows the depths that they will go to to politicise this issue. I am not going to talk about the politicisation of our public health response, because I think I have reflected upon that a number of times in this chamber—and it has been quite consistent throughout the last two years—but it is important to show that as a government we are not just shutting shop. We are not waiting around, we are getting on with the job—and as soon as the report was handed down and the government response was ready we released it the same day. So I think the timing last week—that is when the response was prepared and ready, and so we released it on time. We did not wait around, we just got on with the job. I think it is important to understand that a report without the context of the response would not have the same value. I think it is important that people understand that this is the report and this is the response, that they know what we are doing.

Obviously as a government we have acknowledged that any delay is unacceptable, so I think it is important to note that we have taken that feedback; we have seen the devastating consequences that can have, and we are acting. It is not like we are just saying, ‘Oh, something’s gone wrong, and we’re just going to hide from it’. We are saying, ‘No,’ front on, ‘this is the investment we’re making. We’re going to fix the system. We’re going to make it better, better than it’s ever been’. I think that is what we are taking on.

I think it is a complex area, so I would not rush into making decisions. We need to be considered in our response. And I think with Mr Ashton’s report, you need to review the findings; you need to make recommendations that address the gaps and make the improvements that are suggested. And I think there is real investment—over $300 million.

Mr Ondarchie interjected.

Mr ERDOGAN: Mr Ondarchie would be aware of that. You would have seen the budget, Mr Ondarchie, a few weeks ago. It is a fantastic investment, and the fantastic thing is the minister has done an amazing job in outlining specifically where the extra staff are going.

The opposition calls for more detail. We will give the detail: 142 extra call takers, 103 leaders and trainers, 44 corporate and supervisor positions, 21 centre managers and incident responders, plus a number of additional training and mentoring support positions. The minister provides the detail, and then the opposition just says, ‘Oh, we want more detail’. Well, the minister has provided that to you. So I will not be supporting the motion before the house.

Ms MAXWELL (Northern Victoria) (10:30): I would like to just make a couple of quick comments about this motion. The challenges faced across our health system at the moment are serious and deeply concerning. It is affecting the level of care that people can expect and affecting the level of care that our dedicated healthcare workforce can deliver. It must be extremely difficult for those healthcare workers to operate in such a stressful environment, whether they are an ESTA call taker, a paramedic, a nurse or a doctor in our hospitals. We also need to ensure that there is further consideration moving forward as these emergency workers take leave due to stress and fatigue.

I first raised concerns about ESTA when Tony Hubbard from Seymour lost his wife, Gayl, while waiting more than 40 minutes for an ambulance. Mr Hubbard told Ambulance Victoria that if ESTA had told him that they would have to wait so long, he may have chosen to drive his wife that very short distance to their local hospital as she lapsed in and out of consciousness. Tony Hubbard stood at the Seymour expo in 2020, gathering more than 1000 signatures for a petition to increase ambulance resources in the community, and we encouraged ESTA to review its script and give callers a better understanding of wait times. Back then I noted that our health system was under strain, before the pandemic. This was before the dramatic surge in calls.

We recognise that the terms of reference of the review initiated by the government and undertaken by Graham Ashton were quite specific and focused on ESTA’s operating model and capabilities. There needs to be ongoing, thorough examination of ESTA’s operation and service delivery. It is our understanding from the discussions with the government that this is happening—that it will be ongoing and it will be transparent. We certainly hope that is the case.

Data is imperative to understanding and improving the system, and transparency is critical to public confidence. The motion calls for weekly performance reports, which the government has indicated is just not practical. But we think that quarterly reporting of data is reasonable and should be achievable, and we hope the government will move quickly to provide this in a similar way that ambulance response times and crime data are published.

Raising problems is one thing. It is an important part of the work of a member of Parliament and something that constituents expect. But the community also wants to be part of the discussion about solutions. We have put some of these suggestions to the government previously. They have come directly from the community and include utilising services such as HMS Collective, whose workforce includes registered paramedics and nurses who treat people with minor ailments at home instead of them needing to be hospitalised. HMS Collective estimate their service of just 20 workers saves 90 hours of ambulance transport every week and reduces the burden on hospital beds. They want to expand and be part of this solution, but they do not qualify for state funding.

Since 2008 there has been an agreement in place between Ambulance Victoria and the former CFA, now FRV, for integrated stations to provide emergency medical response. The Kiewa CFA want to become a pilot as first-aid responders so they can support their local community and save lives. I brought this to the government in June last year. Kiewa CFA is ready and waiting, and I am sure other regional brigades would be happy to consider doing the same.

We recognise the health system is complex, and whether it is ESTA capability or service delivery, ambulance response times, hospital ramping or the call from communities such as Wodonga, Swan Hill or elsewhere for investment in their hospitals, we will continue to advocate for our communities and try to work with the government on delivering solutions. We would like to see extended home care, which could and should be a practical consideration towards a solution to these concerns.

Ms TERPSTRA (Eastern Metropolitan) (10:34): I also rise to speak on this motion brought by Mr Davis, and before I go to—

Mr Ondarchie: It’s Ms Crozier.

Ms TERPSTRA: Well, it is standing in his name according to the paper I have—all right, Ms Crozier. But before I speak about the specifics of the motion, what I want to do is just extend my deepest condolences to the families who are dealing with the loss of a loved one. What has been particularly disappointing about this debate is the politicisation of the loss of loved ones throughout this process. It is really inappropriate to politicise the loss of a loved one in this way. I have been in this house on a number of occasions when those opposite have continued to prosecute their political agenda in regard to this matter. I have heard the minister continue to explain and offer responses to the questions raised, but those opposite do not want to hear them. What they are interested in is just a continuation of the politicisation of this, and it is really, really disappointing because there are people and families that are connected to this. The lack of sensitivity with which Ms Crozier has prosecuted this issue is of extreme concern—and I note the minister has expressed exactly this sentiment. I just would like to remind everybody who is debating these matters to be mindful that there are people who have lost loved ones and to continue to politicise this in such a way is actually really poor form.

What everybody wants is to get to a solution where we can improve things. I note that, again, there has been a common theme, with Ms Crozier attacking the government over this, and the minister has said time and time again the appropriate organisation to investigate causes of death is the coroner. A number of times Ms Crozier has been reminded by the minister of that, and it has fallen on deaf ears. So shame on Ms Crozier for that because, again, there are people who might be watching this debate and families who might be watching this debate who are connected to this issue, and I think we need to all be mindful of that. We are politicians standing in this chamber debating the matter, and the lack of sensitivity with which this matter has been dealt with by those opposite is shameful—absolutely shameful.

I will go to some of the specifics. This motion that has been brought—and I will just point out this sentence in subsection 1(a), where it talks about the Ashton review—

Ms Maxwell: On a point of order, Acting President, I would just ask Ms Terpstra to withdraw some of those statements about those sitting opposite. I am sitting opposite, and I felt that my contribution to that motion was incredibly balanced. I have not continued to reiterate things that Ms Crozier has said, so if that terminology could just change, please.

The ACTING PRESIDENT (Mr Melhem): Ms Maxwell, thank you for your point of order, but it is a debate. While I do not think Ms Terpstra pointed to a particular individual or individuals on the opposite side, you made your point on Hansard, and I think that should be the end of it. There is no point of order, but I understand that Ms Terpstra might have been referring to perhaps the opposition but not necessarily everyone sitting there. But it is a debate, and no individual has been named.

Ms TERPSTRA: Yes, I would like to do so uninterrupted, thanks. I will get back to pointing out what the issue is with the motion.

A member interjected.

Ms TERPSTRA: Sorry, can I be heard in silence? For example, what is in this motion, which I find particularly egregious, is that an allegation is made that the government appears not to:

… seriously or properly engage with deaths caused, in whole or in part, by ESTA’s failings.

I will just reflect on the comments that I made before and again reflect on the comments that the minister has made time and time again in regard to this debate—that the appropriate authority to determine a cause of death is the coroner. Again, it is shameful that we have to participate in and listen to this sort of debate conducted in such a shameful way. There are a range of issues that the Ashton review looked at, but again, I reflect on Mr Erdogan’s earlier contribution, where he pointed to, in a very systematic way, the way in which the Ashton review looked at a range of things. But there are also a number of other government task forces that have been created to look at this, and I might just flip to those, because again those opposite do not want to listen to this. Ms Crozier says this all the time when the minister tries to give a response. We get questions asked in this house all the time in question time, and Ms Crozier asks the question—

Ms Maxwell: On a point of order, Acting President, the reference was to ‘those opposite’ as opposed to ‘the opposition’.

The ACTING PRESIDENT (Mr Melhem): Ms Maxwell, I have ruled on that. It is those opposite. I do not see any issue with that reference. I made the clarification earlier that an individual member might be sitting on a particular side, but that does not mean everyone opposite is named or referenced by the comments. That is in order.

Dr Cumming: Further on the point of order, Acting President, just to be clear, we would normally say ‘the government’ and then we would say ‘the opposition’, and obviously we are here on the crossbench. There must be a ruling to say that when you are being disparaging to others not to say ‘those opposite’. It is very clear to just say ‘the opposition’ if that is what the member is talking about.

The ACTING PRESIDENT (Mr Melhem): Thank you, Dr Cumming. There is no point of order.

Ms TERPSTRA: As I was saying, there are going to be three task forces established to look into this. Okay? Again I will go to great lengths to explain, but I know those opposite will not listen to this. I will go to great lengths to explain it again. The minister has now come into the house, and the minister has explained this in great detail. I have been listening to the debate. This includes the establishment of three task forces. A governance task force will be chaired by the Department of Justice and Community Safety and ESTA and will include all critical stakeholders. An operational task force and a workforce task force will specifically include our emergency services organisations and unions to provide advice as to how the reform will impact operational service delivery and support the workforce.

I will reference what the Ashton report says. The minister has talked about the inspector-general for emergency management and all these other bits and pieces to this, but the point is that the surge that has been experienced by ESTA has been found to be caused by COVID, by the responses to COVID. That is something that is in the report. Again, there is a surge that has happened, but that is not to say that this is not something that needs to be addressed. Nevertheless there will be that operational task force that will be established and a workforce task force. The ESTA workforce will be at the centre of this reform. ESTA employees are dedicated and compassionate and committed to the critical work of responding to and supporting our communities and emergency services organisations. That is critical. As I have said this before in this house when I have spoken on this issue, I cannot imagine what it must be like to be an ESTA call taker and to receive a very distressed phone call from a parent or anybody who is worried about their loved one dying and they are calling for an ambulance. That is an incredibly stressful job, and I know that members on the government benches will always back our ESTA call takers because they do an amazing job. Our ESTA call takers are fundamental to how ESTA will continue to work into the future, and we will continue to work with them in partnership along the way.

In terms of funding, the government has invested more than $360 million in ESTA to support improved service delivery and meet the demand pressure on call taking and dispatch. It is a record $333 million as part of the 2022–23 budget. Mr Erdogan touched on this earlier. The additional investment will deliver an additional 400 staff to increase 000 services for ambulance, police and fire. This will include 142 call takers and dispatch positions, 103 leaders and trainers, 44 corporate and supervisor positions, 21 centre managers and incident responders plus a number of additional training and mentoring support positions. This is something, again, the minister has gone to great lengths to explain. You just cannot pull people off the street and put them on to become an ESTA call taker. There is a lot of training involved, there is a lot of mentoring. It is not a position that you can just get anyone from anywhere to do. It is important that the structural supports are built to facilitate people being trained and stepping into the role.

Again, those opposite want to establish a falsehood that the pressure is not driven by the pandemic, and I just simply again reference the inspector-general for emergency management, whose job it is to specifically monitor and oversight the non-financial performance of ESTA. The IGEM has said it very clearly: during the past five-year period ESTA met or exceeded its benchmarks in every month from December 2015 to November 2020. He said that this is an indicator that the extent of the current performance—

The ACTING PRESIDENT (Mr Melhem): Thank you, Ms Terpstra.

Ms TERPSTRA: We oppose this motion.

Dr CUMMING (Western Metropolitan) (10:45): I do rise for the opposition’s motion on ESTA and the Ashton review into capabilities of the emergency services. For me, I wish to start with some of Daniel Andrews’s words of 2014. In 2014 Daniel Andrews said this in ads for the government:

Ambulances take longer to arrive than ever before, and people are dying. I’ll end the war on our paramedics. I’ll work with them to save the minutes that save lives.

These are Daniel Andrews’s own words in 2014. We are in 2022. So to say that this government did not know what this problem was is ludicrous. In 2014 this is exactly what Daniel Andrews said in ads:

Ambulances take longer to arrive than ever before, and people are dying. I’ll end the war on our paramedics. I’ll work with them to save the minutes that save lives.

So here we are in 2022. In 2020, when the pandemic hit, at that time did this government not think it would be a great idea to invest in our ambulances, to put more money in? This government has just said, ‘We looked at this in October last year’, October 2021. Are you kidding me?

The Victorian ambulance union wrote to the government six years ago explaining the exact problems that we have today. There are more than 12 Victorians that have died waiting for ambulances just recently—all of their deaths preventable. The union has also said, as the government has just said talking about the 000 dispatch, that they are literally hearing people die over the phone. This is because of this government’s mismanagement of our health system, this mismanagement of the health crisis and this mismanagement of not putting funds into our ambulances immediately, as soon as this pandemic hit, if not in 2018 when they got into government. But 2019 would have been a great time for this government to have spent the money that it should have spent before the pandemic hit. But then once the pandemic actually hit: what, wait another two years before you put money into ambulances? Are you kidding me? You needed a report? Hilarious. You knew in 2014. You knew six years ago when the union wrote to you, and you waited for a report to drop and then sat on it at the start of this year—total contempt of Victorians.

Do not come in here saying that you sympathise and you feel for the people who have died during this time. You have showed nothing, because actions speak louder than words, actions that you could have put in place in 2019 and that you chose not to in 2020. You got rid of a good health minister, Jenny Mikakos, who wanted to get more beds. And in 2021 what did you do? You still sat on your hands—2020, seriously. Do not pretend that you did not know about this. You did. You knew about this a long, long time ago, Mr Andrews. These words came from out of your mouth.

And I will quote them again for the third time in this speech. These are Daniel Andrews’s words in 2014, just in case anybody here in the government forgot their leader’s words:

Ambulances take longer to arrive than ever before, and people are dying—

these are your words, Mr Andrews—

I’ll end the war on our paramedics. I’ll work with them to save the minutes that save lives.

2014, Mr Andrews: we will make that ring in your ears.

For the people who have lost loved ones during this time it goes to show that this government could have and should have spent money on our ambulances and they chose not to. Who knows what they chose to spend their money on. We will never know, because there has never been an inquiry—they will not allow it. And when we do have inquiries, they are shut down. They make sure that the government has enough numbers that the recommendations that come out of those inquiries are watered down to a point that you would be completely embarrassed about what was actually brought in front of those inquiries and what the recommendations end up becoming. We need proper inquiries, and we need to actually have it enshrined that the government of the day cannot have the numbers in those inquiries so that the truth can actually come out.

What the government does not understand is what these call takers are going through. You should understand. You should understand from the number of emails we are receiving, the number of phone calls that we are receiving, the number of Victorians that are ringing up radio stations and talking to media outlets about their problems, the amount of people that are waiting in ambulances, ramped, plus people waiting on footpaths out the front of hospitals in the cold, in the rain. Children, as I brought up yesterday, are in emergency departments without blankets. Apparently there is a blanket shortage in some of the hospitals in Werribee. Are you kidding me—you cannot even put a blanket on a four-year-old?

Victorians at the moment know that their health system is in total crisis, and it is not because of the pandemic, it is because of the mismanagement of this government—the way that they have chosen not to put money where it is needed, in our ambulance system, in our hospitals, in actually having more beds, in making sure that the hospitals that are needed are built as a matter of urgency, not just promises, such as Melton, not taking years. Hurry up. Throw the money there. Get them built immediately. Pretend it is a tunnel or a level crossing. Just pretend for a little moment that a hospital is more important than a level crossing or a tunnel. Could you just do that? Because that is what Victorians would love, for you to actually put the money into our health system and end the problems that we have got. More people are dying, and these are preventable deaths. If the ambulance turned up, if they were actually able to see a doctor at the hospital—these are preventable things.

For me, November cannot come quick enough, because under this government we will see no change, just more talk, more empty promises, like in 2014, Daniel—2014. It is all in your control. You never did it, and people are dying. This is on your head. It is completely yours. You could have stopped it; it is preventable. For me, knowing that these 000 dispatch call takers have to hear people dying over the phone—yes, smile, government. Check with your department behind you. Have a look. Okay, come on, bring me in, because that is exactly what was happening.

Ms Symes: On a point of order, Acting President, I would just like to put on record, Dr Cumming, that I was having an exchange with my adviser in the box on a separate matter. To imply that a member of the government was reflecting on your contribution in an inappropriate manner is incorrect, so I just want to correct the record. I think it is unfair for anybody in this chamber to reflect on non-members when they are doing their job.

Ms TAYLOR (Southern Metropolitan) (10:55): What I believe is reflected in this motion is some confusion about the purposive nature of the Ashton report. Also it is very clear that the opposition—I think the motion was brought forward by Ms Crozier today—are also confused as to their position on this report. It has been mentioned that the opposition purport to be opposing the changes that have been brought about by the Ashton report, but that is strange given that the shadow minister, Mr Battin, claims that the opposition support implementation of all 20 recommendations, so I am not sure where they sit with this. They are condemning and undermining the credibility of former police commissioner Graham Ashton, which is completely unfair but consistent with the disrespect that we have seen all the way through the pandemic, I must say, for officials and authorities, whether it be healthcare professionals or otherwise. This seems to be their go-to political tactic.

The other matter that is suggested in this motion is that the government is ignoring the current surge in ambulance call demand, and we clearly refute this as well. Nothing could be further from the truth. I did want to rebut straight up one contention: that is, that there is no money being put into this situation. Just a few weeks ago we delivered a budget that is all about putting ESTA staff first. We are backing them all the way. Our response to the Ashton report builds on that commitment and on the record $360 million of investment in ESTA since October. So to suggest that $360 million is not significant or not helpful or not supportive is questionable at best, and I would say a cheap political scoring point.

I want to go back to that issue of confusion with regard to the purposive nature of the report. At the outset I would just make the point, as the minister has done on many occasions, that it is shameful that the opposition are forcing us to have to raise this point so many times. As has been suggested, quite rightly, when we conduct this debate over and over again, in spite of the factual exchange being delivered by our government with regard to what is an extremely sensitive issue, the opposition continually raise questions and concerns which reflect their lack of understanding of what it takes and what is required and in the delivery of the report proper. I should make the qualification that this report is not an investigation into specific incidents or adverse outcomes. I will go into what the report is actually about and the purposive nature of the report. These matters are the subject of reports being undertaken by the inspector-general for emergency management and the coroner. The IGEM will provide his report in the second half of this year, and this will inform the coroner’s important work.

So as I am sure you can appreciate, we do respect those authorities that have the responsibility for undertaking reports which they are qualified to undertake and addressing the specific issues that need to be addressed under the current circumstances, rather than us—and can I say, the opposition—making flippant remarks and assumptions that are not based on factual assessments. At best—and I am not putting that in terms of a positive—they are actually playing politics in a space that actually plays with the emotions of those directly impacted in a very negative way, and I think that that is irresponsible in and of itself.

There was a complaint raised by the opposition with regard to the timing of the report. Therefore the inference is that we should have sat on it and waited for the vote count to conclude, noting a vote count can take days—it can take weeks. I am not sure where and on what planet they think it gives them some kind of moral authority to suggest that sitting on a report till the end of a vote count is somehow a preferable and honourable position to take. So you can see why, and I think it is quite clear for the purposes of the chamber and perhaps those who may be watching, that we have not sat on this report and instead we have delivered the report as promised and are not waiting.

I am sorry, we do not want to adhere to their preferred time lines for the sake of some debate in this chamber when in fact it is the community and it is the ESTA staff at the end of the day who we need to be prioritising and thinking about in this debate and not some, again, political cheap point about when and where a report should be delivered because it is deemed by those opposite that it would be preferable to wait for a vote count to conclude. I would suggest that that is certainly not a tenable argument. We did commit to the house and to the Victorian public to release the report as soon as the government response had been finalised, and we did exactly that. So I hope that that clears up some of the interesting arguments that were put by the opposition with regard to that matter.

Further to the issue of process, I should say with regard to this request for weekly—I might just quote exactly:

calls on ESTA to publicly release weekly performance reports from 1 July 2022.

Can I suggest this is another indicator of confusion on the part of those opposite as to the precise role of the inspector-general for emergency management. So let me put this to the chamber so everyone is absolutely clear about the role of IGEM. IGEM conducts year-round assurance activities to assess ESTA’s non-financial performance of emergency call-taking and dispatch services, including monitoring all adverse events and daily performance reporting. The IGEM reports directly to the Minister for Emergency Services in relation to significant issues requiring response, and ESTA, as with other emergency service agencies, reports on its performance against IGEM benchmarks through its annual report.

In addition, the IGEM is currently undertaking a review of emergency call answering performance during the COVID-19-related surge. Yes, those opposite appear to have never fully understood or grappled with what a pandemic is and the significant impact it has had not only in Victoria, not only across Australia, but around the world. So that is further reflected in the debate today, and it is actually a sad fact, I should say.

IGEM is an independent body that reviews performance data. It simply is not appropriate for them to release the data unverified on a weekly basis and, may I make the point, for the political purposes of the opposition—sorry about that, but not sorry. So thank you very much. Let us let ESTA get on with the job that they are employed to do—that they do so very well—and let us back them in and support them all the way, as we are doing on this side.

Mr ONDARCHIE (Northern Metropolitan) (11:05): I rise to speak to Ms Crozier’s motion 773 today, which talks about the capability and service review final report into the Emergency Services Telecommunications Authority, ESTA, commonly known as the Ashton report. Ms Crozier said in her motion that this house takes note of the report and the government’s inadequacy in grappling with the serious issues at ESTA. It also talks about the fact that the recommendations are focusing on things other than what we deem to be the core things and calls on ESTA to publicly release their performance reports from July 2022.

I want to start by saying the call takers do a wonderful job under a lot of pressure, and clearly there are not enough of them. They do a wonderful job, and I have had personal experience talking to them in the last couple of years. Equally the ambos do a great job as well. The ambulance paramedics do a wonderful job. I have had personal family experience, which I choose not to go into at this time for obvious personal reasons, but when they attended my house for a family matter they were just brilliant. Similarly we thank our first responders, who turn up to emergency situations. When people are running out, they are running in. We also thank members of Victoria Police, some of whom are very close friends of mine. So we are not talking about those individuals and those very energetic and committed workers, we are talking about the problems with the system here.

There is one very simple measure that needs to come out as a result of this report, commonly known as the Ashton report, and the measure is: when somebody calls for an ambulance the jolly thing should turn up on time. That is not happening right now. It is a basic human right that when people call for an ambulance in an emergency situation it should arrive. The phone should be answered in an appropriate time and the ambulance should arrive in an appropriate time. I am not qualified to make judgements about why people have passed away, but sadly, it seems some people have died because an ambulance did not get to them in time. Let us just think about the families and the loved ones that have been affected by this. What a tragedy that in 2022 we are talking about that. What a tragedy it is that we are talking about that a phone was not answered on time, the ambulance did not get there on time and somebody passed away. As I said, I am not qualified to make a judgement on why they passed away. But when you add those things together, it is an absolute tragedy for those families and loved ones.

I had a conversation with a constituent in the last couple of months who on a weekend while doing some work at home received a spider bite. They did not think much of it at the time, but it started to swell on their hand and they were a bit worried about it. This particular constituent said to their partner at the time, ‘If this gets bad, drive me to the hospital. Don’t call an ambulance, because one won’t turn up’. What a frightening thing for a Victorian to have to say: ‘If this goes bad, can you drive me to the hospital because an ambulance won’t turn up’. Such is the worry for Victorians. We have had babies being born on the side of the road in a car because an ambulance did not get to them on time. I have heard colleagues talk about that in this place. It is a basic human right, and it should be in Victoria in 2022 that when somebody calls for an emergency they are appropriately responded to by way of answering the phone and dispatching the appropriate vehicle.

How does the Andrews government respond to the capability and service review report, commonly known as the Ashton report? Well, they said in their media release of 19 May that they are going to transform our 000 system. What will they do? They said:

ESTA will also undergo a major rebrand—becoming Triple Zero Victoria …

I have to say I have been honoured and privileged in my career to have spent a great deal of it working in a corporate career. I have had experiences across a number of organisations and got to observe them both directly employed and also supporting them in some of their management decisions. I will tell you what my experience tells me over a long period of time. When an organisation is in trouble, if the first thing they do is change the logo, repaint the walls and change the uniform, they are stuffed already, because that is not the priority. The priority should be for Victorians that when someone makes a phone call in an emergency situation they are appropriately responded to in an appropriate time. But not this government. This government decides the best thing it should do is rebrand. Call it a different name. Get a new logo; maybe paint the walls a different colour; maybe get a consultant in to do some team building. Maybe they can play dominoes or something in the lunch room. Maybe they could get a new uniform, and maybe we could do a survey amongst all the employees about what the colour of the uniform should be and what the logo should look like and award them with a KitKat at the end. That is the focus of this government? You have got to be kidding me.

Let us not forget when this government came to power they rebranded Victoria with a new logo, a new logo which is an upside-down triangle with the word ‘Victoria’ in it. And how much did this government spent on that rebranding? $20 million. Yes, I know—Ms Burnett-Wake looks shocked by that—$20 million on the new, upside-down triangle with the word ‘Victoria’ in it, $20 million on that new logo for this state.

Ms Burnett-Wake: It’s crazy.

Mr ONDARCHIE: Picking up that interjection, that is crazy—$20 million. Imagine what that $20 million could have done for health in this state. Imagine what that $20 million could have done for improving the quality of call takers and ambos in this state. And I wonder how much money they are going to spend on the new logo and the new rebranding of ESTA to Triple Zero Victoria—well, this will fix it! This will fix it, won’t it? Get a new brand, get a new name and suddenly everything is going to turn around. This government is all about spin and diversion, and it goes to the integrity of this government.

They have known about this problem for years. And those on the government benches today talked about the fact that this was a result of the pandemic. It was not. This happened long before the pandemic, and they have known about this for years. Let us not forget that Daniel Andrews has been either the Minister for Health or the Premier for 12 out of the last 14 years. So who takes responsibility? What it should have said in the Ashton report is, ‘Daniel, this is your fault’. And rebranding, changing the logo and painting the walls is not going to fix it. So how did the government tackle this? Their first matter in tackling this problem was to blame Victorians for ringing the wrong number. So you have got an emergency, and it is your decision—it is your personal situation that you deem an emergency—so you ring 000. And the government will say ‘Well, that overloaded the system’ and ‘Victorians rang the wrong number. They should have gone to the hospital; they should have gone to their doctor’.

The government have failed to take responsibility on so many things in this state, and that is why this motion is so important to the house today—that we note the problems with the response to this report. I am not making a judgement here. I am not making a judgement about the quality of the report. I am not making a judgement about the problems that exist in our system other than that they need to be fixed urgently. I am making a judgement about the government’s response to this. And I have to tell you, Victorians would be shocked today and probably not surprised that the government’s response to this is to create a new brand, create a new logo, create a new uniform, create a new colour—because that will not fix the fact that someone could ring 000 today and not get an appropriate response. This pack of amateurs have been in government for too long. In November this year we should chuck them out. It is the appropriate thing to do. I support Ms Crozier’s motion.

Mr BARTON (Eastern Metropolitan) (11:14): Members will know that the inspector-general for emergency management, IGEM, monitors ESTA’s performance against the determined standards for ESTA’s call-taking and dispatch operations, including a primary benchmark of answering 90 per cent of emergency ambulance calls in 5 seconds and a secondary benchmark of answering 95 per cent of emergency ambulance calls in 30 seconds. We know from the IGEM’s statements that until the COVID-19 pandemic ESTA had met or exceeded the performance benchmark monitored by the IGEM every year since 2015 and earlier. It is also no secret that since the COVID-19 pandemic ESTA has not met these benchmarks, and as a result there have been a number of high-profile incidents where families have been impacted by call taker delay at ESTA. It is extremely important that these incidents are appropriately investigated and that there is accountability and oversight in relation to these issues.

Unfortunately this motion misunderstands the role of appropriate oversight and who should be providing that accountability. Instead of supporting the statutory and independent oversight that IGEM already provides, the motion suggests that a consultant, being former police chief commissioner Graham Ashton, should be providing this oversight. The motion is essentially asking for a consultant to replace the statutory independent role of the IGEM and the important role of the coroner in relation to these specific incidents. Indeed only the coroner can determine cause of death, certainly not Mr Ashton. I also continue to be appalled by the statements of some members in this chamber that time after time try to lay the blame for the death of individuals at the feet of our very brave and hardworking paramedics and ESTA call takers.

Today’s motion also calls into question the work done by Mr Ashton and criticises a number of the recommendations the report makes. This report is not an investigation into specific incidents. It would not be appropriate for it to fulfil that function. The government and the IGEM have made it clear that these specific incidents are the subject of an investigation currently being conducted by the IGEM. I understand that the IGEM will provide his report to the government in the second half of this year and that this report will also inform the coroner’s work. I have sought the government’s commitment that the IGEM report will be provided to this Parliament and publicly released, and I have been provided that assurance. This is the appropriate oversight of these matters and the appropriate role of this Parliament to ensure that this reporting is undertaken and provided to the community in an open and transparent way.

Today’s motion would also appear to duplicate the already established statutory reporting process that ESTA has with the IGEM. The motion would require ESTA to divert resources away from what should be its only focus of making sure they can answer calls from people who need immediate support. At this time it does not seem appropriate to be asking ESTA to allocate precious resources to developing, compiling and reporting to Parliament on data that will likely change from week to week and it may not even be final or validated when the motion requires it to be provided.

As already noted, the IGEM already conducts year-round assurance activities to assess ESTA’s non-financial performance of emergency call-taking and dispatch services, including monitoring all adverse events and daily performance reporting. The IGEM and ESTA, alongside other emergency service agencies, already publicly report against the IGEM’s benchmarks. The IGEM is an independent body that reviews the performance data and investigates matters where appropriate. That is the appropriate oversight of these matters at this time. There are proper processes that need to be followed. Critically, if the opposition’s motion were successful, it would place undue strain on ESTA’s resources that are better used to support its ongoing performance uplift.

These are important matters, and they require appropriate and important oversight. This is the very least that these families that have been impacted by the pandemic pressures on the health system deserve. I will continue to hold this government to account on these matters. The independent statutory oversight provisions review currently being undertaken by the IGEM into specific matters and the role of the coroner are the appropriate places for this accountability, not political interference. If the government fails to respond to these reports and fails to do what is needed to support our paramedics and ESTA call takers, then further action will be required, and I will not hesitate to take this action.

Ms CROZIER (Southern Metropolitan) (11:20): I will be very quick in my summation. I know that there are multiple reviews going on into this crisis. There are multiple reviews going into the failures and what has gone on with the numbers of Victorians that have died, the children that have died, as a result of not being able to get through to 000. But this fundamentally means that we need greater transparency to see what is going on within what is now going to be known as Triple Zero Victoria, formerly known as ESTA. This is an important motion that goes to the heart of understanding what those Victorians have suffered as a result of gross incompetence and failures. The report from the inspector-general is not due out for months. We need to have this now. We need to have greater transparency, and that is why it is important to have that data coming in from 1 July.

I know that the government has been furiously lobbying the crossbench, but think of those Victorians who have died. Think of their families. Think of their loved ones. Think that we need to get this right and we need greater transparency. I urge all to support this very important motion.

House divided on motion:

Motion negatived.