Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I also rise to speak on the Aged Care (Bond Security) Bill 2005, the Aged Care (Bond Security) Levy Bill 2005 and the Aged Care Amendment (2005 Measures No. 1) Bill 2005. These bills are welcome and long overdue. The industry has been asking for some action in regard to prudential security for quite some time now. Sadly, having had some residents in my area affected by the loss of their bond when a nursing home changed location, I know that certain residents and their families in my neck of the woods will be very happy to see this bill introduced. The Aged Care (Bond Security) Bill 2005 and the Aged Care (Bond Security) Levy Bill 2005 aim to protect accommodation bonds held by residential aged care providers in the case of a provider becoming insolvent.

The Aged Care Amendment (2005 Measures No. 1) Bill 2005 is designed to give residents of flexible care services the same protections as residents in residential aged care services; establish a set of prudential standards; ensure that interest is repaid to the estate of a resident for the period between the death of the resident and the repayment of the bond; change the timeframe for repayment of a bond to the estate of a deceased resident; and reduce the timeframe in which a bond must be refunded in the event of a resident leaving a facility or if the resident dies.

Labor supports these bills, subject to legislative committee inquiry, because it is vital to protect aged care residents who have paid accommodation bonds. Accommodation bonds have become increasingly necessary within the low-care sector to ensure that there is capital to build necessary accommodation. We do not, however, see that there is a need to increase bonds beyond the low-care area. Unfortunately, whilst these bills are welcome and do good things in the prudential area, they do not do anything to reverse 10 years of Howard government incompetence in the area of aged care.

Whilst over that time certain things have been achieved, especially when Madam Deputy Speaker Bishop was in that role, I will look with interest at the new Minister for Ageing, Senator Santo Santoro, who has been appointed to this area. Let us hope that when he is not crusading against Australia’s beloved ABC, getting involved in factional brawls and verbally abusing the whip’s clerk in the Senate, he can find the time to do something in respect of aged care. But sadly, judging from Senator Santoro’s previous political achievements—namely, losing the once-safe seat of Clayfield and making preference deals with One Nation—my expectations are not very high. However, having said that, I am waiting with bated breath to hear back from the senator. I did write to him in his very first week as I have a pressing problem in the aged care area.

One of my respectable providers is having his licences taken over by his leaseholder because in his lease there was a statement that said that, if he did not sign a new lease, then the leaseholder could acquire his licences. The poor owner of the licences is a bit befuddled by this, thinking that it was the Commonwealth department’s decision as to who gets the licences. But now that the department has licensed his landlord and made him an aged care provider, it has all become quite murky. The nursing home that is home to 30 people and the oldest resident in Australia has become quite concerned about the future of the institution and the licences. So I do hope that Senator Santoro can look into this issue. I know the member for Deakin, in whose electorate the facility is located, has also approached Senator Santoro. I hope that we can have this matter resolved, as I am sure we do not want the oldest resident in Australia, the oldest living person in Australia, to suddenly find herself evicted and on the street with no place to live.

It is a shame that my expectations of Senator Santoro are not high, because the Howard government’s neglect of aged care has led to a crisis which is causing unimaginable grief and frustration for families across Australia. There is a shortage of 9,275 aged care beds across the country. Thousands of Australia’s most frail and elderly citizens cannot find a nursing home bed. Certain regions are being particularly hard hit. In southern Melbourne there are 730 bed shortages; in south-east Sydney there are 1,496 bed shortages; on the Sunshine Coast there are 585 bed shortages; in southern Adelaide there are 275 bed shortages; in south-west Perth there are 640 bed shortages and in Canberra there are 386 bed shortages. In contrast, there is a huge oversupply of over 1,000 beds in two aged care planning regions: northern Sydney and metropolitan east in Adelaide. Interestingly, they cover the coalition held seats of Bennelong, Berowra, Bradfield, Mackellar, North Sydney and Warringah. Again, the issue of politics seems to get involved in where aged care facilities go.

The Productivity Commission’s Report on Government Services 2006 reveals the extent of the Howard government’s incompetence and negligence in aged care. According to the report, there are now 85.2 operational residential aged care beds per 1,000 people aged over 70 years. In 1995, when Labor was in power, the ratio was 92 residential aged care beds per 1,000 people aged over 70 years. This is a massive decrease and as a result some of Australia’s most frail and elderly men and women have nowhere to go. They cannot get the care they need. After 10 long years, the Howard government cannot even meet its own benchmark of 88 residential aged care beds per 1,000 people aged over 70 years—which it lowered, in a typically sneaky fashion, from 90 in 2004. That is right—instead of fixing the problem, the Howard government simply lowered its target. What a disgrace!

To make matters worse, waiting times to get into residential aged care have increased significantly. Over 28 per cent of people wait three months or more to get into a place, compared with 15 per cent in 2002. It is not uncommon for my electorate office to get at least one or two, perhaps more, phone calls per week from individuals who have been told by the hospital that mum, nanna or their great aunt can no longer stay: ‘We think she needs to be assessed. Here’s a list of nursing homes; off you go.’ It is a very daunting task for individuals to undertake; they are at the mercy of a system which they do not understand and which is very hard to negotiate around.

In my area of metropolitan Melbourne, where we are fairly landlocked, it is virtually impossible to build new facilities. So, unless you are in a facility, you will not get one that is close to home; you will have to go off quite a distance, so relatives cannot meet—people whom you have been friendly with for years cannot come and visit. So it is a screaming issue within my electorate. That has been compounded, obviously, with the sale of Inala Village by the Salvation Army, which is across the road from my electorate in Deakin but which is home to over 600 residents. Whilst the building has been sold to TriCare, who I believe will be undertaking to do the best they can, there is still a great deal of concern amongst the residents and their families about whether they will have a facility into the future. Because of the Salvation Army’s philosophy, the fees and the bonds were very reasonable, so a lot of families are very concerned about the future of all those families and what will happen. The Salvation Army’s moving out of aged care within Victoria has left a gaping hole, especially for low-income earners.

For current operators within my area who operate small family-run facilities, having to be compliant by 2008 is giving them a great deal of concern, and a lot of families are very concerned about what will happen into the future. You are not about to build an aged care facility within the boundaries of Chisholm; you just could not afford the land costs. So it does mean hiking a fairly large distance.

I want to put on record my congratulations to the Chinese social services within my area, who are in the process of building and almost completing the first ethno-specific Chinese nursing home. Again, that will not be in my electorate; it will be in Donvale, but it will certainly service a high proportion of my Chinese community. It has been a phenomenal effort on their behalf. I thank the government for its support—but, again, there is never enough money and the Chinese community are on the fundraising trail. I went to a fantastic concert on Saturday and enjoyed a lot of Chinese opera to ensure that they will raise the money to get beds to facilitate the opening of this nursing home. So there are a lot of good things happening, but a lot more needs to be done. A lot of this is going back onto the communities to fundraise. I find it slightly disturbing that I am having to go to fundraisers to support aged care facilities.

Community care is worse, with over 36 per cent of assessed people waiting more than three months to receive a community aged care package during 2004-05. Again, this is a really disturbing area. It is still only about seven per cent of people who go into residential aged care. Most of them would like to stay in their own home but, if they cannot get the support and facilities to stay there, their families are under increasing pressure to find aged care facilities for them. Respite care is almost non-existent.

Senior citizens who can find an aged care place cannot feel entirely at ease. Disturbingly, more than 41,000 residents of aged care facilities are at risk of fire. Why? Because the Howard government refused to enforce its own nursing home fire safety standards. According to recently released figures on the government’s own website, over one-quarter of homes have failed to comply—791, or 27 per cent, of aged care facilities across Australia do not meet the home fire safety standard. Once again, the government’s financial mismanagement is to blame.

In June last year, the coalition gave more than $500 million to providers to spend on necessary capital improvements to meet the new fire safety standard, but it has done nothing to ensure that these providers are complying with the safety standards. It is doing nothing to enforce its requirements for nursing home providers to install sprinklers, fire doors and other necessary fire safety equipment. There is also a severe shortage of nurses and care workers. According to the Productivity Commission’s report, Australia’s Health Workforce, released this year:

There have been longstanding concerns about the size, skill mix and availability of aged care workers—particularly in regard to nursing staff. A number of recent reports have reinforced these concerns. For example, the Senate Community Affairs Committee Inquiry into Nursing identified aged care as the area of nursing in greatest crisis, with the acute shortage of nurses having led to increased use of unregulated workers, to the detriment of quality of care.

Unfortunately, the fact that there is a wage gap of $191.83 per week between nurses working in residential aged care and those working in the public sector does not help this problem.

Apart from addressing the wage gap, the government must also invest more in education to increase the number of undergraduate nurse places. Last year 2,716 eligible nurse applicants were turned away—that is around 20 per cent of applicants. Labor believes in investing in aged care because Labor believes that Australia’s senior citizens deserve to be treated with respect. It is often said amongst my Chinese community that a society is judged by how it treats its senior citizens. On this score the Liberal government does not have a great account. Whilst we welcome the bills and the increase to prudential regulation, there is a lot more that can be done within the aged care sector to ensure that we protect those people who have gone to wars and fought off depressions to ensure that they are cared for when they most need it.

See this speech in context