Steve Georganas (Adelaide, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I too rise to speak in support of this motion. I also want to thank the member for Mayo for raising such an important issue. It's important because, if one thing has become clear in this government's budget response to the royal commission, it is that they cannot be trusted to do the right thing for older Australians. There needs to be greater oversight of how the recommendations of the royal commission are implemented and how this additional money that's meant to be spent will be spent. We've all heard horror stories during the royal commission, and in the media at other times, about the neglect and the lack of care for older Australians, and that's not good enough.

We've heard of people dying whilst they've been on waiting lists for aged-care packages that would see them looked after in their homes. We know the government has announced around 80,000 new packages, but when you have over 100,000 people on that waiting list—and the number is growing; it's not just the 100,000—you know that it's just plugging holes while other holes gush open. The government made a big song and dance when announcing the additional funding for aged care in the budget. This is what it said it would deliver: a once-in-a-generation aged-care reform package—or something to that effect. However, as we discovered after looking more closely at the detail, the measures announced will simply not deliver for older Australians, and they won't deliver the real reform that's required to fix a system that so desperately needs it.

The royal commission found that Australia's aged-care system is understaffed and that the workforce is underpaid and undertrained—understaffed, underpaid and undertrained. It is very important to pay attention to that because, at the point where you don't have enough staff to look after people, where people are not looking at that particular vocation as their career—and the majority do—and where people are undertrained, you can see why we have these problems. We need to train more people, we need to have more staff and we need to ensure that they get paid a proper wage. It concluded that the inadequate staffing levels, the skills mix and the training were the principal causes of substandard care in our current system.

So how has the government chosen to respond to these very clear recommendations? As I said, they announced 80,000 new packages, which will not go anywhere near getting rid of the waiting list that exists. We've seen stories in electorates. In my own electorate, people have applied for high-care packages. Perhaps they've been allocated a package but there is no package. By the time it comes to fruition, months and months may have passed. As I said, right now, right here, there are 100,000 people on that waiting list—elderly Australians waiting for those home-care packages—with an average waiting time of 28 months. In some cases, people who require a package with the highest level of care can wait up to 34 months. So it's not surprising that around 30,000 people have died waiting for a package. That's atrocious. It's not on. These are people who have contributed to this nation. Because of them, we live the fruitful lives that we do today.

This government's plan will do nothing to address the fundamental problem of waiting lists, because it does nothing to address the workforce shortages. Where will the staff come from to provide home-care places in the next two years? How will nursing homes provide 200 minutes of direct care per resident per day, as promised by this government, without employing a lot more staff? To date, most of this work has been undertaken by new arrivals to Australia. With the virus that's hit us in the last 12 months, that has dried up. That work supply, which is most needed right now, has dried up because our international borders are unlikely to reopen soon. There needs to be fundamental workplace reform to address the pay and working conditions of the people who undertake this very, very important work.

A very critical point is that the government's reforms don't include any requirement for a registered nurse to be on site in nursing homes 24/7, as recommended by the royal commission. This means that elderly residents will continue to be denied round-the-clock nursing care. The government will hand out $3.2 billion, or $10 per resident per day, to support aged-care providers to deliver better care and services, including food. But some providers will choose to do the right thing; others will spend it on office equipment, for example, or refurbishing.

See this speech in context