Dana Wortley (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The needs of older Australians are definitely not one size fits all. They are as diverse as they are important, and I speak tonight to draw attention to this government’s commitment to all older Australians—those people who seek to maintain their independence at home, those in need of the benefits of aged-care facilities, and the great number whose needs fall somewhere in between. Older Australians are telling us that they want to be independent and that they wish to remain in their own homes and live in their communities for as long as possible. The Rudd government understands this desire and continues to strive to meet this need. It also understands that, for some, this is simply not possible and that we have to offer the best care and treatment possible while ensuring such elderly people are able to maintain their dignity.

This government commits almost $10 billion a year to the needs of our older Australians, recognising that the services provided have to keep pace and to change as needs change. We have committed a further $44 billion over the next four years to aged care, including $728 million for aged-care homes alone. This is an essential commitment. Australians have amongst the longest life expectancy in the English-speaking world. Logically, an ageing population makes new-found challenges for our governments, our health, our aged-care systems and our economy, as older Australians deal with a range of complex and chronic conditions. This government is committed to quality of life for the aged. Consequently, we have taken it upon ourselves to reform an aged-care system that was sadly ignored by the previous Howard government. We have also significantly increased the former government’s annual funding for the aged, while looking at the future needs of these older Australians.

Since 2007, the Rudd government has increased residential aged-care places by more than 6,000—with half of that number dealing with high-care needs. Around 210,000 people will receive subsidised permanent residential aged care this year. However, there are many people who do not need this care and wish to retain their independence according to their ability to do so. The aged-care funding instrument, or ACFI, was introduced in March 2008 to ensure that funding more appropriately and accurately matched the care needs of older residents. In replacing the resident classification scale, it also allowed aged-care workers to devote more time to actually providing care and less time to filling out paperwork.

Because of the many and varied needs of the individual, the government has been undertaking a review into the ACFI’s operation to ensure it provides the best service possible for all older Australians. The review, to be completed by mid-2010, is examining ways in which the ACFI can best match funding to the specific needs of residents, reduce unnecessary paperwork and allow better cooperation between departments and aged-care providers. This year alone, the government has committed to almost 15,000 new aged-care workers. In June, the Minister for Ageing, Ms Justine Elliot, announced almost 4½ thousand new aged-care places, worth more than $347 million a year. In October, a further $19 million was directed towards creating 4,600 additional training places for aged-care workers. But, of course, the needs of older Australians extend well beyond aged-care facilities. These places come on top of the home and community care services provided to elderly and disabled people at a cost of $1.2 billion this year alone. Last year, this program assisted 830,000 older Australians.

The Rudd government has allocated $51 million in capital grants—the largest single allocation by an Australian government since the Aged Care Act came into effect in 1997. No Australian government has provided more financial support to aged and community care. We have established community and flexible services in remote areas and for special needs groups. This includes the purchase of essential equipment and motor vehicles. Over the next four years, the government will contribute almost $45,000 a year to every aged-care resident. While residents will contribute an average of $20,000 to their own care, the government will pay for those who are unable to pay for themselves.

The Minister for Ageing, Mrs Elliot, recently announced increased funding for a range of needs for the ageing, including subacute care, transition care, continence support, dementia support, hearing services and palliative care. This includes $1.2 billion for home and community care, $500 million for subacute care, $293 million over four years for a transition care program, $120 million a year for the dementia initiative servicing 200,000 Australians, $348 million this year towards hearing services and $21 million to the National Palliative Care Program. The Rudd government is also investing in the aged-care workforce. It has put almost $7 million towards bringing more than 100 nurses back into the sector. It is working to upskill 21,000 aged-care workers and it is creating a further 12,000 places in the sector. In addition, another 4½ thousand newly trained staff specialising in dementia care bring the total in that area to 18,000.

Looking well ahead with a view to future needs for the ageing, the government will ask the Productivity Commission to hold an inquiry into aged care. The terms of reference for this inquiry will be to look at the needs of the ageing for the next 20 years. It is a big task, and it is an even bigger responsibility, but it is important to get this right now so that older Australians well into the future can expect and receive the care, support and respect they deserve. Why are we putting in place the measures I have outlined tonight? The answer is simple. I will quote Minister Elliot from her address to this month’s Aged Care Association of Australia congress by way of explanation: ‘Our aim is to build a modern system that meets the challenges of an ageing population, one that caters for increasingly complex care needs and one that provides greater choice for older Australians and their families. These are obvious goals—I don’t think anyone would be advocating for a system that did not put the people receiving care at its heart.’