Alby Schultz (Hume, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise in this grievance debate today to talk about Home and Community Care—commonly referred to as HACC—funded services, such as community transport. My understanding is that the Home and Community Care services are 60 per cent funded by the Commonwealth and 40 per cent funded by the state. The community transport that services Boorowa, which is an isolated area, operates out of the Boorowa District Hospital. There is no public transport—no trains, no buses and no trams—in the township of Boorowa.

Adjacent to the Boorowa district hospital is an aged care hostel called Burrowa House. The hospital, which is attached to the Southern Slopes cluster of hospitals, falls under the umbrella of the Greater Southern Area Health Service, or GSAHS. The Greater Southern Area Health Service has had considerable publicity over the last 12 months or so about its huge debt—a huge debt which has, without a doubt, been caused by maladministration and very poor handling of the health service itself. Some of the residents of Burrowa House aged care hostel require chemotherapy and/or specialist treatment on a regular basis. Prior to May 2006, those residents had been using the community transport vehicle of the Greater Southern Area Health Service, attached to Boorowa District Hospital, for 10 years.

The transport vehicle is a four-door vehicle. On average, the vehicle has been used twice a month by one to two residents with this need. The residents made a contribution of $30 to $40 per travelling resident, depending on the destination—for example, whether the vehicle went to Canberra, Goulburn or Wagga Wagga. I might add that the vehicle that we are talking about, being a government vehicle, was purchased with significant tax concessions, including on registration. Also, as we all know, when government vehicles are traded in, they are traded in at a profit. So the cost of running the vehicle is centred on the cost of servicing the vehicle and the cost of petrol. Incidentally, the driver of the vehicle is a volunteer.

Residents of Burrowa House aged care hostel were advised last May that they were no longer able to access the community transport service. According to the bureaucrats, the reason is that it is a community transport service and, once a resident is placed in an aged care facility, they are no longer considered part of the community. I will repeat that: the bureaucrats say that it is a community transport service and, once a resident is placed in an aged care facility, they are no longer considered part of the community. It needs to be kept in mind that there is no public transport available to the residents of that particular aged care facility.

Comments had been made that there is nothing in the Commonwealth legislation that allows those residents of that aged care facility to access the community transport vehicle. The advice that I received from the federal minister’s office said: ‘Should a HACC funded transport service have the capacity, it may be possible for recipients of residential care to access that service on a cost recovery basis.’ That is what they have been doing for a decade.

There is no requirement under the national HACC program guidelines that excludes residents of residential care homes from accessing HACC services unless the home is receiving government funding to provide this service. This aged care home is not receiving government funding to provide the service; therefore, quite rightly, it has had access to the HACC community transport vehicle from Boorowa District Hospital. It is also important to note that, if a resident of a residential care home receives HACC services, those services should be provided on a full cost recovery basis and only where the HACC service provider has the capacity to take on additional people without adversely affecting people in the HACC target group. The community transport service has been utilised by the residents of Burrowa House Aged Care Hostel for 10 years now and nobody has been affected by it. In fact, they only use the vehicle when it is not required elsewhere.

When I approached the hospital and the departments under the umbrella of the Greater Southern Area Health Service, I found that health service managers were difficult to contact. They did not return telephone messages left by my office and, finally, after I intervened and made some phone calls myself, I had a response from a person whom I can only describe as a spin doctor, obviously dispatched to placate a member of parliament. I made it quite clear to that person that I did not want to talk to her; I wanted to talk to the people responsible for the decision for the hospital to no longer supply the community transport service to these elderly residents who had need of specialist care. Incidentally, the person who contacted me described herself as the manager of a development unit. That is obviously nice terminology for people who need to calm the waters and cloud the issue with regard to a complaint coming from a member of parliament.

The Greater Murray Southern Slopes cluster service, which was the service that I apparently had to talk to, told me that the service was under review right across the whole of the Southern Slopes cluster service. The cluster service is a series of hospitals in the area of the Greater Southern Area Health Service which have community transport services. Those involved have been talking to one another about how they will resolve the issue for three months now. They have been drinking coffee and having their meetings and it is still not resolved, and in an environment where there is no transport for these elderly residents in need of specialist services.

The barriers that have been put up on requests for information have been significant. I have been recently told—as late as last Friday—that the people responsible for the Southern Slopes cluster service, which is responsible for making the decision, cannot supply any information because it must go through the state minister’s office. As I said earlier, in the meantime elderly residents in an isolated community suffer from a lack of medical treatment and medical care. It is an absolute disgrace, and if we have to make some more definitive contribution to the act to ensure that they are covered under it then we need to do that.

In closing, I appeal to the minister to change the legislation to ensure that the elderly are not treated in this disgusting manner by the state department or the state system, which have obviously been focused on penny-pinching cost reduction because of their own maladministration. More importantly, in the interests of looking after those elderly people in the twilight of their years—some of whom have very serious illnesses and have to travel in excess of 100 kilometres north, south or west in order to get treatment from specialists for their particular health problems—we really do have to put some pressure on the state minister to tell those involved in his area health service to get off their backsides and put the service back on so that these people can go about having their treatment. In any case, it is in an environment where they are making a contribution to the cost of the running of the vehicle. As I have said, I will pursue the issue until such time as that occurs. I thank the House for the opportunity to put those concerns to the parliament in the grievance debate today.

See this speech in context