Wendy Askew (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Aged Care Bill 2024 and the related Aged Care Legislation Amendment Bill 2024. If you were to describe Australia's aged-care sector over the past few years, you'd probably think of words like 'frustrating', 'disappointing' or 'challenging'. As confronting as that is, we must all acknowledge that it has not been smooth sailing for our aged-care sector, particularly for those older Australians seeking support or for the nurses, carers, chefs and cleaners who work in the industry.

For too many years the aged-care sector has been forced to deliver care to our elderly in an environment of high costs and high staff turnover, which has led in some instances to chronic underresourcing and occasionally substandard levels of care. Across Australia, more than 50 per cent of aged-care homes are operating at a loss, and reform is desperately needed. I have no doubt that everyone in this place wants to see improvements to our aged-care sector, because we all want our older Australians to be treated with dignity in a caring environment. We want them to feel safe and secure.

In May 2023, the Leader of the Opposition undertook 'to work with government to ensure that our aged-care system remains sustainable'. In honouring that commitment, the coalition has agreed not to amend the financial framework of the bill without bipartisan support—but only after gaining agreement on quite a number of significant changes to the original exposure draft and draft bill. These changes included grandfathering arrangements for older Australians, lifetime caps for non-clinical care contributions, a much lower taper rate and an assurance that the federal government, not the consumer, will remain the majority aged-care funder. These arrangements guarantee that Australians who are already in residential aged care or on a home-care package, or who have been assessed and are waiting for their allocated home-care package, will not see changes to their existing arrangements. In effect, it means that all Australians currently in the aged-care system will not pay one cent more for their aged care.

I want to acknowledge the work done by my colleague the shadow health minister, Senator Ruston, in securing these critical amendments to the early draft of the bill. I would also like to take a moment to acknowledge my colleagues on the Community Affairs Legislation Committee, Senators Kovacic and Hughes, for their efforts in interrogating the impacts of this bill as they heard from a wide range of witnesses as part of the recent Senate inquiry process. The coalition senators' additional comments in the inquiry's final report detail a number of recommendations which would provide significant improvements to the proposed legislation, and I anticipate that the amendments submitted by the coalition will reflect those recommendations.

While the coalition will ultimately support this bill, it is important to remember: this is Labor's package of reforms. It was not co-designed with the coalition. As mentioned in response to the advocacy of witnesses to the inquiry, further amendments will be proposed by the coalition. These proposed amendments will address concerns raised and will look to ensure the bill is fit for purpose, provides dignity, respect and security to our older Australians and does not penalise hardworking people in the sector who are just doing their jobs.

The coalition wants older Australians to feel safe and supported in our aged-care system. But, for them to be safe and cared for, there first needs to be a workforce. That has been just one of the frustrating challenges for the coalition during these negotiations. We remain disappointed that this bill has failed to address critical issues such as workforce, regulatory impacts and implementation timelines.

In 2018, the sector participated in the aged-care royal commission initiated by the coalition government, a necessary but difficult process for many working in the sector. Two years later, while looking towards implementation of the recommendations of the aged-care royal commission, the sector was again heavily impacted, with staff forced onto the frontline of the COVID-19 pandemic. Wearing full personal protection equipment throughout their long shifts, staff were also required by law to enforce strict visitor rules with family members, often frustrating residents and their loved ones.

The last few years have not been an easy road for the aged-care workforce. As a result, many people have left the profession to work in other areas of the health sector or left the industry altogether. Staff are the backbone of this sector, and we must support them to ensure continued growth of the aged-care industry to accommodate our ageing population, particularly at a time when there have been significant political, legislative and economic changes.

This is one reason the coalition did not support Labor's proposal to introduce standalone criminal penalties—yet another example of the government's heavy-handed approach to regulation. The introduction of standalone criminal penalties would only make it harder for the sector to attract staff. Our position on criminal penalties has always been clear. We do not support their introduction, and neither does the royal commission—although, for clarification, I'll say: by removing criminal penalties from this bill, the coalition has not given a free ticket to providers for doing the wrong thing. Existing workplace health and safety laws, banning orders and criminal codes provide the necessary regulatory framework to hold people to account.

The coalition has always recognised that rural and regional aged-care facilities face unique challenges and need more support from this government. I come from a regional state. Tasmania is totally regional, and it was pleasing to note that Senator Ruston was able to negotiate extra funding for regional and remote aged-care facilities—something the Labor government had failed to address in its original bill.

It is vital that all Australians, regardless of their geographic location, have access to quality aged-care services. It should not be a postcode lottery, where access to services is determined by where you live. This is why the coalition fought to secure an additional investment of $300 million in capital funding for regional, rural and remote aged-care providers struggling to remain open under the Albanese Labor government. We need to invest in and support our regional and remote aged-care providers, to ensure they can continue to do their important work and provide the care needed by their communities.

I regularly visit aged-care properties across Tasmania, and it is obvious that many of them are struggling under the regulatory burden placed on them, and, as a result, their services and resources are often stretched. I have seen aged-care providers struggling to recruit staff, often forced to rely on agency nurses, at significant cost, or foreign workers, such as those here under the government's PALM scheme.

But I've also seen great providers, including not-for-profit organisations who are community-led and community-driven to provide services to their local region—providers like Longford's Toosey aged care, which was created from philanthropic donations and is run by a dedicated community board. They provide home-like facilities, with separate wings grouped like family homes, and have been entrepreneurial in their pursuit of new revenue streams, such as the Meals on Wheels service they provide to their local community. Toosey is not heavily reliant on locums or agency workers; in fact, during a visit to their facility earlier this year, they told us that they often have a waiting list of people who want to work at their facility—not a common story anywhere. They are a blueprint on how to run a successful grassroots, community-led aged-care service, yet they, too, struggle with the regulatory burden placed on them by the aged-care royal commission and other changes.

While this bill aims to ensure Commonwealth aged-care services remain accessible to those who require them, now and into the future, it is important that the government acknowledges the impact the changes in this bill will have on providers. There is frustration within the aged-care community. Sector providers and older Australians are looking for clarity and surety in relation to their future plans, yet the government has withheld vital information in relation to the bill and the associated rules. Labor has chosen not to share their proposals and has not consulted more widely with the sector or the coalition about what they are and how they will impact the industry.

Then, just this week, the government dropped an additional bill, as well as about 80 changes for consideration, none of which had been sighted previously, yet they expect the coalition and the crossbench to consult with stakeholders, to form a position on each of them and vote on them here this week. With that kind of disrespectful behaviour from the minister and the Albanese government, how can the industry be expected to adequately prepare, respond and implement these changes in a timely manner?

Despite these concerns, I'm grateful for the negotiations of, and amendments secured by, Senator Ruston to date, and to everyone who participated in the Senate inquiry to add strength and rigour to this proposed legislation. It is testament to the reason we, as senators, are here: to ensure the bill is improved through the consultation and inquiry process, to ensure the legislation is as strong as it can be and to ensure no unintended consequences occur.

Older Australians in our communities deserve dignity, respect and a secure quality of life, and that is the ultimate intention of this bill. I hope the government and the crossbench senators carefully consider each amendment as we progress the bill, to deliver security and confidence in the future for our older Australians.