Ross Cadell (NSW, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

Imagine an Australia where, no matter where you live, no matter how far from the city you are, aged care at the highest level is a given—where your family would be close to you, you would be looked after and all the things you hoped for in your retirement would be provided. It's incredibly hard in a country like Australia, where we are so spread out, where we are so wide, where we have such tyranny of distance in many of our areas. This role of inspector-general can help sort some of these problems out. We will never have a perfect aged-care system not because of a lack of care, and not for lack of trying, but because it is so hard to care for everyone. But we can strive, and these bills, the Inspector-General of Aged Care Bill 2023 and the Inspector-General of Aged Care (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2023, are a step in that direction.

I was disappointed to see, with what is strong support across the chamber for these bills, that some speakers earlier reverted to 'everyone on this side, everything done on aged care bad; everyone on that side, everything done on aged care good'. That's wrong. I was sitting in the chamber when I was told people on this side did not care. That is a horrible thing to say. I had family members in aged care. All of us probably will have or have had the same thing. To be told we don't care is wrong. These are people that have given us their best lives, that have given us their love, and we are just trying to repay them towards the end of their lives so they can also live like that.

It is hard. I get this. The royal commission wasn't put in place because we've got this nailed and it's all great and everyone's having that great life we spoke about. The royal commission was to get evidence to work out how we could do this better, and well done to this government for implementing things like the inspector-general out of that review and out of that royal commission. And well done to the previous government, which I also wasn't a part of, for starting the royal commission, starting the process. We have to have a role of constant improvement, of looking for opportunities to make things better, and this full-time inspector-general will help us do so. The interim selection of Mr Ian Yates AM is a great selection for that role—he's from the Council on the Ageing and he's going into this with deep knowledge—in seeing some of the processes going forward.

We saw the horrors of COVID and what that did in aged-care centres, despite the best intentions of everyone. It wasn't negligence; it was best intentions everywhere. There have been more COVID deaths in the last 12 months than there were in the previous two years in aged care, but it is not the fault of people not caring. When we come into this chamber it's: 'Hopeless, hopeless. Don't care. That side bad, this side good.' But there are more issues like this one which strike us all, so we have to work together.

In the regions we have a problem, and I'm going to use these two words here: unintended consequences. It is all well and good to come in with the goal of elevating the care of the aged throughout Australia—as I said, it's a good thing—but this is where the rubber has to meet the road. At the moment it doesn't. This bill isn't an Audi RS Q8 race car. It's something, but there are no tyres on it. It has no grip; it has no traction in the bush. What we're not seeing is a better aged-care system in the bush. We're seeing no aged-care system in the bush because of this. I say unintended consequences, and I hope it is that—I hope it is not by design that we are making these changes to make aged care in regional and remote areas unviable. I hope it is an unintended consequence. This bill is a step. It's not a race car. It's not great as the rubber is not on the road. We are seeing these problems and we are ignoring them.

We have an instance up the road from me—about one hour 20, from Redhead to Bulahdelah—where John Sahyoun was in an aged-care facility that could not meet these criteria and was shut. However, the only other aged-care centre in town that could meet those criteria was full, so John is now an hour away from his family and friends. So I say thank you for trying to make his care better, but damn you for making his life worse. That's what I say to the policy people there.

There needs to be greater understanding of what actually happens, and I will get political here. When Labor represents only 10 per cent of the landmass of the states of Australia, they don't see that difference in the bush. They don't see how it tears families apart, and it happens time and time again. Let's go to the states and see what happened in the council merger debate. In a city you wake up in one local government area, you drop your kids at school in another local government area, you go to work in another local government area. In the regions and remote areas there is still community. When you are removed from your community, when you are removed from your support networks, when you are removed from everything you have known, it hurts. It can ruin a person. I feel this is an unintended consequence of the changes to aged care. I hope it is, because if it is by design heads need to roll. This has to be unintended for me to be able to live with it. I hope this inspector—if it's Mr Yates and he becomes permanent; whoever it is if he doesn't—has the access and the ability and the voice to tell these stories for John, for his wife, for everyone who goes forward in this respect.

As I said, aged care is a right at the end of your life. When you've given so much to your country, when you've given so much to your family, you need to have dignity at the end of your life, to be able to enjoy it for as long as you can. I know my nan was in aged care far too long. She lost cognitive ability. Every now and again she would have these bright sparks, and there was that joy when you knew she connected with you and was fine. The people that work there did so much; they are great people. I can see why we want registered nurses, I can see why we want the various best people and I can see why we want higher pay for these people—because they looked after nan. They may look after my parents. Dad keeps telling me only the good die young, and, God knows, dad is probably immortal! But this is what we have to do going forward.

When we have an inspector going around, he—he, she, they—can see what's going on on the ground, and they can come to government and say these things. The royal commission was there to do this. Aged-care wasn't horrible. People didn't die in COVID because people on this side or that side didn't care. I know we all did.

But that is the way we should do that, and I would just ask that the government consider what is going on. It's not just one thing. Senator Canavan spoke about the need for 24-hour registered nurses in aged care and about requiring five registered nurses in far-flung places. This is on the back of the NDIS feeding demand for health professionals everywhere. Demand is so great. Wages are so great. It is so hard to attract these people. These communities are close to dying anyway. We have seen schools shutting down. We have seen vital services shutting down. When we talk about Indigenous Australia, most of the battle is not the colour of skin or race; it is the dislocation from services. It is the dislocation from cities, from doctors, from health and from education; it is these things. It is the same in aged care and the same in most things for regional Australia. We sit here in debate and talk about the life expectancy of rural and remote Indigenous Australians. It is life expectancy for rural and remote people of all races as well—I accept they are lower for Indigenous Australians—because of a lack of services. What happens and we take the people from their homes and move them to cities? It falls lower. They lose the will to live because they have nothing to live for.

We have this great program now to make this better. We have this first challenge, for me, in talking about the numbers of aged-care centres that close—one a month, I'm told—in rural and remote Australia. I keep saying: I hope it is not by design of government. Because that would be unforgivable and unbelievable.

But let's see these unintended consequences. Senator Polley spoke about the transparency of government in this. That transparency in rural and remote Australia is because they are so paper thin on substance you can see through it. It is not because anything else occurs. We don't want to be up here in the bush saying, 'I told you so.' We would prefer to say, 'Oh, gee, they've got us on this; they've got a good policy,' but it is not happening. So many times, in this place, consequences are pointed out. What could happen is pointed out. What is going on and what could happen—all of these things are spoken about—except with an agenda: I was appointed; I have a mandate. I get that. You won. We're bad; you're good.

But these things need to be a work in progress. When they are not, people suffer. They are not nobodies. These are people, some of them, at their weakest in life. All of the steps that are taken, all the steps we do, everything we want to do in this space needs to be done. You can never spend enough money. We don't have enough money. You can never build enough facilities. You can never put 20 registered nurses on. We want that best practice. I want cocoon pools in every aged-care facility, where people feel alive every day when they go swimming. That is what we are after: you won't get old and you won't ever die!

This is what we strive for, and I hope that this inspector, even with some of the concerns about common law that Senator Fawcett raised, and all the little things we want to ask questions about in committee—put that aside. We are giving them a voice. Just please listen to it. This inspector-general is nothing if the government won't take the advice, won't listen and won't make the changes. We are governing for people who live within 100 kilometres of a capital city or a secondary city like Newcastle, where I am close to, and that is not taking the country with us. The haves and the have-nots are no longer wealth divided or earning divided; they are becoming geographically divided. So I just say— (Time expired)