Helen Polley (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Aged Care) Share this | Hansard source

On many occasions I have spoken in this chamber about the importance and the priority that this government has failed to give to the ageing population of this country. We know that there have been a number of ministers in the role of minister for aged care, but we have not seen, either from the Abbott government or from the Turnbull government, a minister for ageing.

We also know that over $3 billion has been gutted from the aged-care sector over the last three to four years. We also know that we have a rapidly ageing population and we know that workforce issues are paramount to the care that Australians expect and what they deserve. We have had numerous conversations in this chamber in relation to penalty rates, and I will come to that and how that will affect those people caring for some of the most vulnerable people in our country.

But we know that part of the money that has been taken away from the aged-care sector was always earmarked for the development of a workforce strategy. This government has absolutely failed to show any leadership at all when it comes to rolling out the reforms that were part of the former Labor government's Living Longer Living Better policy development. In fact, they have never really had their eye on the ball since they took government; consequently, the rollout of the reform has been not as smooth as it should have been.

I also believe, from the feedback I am getting from the sector, that this government has missed many opportunities to communicate and engage with the sector, to ensure that we have not only a highly skilled workforce but one that can meet the needs of older Australians. We know that, in my home state of Tasmania over the next decade, we are going to need around 5,000 additional aged-care workers. Where are they going to come from? It is the government's responsibility, even though it wants to push that responsibility onto the aged-care sector. It is also its responsibility to show leadership.

Last year was a very mediocre year, I would suggest, for this government. I know, from the people I talk to throughout the sector when I visit homes and when I meet with the various interest groups from within that sector, that they feel somewhat let down by this government. But it is all contributed to by their total dysfunction. The Prime Minister has been unable to show any leadership at all. They went to the last election promising jobs and growth and have delivered neither of those things—apart from, I understand, the Prime Minister looking to employ extra social-media advisers. Well, I would have to say that he needs more than social-media advisers if he is going to turn the fortunes of his government around.

This government has failed to seize the opportunities that are there in terms of the aged-care sector. There are great job opportunities. There needs to be a career path for those people working in the sector. We need to be talking up how valuable those people working in the aged-care sector are.

As recently as last month, we had consumer directed care rolled out, which means that those people who are still able to live in their own homes will be able to have support. But the big difference is: instead of the pot of money going from the federal government to the providers, each individual will be able to direct the sort of care that they want. So they will be able to spend their pot of money and to choose the sorts of services that they want. That works marvellously well, and it will, I am sure, without any doubt, in the major cities around this country. But when it comes to regional and rural Australia, unfortunately, that is not going to be the case, because (1) they do not have choice of providers, and (2) if you go out to remote areas in this country and to the Aboriginal communities, you will very quickly see that the CDC rollout is not going to work there. That is not because of this government—I am not suggesting that that is why it is not going to work. What I am suggesting very strongly is that this government has not listened to those people who are working in remote areas of this country. Unfortunately, it is not going to work there. The government needs to take heed of that and to look at other ways of delivering those services. I have spoken many times about what the government could be doing, and I am well aware that Indigenous community groups and people working in the sector have also raised their concerns with this government.

Unfortunately, the government has, yet again, added to the anxiety of older Australians who do not understand what this all means for them, because the government has failed to run an education campaign. It failed to inform anyone who was not already receiving these sorts of home-care packages. That, quite frankly, is a failing. I had raised that with the former minister but, unfortunately, she flew out the door.

The other area that really is of concern to the sector is the ACAT assessments—the assessments made of an individual as to what sort of support they need to enable them to stay in their own home or go into residential care. Now, here is an extraordinary thing. I have been to Senate estimates hearings on aged care for a lot of years now, and I really could not believe it. Here was a golden opportunity for the minister to ensure her department—or his department it was then—came to those estimates able to answer questions; they were pretty basic sorts of questions around: 'How long is it taking the assessment, through ACAT, around the country—just a breakdown in states?' I thought that was a pretty obvious question if you are running such an important area of government policy. But they were shocked that I would ask the question. I was mortified for them that they could not answer a simple question like that and had to take it on notice.

But maybe I can help them, because I have had so many calls to my office and I have spoken to so many other colleagues around this country. I will give you an example. Can you believe this? I have had one call from a worried daughter whose mother has just come out of respite and has been assessed for a level IV package. That is a pretty high package; it would indicate that they need a fair bit of assistance, but they have been given three different waiting times for her mother to receive the package. The worst was for a one-year wait! Quite frankly, this is unacceptable. That woman's health is going to deteriorate more. If she has to wait for a year, then the possibility is that she is going to deteriorate to the point where she may have to go into residential care.

Another person, a gentleman, has called my office distressed because his 93-year-old father has been told that he will not get access to a home-care package for—wait for it—three years! He is 93, and they expect him to wait for another three years! Well, I sincerely hope that he is still here in three years, but it will not be through any assistance from this government or the department.

When it comes to penalty rates, what the government is saying is that we are overreacting and that it is not going to go beyond shop assistants; it is not going to go beyond people who work in hospitality; it is not going to go beyond people who work in pharmacies; it is not going to go beyond—anything that you want to name, in its view. But in each and every one of those sectors, the people who work there deserve their penalty rates. But the secret is already out because the government is trying to say that essential services will not be affected; however, aged care and registered nurses are not protected, because they do not work in the public hospital system. We already have a crisis where we do not have enough people working in aged care and we do not have enough registered nurses working in this sector. It is not necessarily because we cannot attract them, although that is part of it but the aged-care sector pays somewhere between 20 per cent and 40 per cent less than someone who is a registered nurse in the public health system. Take penalty rates away from registered nurses who work in aged care, take penalty rates away from those caring for the most vulnerable, and what will we have? We will have a tsunami.

We cannot, at this point in time, guarantee that we are going to have enough people to look after those who are in care now and who are getting assistance that they need at home. What is going to happen if this government is allowed to take away the penalty rates of those who look after the most vulnerable, the people we should respect: older Australians?