John Murphy (Lowe, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Hansard source

I am speaking for you too, I think. We must have proper systems and proper standards and greater protections in place to make life a little easier for Australians entering their twilight years. I am sure that every member of this parliament and everyone who works in this place would be horrified if things did not improve. Fortunately, these instances are in the minority, but there should not be any instances. That is the truth of the matter. After years of hard work, the baby boomers will certainly deserve a comfortable retirement and accommodation in aged-care facilities provided by the government. This legislation is part of the government’s attempt to use the problems of the past, however belated this response may be, to protect residents in the future.

Many aspects of this bill are being implemented two years after the Senate inquiry and report titled Quality and equity in aged care. The inquiry found deficiencies with the operation of the current Aged Care Complaints Resolution Scheme and made recommendations to improve the system, yet here we are debating a bill two years later, and it is now being rammed through parliament without following proper processes. I ask again: why has it taken two years and media reports of sexual abuse in residential aged-care facilities to kick the government into gear? Why does it take the alleged rape of an elderly patient before the bill is presented to the parliament?

While Labor supports the bill, the process, as I have indicated, has been far from acceptable. It is completely unacceptable to feign concern that the important measures in this bill have a timely passage through parliament, when the government sat on some important recommendations for two years. I will say it again and again: that is a disgrace. The government has certainly not earned the right to be above scrutiny and accountability in this parliament.

I will preface my comments about specific aspects of this bill by saying that, while I am supportive of it, it is only part of a much greater package that is needed if we are to tackle seriously the abuse of older people in Australia. The truth is that most abuse of older people occurs in the community, and, perhaps unsurprisingly, this bill does nothing to address that reality.

Had the government pursued a proper timetable with this issue, we could have carefully considered some very important policy measures in much greater detail. We could have analysed other forms of abuse, including but not limited to psychological, financial and emotional abuse or neglect. We could have taken the opportunity to learn a lesson or two from some of our state governments. Rather than looking at a bill which is extremely limited in its scope, we could have looked at some very worthwhile initiatives that support the aged and provide community education about combating abuse.

Victoria’s swift action to raise community awareness of elder abuse—which I know the member for Gorton is well aware of—the implementation of a new legal and advocacy service for the elderly in community legal centres, and police checks for employees in Victoria’s aged-care sector are cases in point. I know that the member for Holt, who is sitting here listening to this debate, is also aware of that. Good on Victoria in relation to these matters. The government could have taken a leaf out of its book.

If the government had any further, serious reforms to safeguard older people it ought to have presented them to us today. It cannot rely on the flippant statement in the explanatory memorandum, which states, inter alia:

... the new initiatives that are implemented through this bill are part of a $90.2 million (over four years) package of reforms aimed at further safeguarding older people in Australian Government-subsidised aged care from sexual and serious physical assault.

It is no surprise that details are sketchy. Do the details actually exist, despite years of inertia? If they do, the community is entitled to know how much is being expended and on what, as belated as the case may be.

The specific elements of the bill I have alluded to deal with: the requirement for compulsory reporting of suspected and alleged sexual abuse and serious physical assault of residents; the protection of those who make such reports; giving the Department of Health and Ageing greater capacity to investigate complaints; the creation of a new Office of Aged Care Quality and Compliance; and the creation of a new Aged Care Commissioner to provide an independent mechanism to hear complaints about how the department has responded to complaints.

While concurring with my colleagues on all aspects of this bill, I only make the following observation on the new protections afforded by the bill to those who report an assault. This is a most important protection, and one that will go some way to redressing the situation where witnesses to a vile rape or assault of an aged-care resident only come forward with some trepidation. It is worth noting that there has been at least one occasion where a staff member has failed to report an assault against a 95-year-old grandmother, despite witnessing it.

I again draw the attention of members to the Lateline program broadcast on 20 February 2006 in which an unnamed aged-care worker said:

You have no recourse to say anything, because if you do say anything, you are then bullied by management, from right up, the head office right the way down. You have no recourse. There is nowhere—you put in reports and say that this is happening. Nothing is ever done. It disappears never to be seen again.

That is a disgrace. This can never be allowed to happen again. Staff members, such as the one I have just quoted, should not have to be in the insidious position of knowing what is happening but feeling helpless at instigating change.

The legislation requires that staff members who make disclosures must have their identities protected and must not be criticised. Further, it protects disclosers from civil and criminal liability. Unions, knowing better than anyone else the helplessness felt by many of their members, have been calling for whistleblower protection for some time. I ask on their behalf tonight: why have their calls been ignored? Why have staff had to endure feelings which oscillate between trepidation and helplessness?

This has been most unfair to the aged-care residents who have suffered from maltreatment, and, to a lesser extent, the staff who have witnessed such maltreatment. I hope that staff will feel empowered by the provisions in this bill and never have to endure a sense of helplessness ever again. It is with this in mind that I will support this legislation, bearing in mind the need for far more comprehensive reforms in the future.

See this speech in context