Richard Colbeck (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I indicated previously during my presentation, the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment (Royal Commission Response) Bill 2022 is an important piece of legislation. It's the second tranche of legislation in support of the reforms proposed by the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety. We will have Labor senators popping up and rewriting the history of progressing reform of the aged-care sector. But, as we've discussed, this legislation is essentially the same, except for a couple of points, to legislation that should have been passed prior to the election. The only thing that Labor has done at this point in time is delay the reform process, unfortunately, because there is no disagreement on either side of the chamber here that this is important.

That's why we called the royal commission. That's why we put up this piece of legislation. That's why I've made the comments that I have made. My comments are not about politics. They're about ensuring that senior Australians in residential aged care in this country get the care that they deserve, as proposed by the royal commission. So the government need to put back in the workforce registration scheme, which is the NDIS workforce registration system. They need to make sure that Indigenous Australians in aged care are protected in the same way that every other Australian in residential aged care is protected. They deserve no less. It's a very unfortunate omission. I don't understand why the government has made it. Maybe the Aboriginal community controlled organisations asked for it, but this reform is about the people receiving care. The providers will ask for a lot of things. We should be looking through the providers to the people in residential aged care. They are the ones that this is about. They are the ones who are important.

Unfortunately, the government are actually even winding back their own election commitments, because now, with the responsibility of government, they're realising the logistics and the realities of having to deliver those things.

Deborah O'Neill (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Before I get to my prepared remarks, I want to go to the commentary that we've just received from the former Minister for Aged Care, who seeks in his speech today to absolve himself and three terms of Liberal government from an abomination that manifests itself in Australian aged care. That weak contribution was an excuse. It was as good as saying 'the dog ate my homework' to a teacher. No responsibility was taken by the former government. He says, 'I don't understand.' We knew he didn't understand; he couldn't answer questions here in the chamber. The performance of that minister and the department that was supposed to be supporting him failed the Australian people year after year. He admitted that this is the second bit of legislation. Well, we're getting to this legislation as a new government because the former government failed to do the job of government. They failed to do what Australians need us to do.

I see people here in this chamber. If we're all lucky, we're going to get to be aged. If we're all lucky, we love people who are aged. There is no government responsible for aged care other than the federal government. For nine long, long years Australians buried their family members. They buried people who died in aged care. They suffered watching the struggle of people in aged care because the former government didn't do what Australians expected them to do. They didn't care. They didn't pay attention properly. They didn't consult. We heard Senator Colbeck before saying something about the Aboriginal population and that it's well that we celebrate contributions by two amazing women who have been elected to the parliament. It's a privilege, whether you sit on that side in opposition, whether you sit on the crossbench or whether you sit here in government, as my colleague Senator Jana Stewart is going to. It's a privilege to sit here. But the privilege gives you the opportunity and the responsibility to consult properly with groups.

In a throwaway line, the former minister said, 'Well, maybe the ACCHOs called for it,' that maybe the Aboriginal people called for this change, and he dismissed it. That's what we saw from them in government for nine years—a litany of excuses. He wants to play politics with this, because the truth is that report after report after report after report, from the moment that Tony Abbott was elected, through the prime ministership of—who was the next one? You've got to remember. There were three in a row. Who was the second one?

Janet Rice (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Turnbull.

Deborah O'Neill (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Turnbull. And then we had Mr Morrison. All three of them have to take responsibility for having failed to respond to any of those reports. And then Senator Colbeck said, 'We instituted the royal commission'—because he had no choice. It became so apparent how disgraceful the situation was that they actually had to go ahead with a royal commission. But they'd already had 20 reports before that. Talk to anybody, talk to any Australian who has had any interaction with aged care in the last 10 to 15 years, and certainly in the last nine, and they will tell you that it was a disaster.

So I want to say to the Australian people who, in the most recent election, voted for a range of reasons to bring to bear this Albanese Labor government: thank you for the trust you place in us. There were many people, millions of you, who voted for all sorts of reasons. To those who voted primarily, from their experience of aged care, for the change that they know is needed for this country for aged care, I say: thank you for giving us your vote; thank you for supporting the delivery of an Albanese Labor government; thank you for enabling us to change the ministry, to get on with the proper job of delivering for this country.

We are here doing our job so that Australians can get on with their lives. That's what they expect of us. That's what you expect of us: to show up, to take it seriously, to listen to the truth about what's really happening in our country and to respond wisely and carefully with the taxpayers' dollars that come here—to look after not just the loud and strong, whose voices echo through these chambers, but the weak and vulnerable, who are desperate for a government that will give them the essential care that they need. We're doing it by bringing this bill, the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment (Royal Commission Response) Bill 2022, to this place. There's been so much delay. There can be no further delay. The sort of tinkering that we just heard from Senator Colbeck gives a bit of a hint of some of the games that they might want to play. It's over for those who are sitting there in opposition. You had nine years to sort it out. Don't muck around. Don't get in the way. Even in the consideration of business, we've got delay in attending to other matters. Australians deserve better than delay and game playing. We need to get on with the job of fixing the messes that the former government left behind.

There is indeed a crisis in our aged-care system. Many of you would have seen the 'Who cares?' Four Corners investigation. That was aired in 2018—2018! Think about the suffering. Think about the grief; the loss; the suffering; the hurt; the mental health challenges; and the despair of people working in aged care and of families engaged in aged care. It's been four years since that report on the telly that opened the eyes of all Australians to the horrifying picture that lay behind the doors of aged-care centres in Australia, where profit-taking and profit-making took precedence over care. It's hard to actually say, to speak into the record the descriptions of, what we saw there: ants and maggots crawling over weeping wounds; dirty bandages that hadn't been changed in days; disgusting and putrid food being served; mistreatment; assaults; abuse—that was what was described. And we saw it.

I congratulate the fourth estate and Four Corners for putting that on the television, as confronting as it was—because the previous government hid the truth. The Liberal-National Party government, under those three leaders, misled the Australian people. They hid from the Australian people what their agencies knew. And they did nothing about it. That's why this is a late clean-up of a mess, but it's the first opportunity that Labor has had to do anything about it.

The Four Corners report itself pointed out:

In the responses we received from across the country it's clear that hurt comes in many forms … not just the horrific tales that have captured headlines but every day stories of neglect and inattention, poor quality food, lack of personal care, boredom and heart-breaking loneliness.

The royal commission went on to even further expose the disgraceful state of the reality lived by some of our finest Australians who've found themselves in aged care. The interim report of the royal commission was a single-word title, and it describes the reality that this government—this new, Albanese government—will make the effort to correct. That title was Neglectand that's what happens when a government doesn't do its job.

So here we are with the legislation. We're up for the task. You trusted us. You gave us your vote. We are doing what we said we would, with multiple pieces of legislation to fulfil the commitments that Labor made to the Australian people that were put into the House yesterday. This is the first one that we're getting to debate here, and I'm very proud that it's about aged care, because, if we don't care for the aged, who've given so much to our country, what sort of country are we? Not the country I know we can be; not the country that you want us to be; not the country we need to be for the people we love and care about.

So this bill is going to do a range of things. If you were here when Senator Colbeck was making his contribution, he talked about different schedules. It all sounds a bit like gobbledegook sometimes, when you don't actually sit in the Senate all day and listen to it, but schedules are the bits of the bill that are going to do things.

This is what this bill is going to do. It's going to introduce a new aged-care subsidy calculation, because that's about money. The money is not working properly in this sector. We have to make Australian taxpayers' money work properly and deliver the care that is required. Currently it's not working. We need to provide a legislative basis for a star rating system, and I would like to say some more about that if time allows me. We are going to introduce a code of conduct, because some people don't seem to know what to do. And we will have a banning-order scheme. We are going to extend the Serious Incident Response Scheme to aged care delivered in home settings. We are going to strengthen the governance of approved providers, because too many dodgy operators got away with doing the wrong thing for way too long. We are going to enhance information sharing across related sectors so that information moves properly with people, particularly between the health sector and the aged-care sector. We're going to increase financial and prudential oversight. It makes me livid when I hear Liberal and National Party members in particular talk as if they've got everything economic sorted. They definitely haven't. The economics of this haven't worked. We need to make this system work so much better to deliver. We're going to broaden the function of the renamed Independent Health and Aged Care Pricing Authority. We will also address issues with the informed consent arrangements with respect to the use of restrictive practices in residential aged care.

I just want to speak in the time remaining to me on what a couple of these critical elements in these schedules in the bill are going to do. I've talked about the terrible circumstances in which too many young Australians found themselves in aged care. I want to speak particularly to the establishment of a safer and more accountable system for our elderly residents. We will not delay in doing this. That's why we have made it the first order of business. The bill must not lapse. I urge all senators from all parties who have been elected here to get on board with Labor and get this done. It's appropriate that this bill pass as soon as possible.

We are going to change the existing but outdated aged-care funding instrument. This will create a new model for calculating aged-care subsidies. It's called the AN-ACC, the Australian National Aged Care Classification. That model is set to commence on 1 October 2022. We're doing this as fast as we possibly can—responsibly but quickly.

With regard to some of those appalling images that, for those who saw the Four Corners report, will be with us forever, the Serious Incident Response Scheme is going to be expanded. It will be expanded in a way that will establish obligations for providers of home care and flexible care in community settings to report and respond to incidents and to take action to prevent those events from recurring.

This isn't rocket science, but the former government delayed bringing these things in. We have to close the gaps that existed previously in the system. I'm sure, like me, you agree that accountability through all aspects of our aged-care system has to be fundamental, observed and enforced. We are determined to bring the care back to aged care.

Louise Pratt (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Today as we speak to the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment (Royal Commission Response) Bill and the government's proposed legislative response to the royal commission into aged care, we have before us a great opportunity to get on with fixing the problems created by the former government in aged care. We are here to amend aged-care law to implement a series of urgent funding, quality and safety reforms. This includes, as we know, a number of really important recommendations made by the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety.

That commission can only be described as giving an absolute picture of a national disgrace—the absolute disgrace that the former government allowed aged care in our nation to become. It allowed it to absolutely deteriorate, to the enormous detriment of the lives of thousands of older Australians depending on care and their carers, both family and paid, in the aged-care sector, and broader families and communities.

I think all Australians have, over the last year or so, come into contact in one way or another with the significant atrocities that older Australians suffered at the neglectful hand of the Morrison government, so much so that the royal commission itself saw fit to name its interim report Neglect. This came after many years of the former government's attacks on and budget cuts to our aged-care system. It was an approach by the Morrison government, those now in opposition, and this is part of the reason they were sent there. It was a pattern of behaviour, policy approach and lack of attention that systematically endangered and harmed older Australians who were the grit of building our nation. They paid their taxes, worked hard and raised their families. The least we can do as a nation is offer dignity and respect in the care that people receive as they move into frailer years where they need that care. No-one wants to be in aged care. It's an absolute last resort, so there are pressures on and tensions in families to keep their loved ones at home and for partners who are also ageing to keep their partners at home. In the case of my own family, people who have retired are now caring in their retirement for their very elderly parents, who don't want to be in aged care because of this systemic neglect.

It's worth remembering as we discuss this legislation before us today that this royal commission began as far back as 2018 and delivered an interim report in 2019. What you can see from this between 2019 and the final report, evident in the last few years in this place, is that of the horrors that were exposed by the report in 2019—which is the purpose of issuing an interim report, so governments, aged care providers and communities can get on, respond and start to take action—none had been addressed in the final report of the royal commission. It's a really telling reflection on the final report, abandonment and neglect being its major themes. So let's not forget that those over the aisle from us now presided over this neglect and abandonment, and they presided over it during the course of the COVID pandemic, when of course the vulnerabilities of people in aged care became even more profound.

Had action been taken back in 2018 and 2019 when the royal commission was started—you know, normally governments recognise that, when they're under so much attack and pressure that they need to call a royal commission into something, that's the time to start actually getting on and fixing it. When things are so bad you need a royal commission to do something, it shouldn't be the case that you then say, 'Well, we can't possibly act now on these very urgent issues, because we need to see what the royal commission says.' Honestly, in the case of an issue that is live, where people are suffering harm and damage every day, the important thing to do is get on with reforms and put a stop to that harm as quickly as possible. It's kind of why we, here now in the very first week of convening ourselves as a Labor government in this parliament, have this legislation before us, because we recognise that it's urgent.

The abandonment of the last government led to people being put in really difficult situations, worse situations than they had to be. Our former Prime Minister seemed to have been banking on an exhausted collective national amnesia as to his failings to act on these issues—in yet another term, post-2019, of ignoring vulnerable Australians. The former PM, as we know, had previously been the Minister for Social Services and was the Treasurer who cut $2 billion from aged care, leading to this disaster. In so many areas of the public policy failure that we've seen from the previous government, cuts like this were the most common weapon in a dwindling arsenal of what was a neglectful and ineffective government.

But the Australian public have spoken. They have changed the government, and the message that we got—and we knew it all along because we had been fighting the government on these issues—was that Australians have said that the quality and safety of our aged-care system is of the utmost importance, which we intend to deliver on prioritising. The last government failed in its final days to bring forward any bill related to fixing the crisis in our aged-care system. This bill addresses that. It's more reflective of the recommendations of the royal commission's report. We have a bill before us that is already dangerously late in terms of responding to a damning royal commission that has implored us to increase funding to our aged-care sector. But, as I said, we as a Labor government have done this as urgently as possible.

I recognise that this bill is largely the same as the previous government's Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment (Royal Commission Response No. 2) Bill 2021, but it is significantly improved. I also note the government had ample time to introduce such measures into this place. If you look at the legislative agenda that they pursued during 2020-21, there's no reason that this agenda could not have been dealt with then.

In this bill we are requiring a qualified registered nurse to be on site at every residential aged-care home 24 hours a day, seven days a week. This is absolutely critical. When you look at the issues in our health system nationally, state government health hospital systems are under significant pressure. We have ambulances ramping at hospitals. We've got emergency departments trying to get patients admitted. And we've got patients who have come from aged-care homes, who are inside the hospital as they've needed urgent care, who are waiting in the hospital to go back to their aged-care service but can't go because there is an inadequate level of supervision and care from a registered nurse on site 24 hours a day. It's important to recognise that, while many people in our aged-care services might be physically healthy but have dementia or other challenges that mean they need to be there, others have physical ailments which make it difficult to be at home, and many others are this close to being in and out of hospital. But being in and out of hospital doesn't actually help them live as healthily and as happily as they can in an aged-care facility, because that kind of dislocation and movement doesn't support their health. What does support their health is having that access to a quality aged-care service, and quality supervision and support with a registered nurse inside their aged-care facility.

The former government ignored the royal commission's recommendation that nursing homes should have a registered nurse on site, so the legislation before us delivers on what was Labor's election commitment to stop the rorting of home-care fees by placing a cap on how much can be charged in administration and management fees. These are two key platforms that Labor have taken forward and that we have consulted on. We have worked with unions, we have worked with people who care for people in aged care, we have worked with their families, and we have worked with the whole sector to ensure that we are able to deliver what are incredibly important reforms, reforms that the last government ignored and refused to prioritise.

A Labor government wants to be confident that the precious money that comes out of people's pensions, that might even come out of the equity of the family home, to pay for that care is going directly to care and not to the bottom line of corporate providers. These improvements, we believe, reflect in a much better way the recommendations of the royal commission. We have a new code of conduct to set high standards of behaviour for providers. We are looking to improve communication between care and support sectors so that regulators can do their jobs and supervise risks in facilities and a lot more.

I have kind of rattled on without getting to one of the things that I really wanted to outline today. Amina Schipp has been a constituent of mine. She bravely told me her mother's story about how unqualified staff dispensed and administered drugs and shared medication soon after placing her mother in an aged-care home. The home did not get a doctor quickly. There was a lack of urgency in getting a doctor. She had a major fall, a number of unreported falls and then her mother passed away. Those complaints had already been made to the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission before her mother passed away and nothing was done. This is why Amina has been so angry at the last government, and I want to be accountable to her and people like her. (Time expired)

Marielle Smith (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I also rise today to make a contribution to the debate on the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment (Royal Commission Response) Bill 2022. But, before I do, this is my first opportunity to acknowledge our new President, Senator Lines. I want to congratulate you on your appointment. I think it is a historic moment for our party and for our chamber and I know we are in very good hands with your leadership and stewardship of this very important institution of the Senate.

This is the first piece of legislation I get an opportunity to speak on in the 47th parliament and I am so pleased that the first piece of legislation we are considering is on aged care. I think aged care would be one of the issues I spoke most about during the 46th Parliament because during that time we were confronted with the absolute worst of what happens when an entire part of our carer economy in aged care is left in neglect, and a crisis rained down upon it. The pandemic was horrific for aged care. Still there are many, many challenges in the sector as a result of the pandemic. But it was made worse than it needed to be because of the neglect that predated that crisis, the neglect that has existed within the sector for many, many years—ignored, not dealt with, not addressed. This is our first opportunity to deal with a piece of legislation in this chamber, and thank goodness we are dealing with aged care.

This bill is, of course, just the first step in our government's work to fix the aged-care crisis. We know that that fix won't happen overnight, and of course not everything in this crisis can be fixed by one piece of legislation. This is a sector that has suffered neglect for years and was downright failed by our previous government. But this bill—and the fact that it's the first piece of legislation that we are debating here—is a really important start. I want to commend Anika Wells, the member for Lilley, for her tireless work, since she was sworn in as our new Minister for Aged Care, to make sure that she could bring this bill to the parliament, that it was treated with the urgency that it deserves. I wish that minister every success in what I know is her genuine and dedicated focus on fixing the aged-care crisis.

This bill contains a number of important measures. It seeks to implement a new Australian National Aged Care Classification funding model, replacing the outdated Aged Care Funding Instrument, offering more equitable funding, better matched to providers' costs in delivering the care residents need. There will be a new star-rating system that will see the Department of Health and Aged Care publish a comparison rating for all residential aged-care services by the end of 2022. There will be an extension to the Serious Incident Response Scheme to all in-home care providers to increase protection for older Australians from preventable incidents, abuse and neglect. The bill establishes a new code of conduct for approved providers, their workforce and governing persons, setting minimum standards of behaviour. The bill implements new provider governance and reporting arrangements to improve transparency and accountability and it will improve information sharing between the aged-care, disability support and veterans care sectors, to harmonise the regulation of care. This bill, at its core, is about restoring dignity, care, accountability and humanity back into aged care, and this is where we must start. This is where we rightfully start.

The Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety's interim report was called Neglect. It found that the Australian aged-care system had failed to meet the needs of its older and vulnerable citizens. It found that the system didn't deliver uniformly safe and quality care and that there was unkindness, a lack of caring, towards older people and, in too many instances, neglect of our older Australians. It found systemic problems in the aged-care system that require urgent fundamental reform and redesign. The final report, which gave the recommendations that this bill is based on and seeks to start addressing and implementing, stated that the aged-care system has been under prolonged stress and has reached crisis point. Of course, the COVID-19 pandemic only extended that. It made things worse. It added an unprecedented pressure to a system already buckling under strain. Aged care was in crisis. It still is in crisis. It was a poor system before the pandemic, with the pandemic only weakening it further.

Over the last decade, we've seen 23 reports, inquiries, studies, committee reports and then the royal commission. The story never changed. It's not like one of these reports was the standout moment where we said, 'Oh gosh, there's a problem here.' All of these reports told us the same thing. All of these reports were pointing to the crisis unfolding before us, a crisis which we have seen amplified and worsened over recent years.

I am so proud to be part of a government not afraid to confront this crisis head-on. I sat in this chamber many times during the 46th Parliament as we had debates around wording and semantics, with the government defending the use of particular words—not debates on the substance of what was happening in aged care, not debates on substantive pieces of legislation that the government was bringing before this chamber which would enable us to get the big process of reform started, but political debates. Like so many things in the Morrison government, aged care was turned into a political football. It was about defending on their failures, deflecting on their failures, rather than getting to the work which needed to be done. I don't pretend the work ahead is easy; I don't think anyone in this chamber would pretend that the work is easy. It's going to be really hard to fix this crisis. But I hope we can all agree that it matters, that it's urgent, and I hope—in the Prime Minister's spirit of a better parliament—we can work together to get this done.

This matters for South Australians, for my constituents, for the people I represent—South Australians like Noleen Hausler, who has been fighting for reform since 2015 when a camera she had hidden in her father's aged-care facility revealed horrific abuse. It was a sight no daughter should ever have to see of her beloved father. In her evidence to the royal commission Noleen spoke of her shock when she saw the visual images—her heart racing, her hands shaking. What a dreadful thing. What a dreadful thing to witness of someone you love. For Noleen, for everyone who gave evidence to that royal commission, I am sure there would have been hope at the end—hope that, by giving that evidence, by sharing those painful stories, that fear and that sadness of what happened to the people they loved, change would come. And the slowness of that change has failed them. It's let them down. They bravely told their stories and they've been let down.

Of course, this South Australian family wasn't alone. We heard countless stories which would shake any reasonable person to their core. We heard from carers who told of the pressure they felt to spend little time with their residents, choosing between supporting residents most at risk, leaving some residents behind who they wanted to give care to but couldn't—ad hoc care, staff at breaking point and stretched to the limit, residents and families who felt abandoned and let down by the places they entrusted to care for people they loved. What a heartbreaking thing. You send the person you love into care, hoping that that's what they will receive, and instead of care, instead of compassion and kindness, your loved one gets failed in the most horrific way.

So many South Australians have been let down by a system in crisis, a system reeling under extreme strain. They're feeling this, I know. I speak to them all the time, not just the residents in aged care, who I've had the privilege to visit, but the workforce trying to support them and care for them—workers like Donna, an aged-care worker in Adelaide who absolutely loves her job. She loves the people she cares for. She loves the people she works with. But she's under an extraordinary amount of pressure because this system is in crisis.

I've spoken to another young aged-care worker in Adelaide who stumbled into aged care by accident and fell in love with the sector, fell in love with caring for people, fell in love with what the nurses were doing and how to show tenderness and kindness to people in need. She loved it so much that she's now studying health at university, wanting to give back in a healthcare setting. And she would love to go to aged care again, but she just cannot bring herself to do it because the conditions of her work and the strain that that sector is under mean she just doesn't feel like she's up to returning to that sector. This is a young person who could make a tremendous difference but whose contribution has been lost because the system has failed so many.

I've spoken to workers in Adelaide East, just a few months ago, who were working really hard every day to support their residents but couldn't give them the attention they deserved. A nurse in regional South Australia spoke of the difficulty in accessing a RN, as there wasn't always one on site—something we're going to fix—and how that hurt when there wasn't that care for residents when they were in need. And I've heard from residents who love their support workers—the people in their clinics caring for them, providing entertainment for them, activities, cooking for them. They absolutely adore the workers in aged care. But who can see the struggle this workforce is under as well, who want relief for the people who care for them?

All of these South Australian stories stay with me every day—the stories of dedication and compassion, and the stories, sadly, of abuse and of neglect. They stay with me and they come in here, into this chamber, and they're the stories I think about when we debate legislation like this, and that's what this legislation is seeking to do—to put security, dignity, quality and humanity back into aged care, to do better by these South Australians. It builds on our broader plans for aged care, our serious plans for aged care. We made this a centre of our election commitments because we know how much it matters to every single Australian, not just those with loved ones in aged care.

If each of us is lucky enough to get old, many of us will find ourselves in aged care. Many of us will find ourselves making really difficult decisions about care for people we love. We need to fix this. We need to fix this urgently. Our policies will ensure qualified nurses are onsite 24 hours a day, seven days a week, increasing the pipeline of registered nurses into aged-care facilities and, importantly, helping clear so many unnecessary trips to emergency departments, a particular issue in regional areas. We want to see a real pay increase for workers, a boost in workforce numbers, more training places and university places to support and grow and build that workforce and, importantly, a mandated average of 215 minutes of care being given to those in aged care. These are really important measures. They are measures which will change the face of aged care.

This bill is a really important first step. It's not every step. We won't pass this piece of legislation and see a dramatic turnaround in what's happening in aged care. But the dedication of this government—the fact is that this is the first piece of legislation we are dealing with—I think, is testament to how seriously Minister Butler, Minister Wells and, of course, our Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, take this crisis and their role in tackling it. That's something we didn't see in this parliament, and I don't think any of us could really, honestly reflect on the way aged care was treated in the last parliament with any sense of pride.

This is our moment to get the real piece of reform done: to do the hard work, the scary things, to not let people down, to not let down our elderly, our older Australians, who have done so much for our nation—who have built our nation—and are in aged care and need the support of this chamber, of this Senate and of our government. It's our opportunity to say to those workers who have been through so much, particularly during the pandemic: 'We value you and we're going to try to get this fixed.' This is about not letting down Australians—Australians who have been horrified by what's happening in aged care—many of whom, dare I say, feel scared about what their future looks like if we don't fix this crisis.

I am proud to be a part of this work and I am proud of my government for not being afraid to confront the enormity of it. I look forward to the support of this chamber. Let the 47th Parliament be better in the way it deals with aged care. Let us be the parliament that fixes this crisis and restores dignity, humanity and care to those Australians who so desperately need it.

Perin Davey (NSW, National Party, Shadow Minister for Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment (Royal Commission Response) Bill No. 2. I appreciate where Senator Smith is coming from. I share Senator Smith's absolute admiration for our aged-care workforce and her heartfelt sympathy with the families of aged-care residents who have been mistreated and for the gaps that have been created over time. But I do not accept the premise that it was the former coalition government's fault. I also don't accept the premise that the former coalition government failed in aged care nor, as Senator Smith declared, that we treated aged care as a political football. Indeed, it was the former coalition government that initiated the royal commission, which then made 142 recommendations. The former coalition government diligently reviewed those and prepared a response, including accepting 135 of the recommendations wholly or in part. Of those, 126 were accepted in principle, 12 were subject to further consideration or were noted, and four were noted as supporting an alternative approach. Only six recommendations were not accepted. It was also the former coalition government that worked hard to ensure that the budget for aged care was extended and extra funds were provided, and it was the former coalition government that basically drafted this legislation that we are presented with today.

Certainly, declaring that it was our government that treated aged care as a political football completely ignores the fact that Mr Albanese was happy to let aged-care providers and older Australians remain in a state of complete uncertainty—a state of limbo—for six months, just so he could play political games, delaying the implementation of many of the important recommendations of the royal commission, which are contained in this bill that we are debating today. Now that he's in government, Mr Albanese has realised that these reforms need to be pursued, and now he's trying to push them through, when they could have been passed in April. By playing politics with older Australians for six months and by not facilitating the passage of this bill in the last parliament, Mr Albanese delayed significant and time-critical legislation purely for political gain—purely so that we can stand here today and listen to Senator Polley say that former minister Senator Colbeck was an abject failure and hear Senator Smith say that our former coalition government treated aged care as a political football, completely denying all of the steps that the former coalition government actually took to address aged-care issues, even prior to the final royal commission report.

Let's not ignore the fact that in 2012-13, under the previous Labor government, there were only just over 60,000 home-care packages available in the aged-care sector. By the time of the last election, this had increased to 275,597 home-care packages. We all know that many of our older people would much rather stay at home than go to a residential facility. If we can keep them at home, enable them to keep their dignity and make sure they are looked after, they tend to have a much more positive experience. We also made sure, in February, that we recognised the significant contribution our aged-care workforce had made, particularly during the COVID pandemic. In February, we announced a workforce bonus of up to $800 for all eligible aged-care workers, and it was estimated that about 265,000 workers benefited from that.

Our government certainly did not treat aged care as a political football. Our government was absolutely committed to delivering on the royal commission recommendations. This legislation we are debating today forms the second step of what we had developed, which was a five-year implementation plan, underpinned by five pillars: the home-care packages that I've just discussed; residential aged-care services and sustainability; looking to improve and simplify residential aged-care services; and access. That is essentially what this bill helps to deliver on today. Then we also wanted to look at residential aged-care quality and safety—and I will be looking with interest at what the new government does in those areas—as well as supporting the workforce and growing a better skilled-care workforce. Because for all of what Senator Marielle Smith said before about supporting the workforce, needing to recognise their contribution, and needing to give them better pay and conditions, that's not in today's bill, so we shouldn't pretend that we are delivering those outcomes.

We also need stronger governance in the aged-care sector, some of which is in this bill and some of which needs further work. I hope that the new government will work with the opposition to ensure that aged care is not treated as a partisan football, as it was in the past when we saw the six-month delay by Mr Albanese in opposition. But now he's in government we will not stand in the way of this bill, because we're not going to play those same games. We're not going to turn it back into a partisan football.

This legislation is basically just a revised version of our legislation that we introduced nearly six months ago. There are really only two key changes from the original version of the bill that we introduced: one is the removal of the aged-care workers' screening regulation, and the other is the removal of the enshrining of the star-rating system in legislation. The clause about the workers' screening regulations sought to establish a nationally consistent pre-employment screening for aged-care workers. Now, that pre-employment screening was not—as has been claimed—a punishment. It was actually about protecting aged-care residents, providing consistency and establishing a good baseline. It was an important arrangement in response to recommendation 77 of the royal commission, and it prevented unsuitable workers from entering or remaining in the aged-care sector. We in opposition will be keeping a very close eye on what further reforms come forward about this key recommendation to prevent poor conduct in the sector and protect residents. We will be watching very closely to see what is brought forward, because it's our view that, by removing the workers' screening regulations, the government has basically acquiesced to the unions. They've capitulated to the unions. We would call on the government and say: stand up to the unions. Implement good policies that protect both the residents and the workforce, and allow a nationally consistent database to be established for all care workers. It gives our residents in aged-care communities—those that we care for in their twilight years—certainty that they are being looked after by the best.

While I have the call, I want to express my dismay that the government has ceased the availability of free rapid antigen tests for aged-care homes during COVID. The timing is absolutely remarkable. When the COVID pandemic first hit we saw significant outbreaks in aged-care facilities—and, unfortunately, we saw some untimely deaths in those facilities. However, when we look at the numbers of what's going on now that we're not in the peak of COVID hysteria, now that COVID has almost become endemic and people are treating it as part of their day-to-day lives, we see the number of deaths linked to COVID in aged-care facilities are higher than they were during the first and second waves. In fact, according to the Australian government website on the Department of Health and Aged Care, my calculations are that there have been 883 deaths in aged-care facilities between May—just prior to the election—and 22 July. That's 883. Yet free rapid antigen testing has been ceased.

There are currently over 1,000 active outbreaks of COVID in aged-care facilities across the nation. That is a higher number than ever was seen in the first and second waves. From this opposition, they absolutely tried to crucify the coalition government of the time for perceived failures in rolling out personal protective equipment, in rolling out vaccinations, in rolling out rapid antigen tests. Yet it is now in government that they see fit to cancel rapid antigen tests for aged-care facilities, right when deaths are higher than they've ever been, right when active cases in aged-care facilities are higher than they've ever been. So where is the consistency with what the government said in opposition and what they are implementing in government? It beggars belief.

Ultimately, the opposition will not play games with this legislation. We will be supporting it for the health and the safety and the wellbeing of our older Australians. We will not delay the time-critical legislation just to play games, as was done by the opposition. And we implore the Albanese government to continue our generational reform of the aged-care system for the benefit of all residents. I commend this bill to the House.

Anthony Chisholm (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is the first chance I've had to talk in the chamber following the election result and the sitting of the new parliament. Nothing brings home the responsibility more, for what my party confronts now that we are in government, than fixing the crisis that we were left in aged care. So it is fitting that this is the first bit of legislation that we have before us in the Senate.

It also reinforces, for me, the challenge that we face as a government and the faith that the Australian people have put in us to do that, and also the people who are responsible for that. The member for Lilley happens to be my local member and has taken on the responsibility as minister in this area. It's an important job, it's one that I am more than confident she is up to and it's one where she has started so well. I get the sense, from the travel that she has done and the consultation that she has undertaken, that it has all been of an urgent nature, but it is the work that is required to get legislation like this right, and it is important legislation that we are talking about today.

I note the contribution from some of those opposite and the former minister. They're trying to recreate the history around why a royal commission was called into aged care, and trying to take credit for it by saying it was one of the things that only they were able to do. It's important we don't lose sight of what the motivations were behind the former Prime Minister when he called that royal commission. If you go back, it was not long after former Prime Minister Morrison rolled Malcolm Turnbull as Prime Minister and he called a royal commission.

It was one of the first moves we saw from 'Scotty from marketing' that we were to become used to. He called this royal commission not because he wanted to fix the aged-care crisis. All he wanted to do was move it beyond that election cycle, which was due in about six months time. So what did he do?

He called a royal commission not because he wanted to fix the challenges but because he wanted to avoid taking responsibility before the 2019 election. That was his motivation in that, and it became a theme for the former Prime Minister. It was obviously one that cost them at the election. It was the first sign of someone who wanted to avoid responsibility—who didn't want to take on the job as Prime Minister and actually do the hard work of reform that was needed.

We saw that aged care was in crisis before 2019, but it was really laid bare how bad it was and what a significant crisis it was when COVID hit, with the devastation that we saw in many parts of the country with residents in aged care and the lack of ability of those policies to respond to ensure that those elderly Australians who were in those residences were treated with the dignity and respect that they deserved.

I think there's a lot of contrast between the current government and the former government. In the agenda for the Albanese Labor government, what we want to deliver on and how we acknowledge the challenges that we're facing—whether it be aged care or whether it be the economy, as we're seeing from the Treasurer in the other place right now—we're being upfront with the Australian people. We are actually saying what the challenges that we are confronting are and what steps we are taking to fix these problems.

There's a real stark contrast between Minister Wells and what we saw from former Minister Colbeck. In his performance in question time in the previous parliament, he would try and give this air of confidence—'Everything's under control, we're dealing with it, we're doing these things, and it's all going to be okay'—when the reality on the ground was different. We all received correspondence in our offices or dealt with people, I'm sure, who would be able to tell you their heartfelt stories of what they were confronting for an elderly relative or a friend who they cared for so deeply. In contrast, the current minister is someone who has acknowledged that there is a crisis in aged care; has said what the steps are that need to be taken to fix it; has been out there in aged-care homes every week since the minister was appointed; and has outlined a clear reform agenda, building on what we took to the election but also responding to the immediate impacts of what the nation is confronting with COVID at the same time and particularly in nursing homes.

We know about the 23 reports. We know about the royal commission. But we see the stark difference in government now, with a minister, a Prime Minister and a government that are actually taking on the challenge in aged care and doing the things that are necessary to ensure that we can provide long-term reform and that the aged-care system is one that Australians can be proud of, so that those Australians who have relatives or friends in aged care can know that there is a robust system that is going to look after those people.

The Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment (Royal Commission Response) Bill 2022, which the government is introducing, is to respond to the decade of neglect under the previous government. They failed to implement all the recommendations of the royal commission report that was titled Neglect. As Minister Wells said in the other place yesterday, there have been 23 reports, inquiries, studies, committee reports and a royal commission which all told us consistently the same thing. There has been a decade of inaction for a system that is in crisis, one that needed support and that received nothing from the previous government.

The bill shows the priority of this government is to act on aged care. It was something that the Prime Minister talked about consistently for the last term of opposition but also something that was a focus point for the now-government during the election campaign. We are delivering on our promise to the Australian people to treat older Australians with the respect that they deserve. We know the role that older Australians have played in building this country, working hard to contribute to society, and they deserve that dignity and respect as they get later in life. For many years, the previous government showed that reforming and fixing aged care was not the high priority that it should be. You only need to look at the performance of the former minister and compare that to what we are seeing from the current Albanese Labor government. The contrast could not be more stark.

During the campaign, I met with aged-care workers and workers in aged care through parts of regional Queensland, and they told me firsthand the significant challenges in this sector and what years of lack of support has meant to them and what it has meant to people living in those facilities. Some of the workers I met with have been working in aged care for decades, and I was happy to convey our thanks, as a senator for Queensland, for the work that they have been doing. These people are really committed to the care of elderly Australians.

This bill will implement a series of urgent funding, quality and safety measures, many of which were recommended by the royal commission. The legislation will introduce several key measures that will ensure older Australians are protected, measures that have been delayed for too long under the previous government, including the Serious Incident Response Scheme, which will be expanded to establish obligations on approved providers of home care and flexible care in a community setting, to report and respond to incidents, and to take action to prevent incidents from reoccurring.

A new code of conduct will set high standards of behaviour for aged-care workers, approved providers and governing persons of approved providers to ensure they are delivering aged care in a way that is safe, competent and respectful. Improved information sharing between care and support sector regulators will enable proactive monitoring of cross-sector risks and better protection of consumers and participants from harm. An interim solution for the provision of consent to the use of restrictive practices will also be established while state and territory consent arrangements are reconsidered. The bill will also increase transparency and accountability for providers as well.

The legislation has the important support of many organisations in the sector. The Council on the Ageing said:

These Bills are crucial steps in a reform process that when fully implemented will ensure Australia will finally enjoy the quality aged care system all older Australians deserve … and to have them introduced today is testament to the fact that Aged Care Minister Anika Wells, strongly supported by Health and Aged Care Minister Mark Butler, has hit the ground running in her new portfolio.

The Health Services Union said:

Our industry will not be fixed overnight and will require significantly greater resources. But we are confident Minister Wells is headed in the right direction.

For too long, the aged care system has exploited the time and goodwill of an underpaid, insecurely employed workforce largely made up of women. For the first time there is a crack of light at the end of the tunnel.

Catholic Health Australia has said:

Legislation introduced today really fires the starting gun on reform. This is long overdue and our members welcome the fact that the Albanese Government is serious about improving care for the elderly … in our society.

Opal Healthcare said:

We are delighted to see the new bill will enshrine mandated standards for all aged care providers, including the requirement for all care communities across Australia to have a registered nurse on duty 24-hours a day.

That's something, by the way, that the former minister took umbrage with, and that was one of the reasons why this legislation has been delayed—because of an amendment that the previous Labor opposition was able to get passed in the Senate requiring that, which is why they delayed actually passing this legislation in the previous parliament.

So this legislation is an important first step in turning around the neglect that we have seen over the last 10 years. Anthony Albanese as Prime Minister is committed to it, and I'm confident in the ability of Minister Wells to take the steps necessary so that all Australians can retire in dignity and comfort, which is what they deserve. This is an important part of the incoming government's agenda. It's something on which we made a series of promises, and it's something that we are absolutely committed to delivering, and I expect the Australian people will be holding us to account.

The performance of the previous minister and the fact that he is still trying to create this myth about not only the role that he played previously, whether it be the royal commission, as I highlighted at the start, but also his attack during his speech just then on the treatment of Aboriginal community-controlled organisations as part of this legislation, is quite disgraceful. For him to try to suggest that these changes are going to result in a lower standard of care for elderly Aboriginal Australians is a disgraceful thing for him to suggest in this parliament. A key part of closing the gap that the previous government paid lip-service to is about ensuring that those Aboriginal controlled organisations actually take the responsibility for improving those standards themselves, whether it be in health, the community sector or in aged care. So for him to try and allude that this is going to in some way result in standards slipping is a disgraceful thing for the previous minister, given his status, to actually do. I just wanted to ensure that that was on the record and not let this myth be created—like those opposite are trying to do on royal commissions and on other things—that this isn't something that we haven't thought of. We have confidence in those community organisations to do the right thing by their communities, which is exactly what this government is about.

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment (Royal Commission Response) Bill 2022 and take this opportunity to commend Minister Wells for bringing this to the Senate and to the House, showing not only the priority that we place on all of our election commitments, which we will be pushing forward over this term of the parliamentary cycle, but also the priority we place on our elders. We talk about our children as being vulnerable and we know we must look after them, but we also have to look after our elders. Certainly in the First Nations way of life our elders are critical. We saw throughout the pandemic the fear that most Australians felt but, in particular, elderly Australians—and who still feel it today, because the pandemic is not over. We are living with this pandemic, and it is our elders who are incredibly vulnerable.

I recently visited Nhulunbuy, in north-east Arnhem Land, and had the opportunity to work with some of the Yolngu elders there and seek their advice and their wisdom as to what we need to do in terms of our aged care and caring for our elders. It was wonderful to be able to spend some time with Carers NT and to see the launch of the Djaka'mi facility in eastern Arnhem Land. In the Yolgnu language 'Djaka'mi' means to care, and it's certainly a fitting name for this initiative. The work of Carers NT at Djaka'mi supports both NDIS disability participants and aged-care clients to be supported on country in Nhulunbuy. They employ local people who bring their language, culture and connection. It also provides an opportunity for respite for the elders in a place that's safe, and their families and carers know that they can take some time and leave their loved ones with people that they trust.

Many elderly Territorians have died hundreds of kilometres away from their community, away from their homelands, their country and their families. I say this from a very realistic point of view due to the geography of places like the Northern Territory and indeed places across northern Australia and Western Australia where we are such a great big country. First Nations people largely want to live connected closely to their country, and sometimes those hospital services, those aged care services and indeed most government services are not as close as we would think they could be in places like Darwin and Alice Springs. So most people travel where they have to for the care that they require.

Good, dignified aged care depends on listening to elderly Australians and what they want no matter where they are in the country, and this facility is what good, dignified care looks like. It changes lives. If we can see great care provided in a remote part of the Northern Territory like Nhulunbuy with this particular service, we can and should see it done elsewhere.

And, as Assistant Minister for Indigenous Health, I will just highlight that the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety recommended that the government:

… ensure that the new aged care system makes specific and adequate provision for the diverse and changing needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people …

I'm incredibly pleased to highlight here to the Senate that the Australian government is investing $106 million in providing face-to-face support for older First Nations people and $115 million in building culturally safe aged-care facilities. I met with elders in north-east Arnhem Land and with Djaka'mi, which is a not-for-profit community-based organisation dedicated to improving the lives of family carers living in that part of the country.

We know that, through this particular bill, the Albanese Labor government's commitment crosses a broad cross-section, in terms of seeing the aged-care sector across Australia improve quite dramatically, and I just want to go through some of those points. One of the things that I know has really, really raised the hopes of many families is the fact that we want to increase the average minimum care time per resident per day and introduce a mandate that requires all residential aged-care facilities to have a registered nurse onsite 24 hours a day, seven days a week. This will deliver on the government's election commitment to put more nurses back into nursing homes, giving carers—the loved ones who care for their loved ones and their elders—more time to care. From July 2023 our government is mandating the requirement for a registered nurse to be onsite at all times. This commitment directly responds to recommendation 86.5 of the royal commission and will be delivered one year earlier than was recommended.

Aged care is everyone's business. This piece of legislation promises much of what we took to the election, and we know that that critical need is one that we recognise has been ignored and neglected for way too long. This was evident in the Out of sight, out of mind report that we saw in the previous term. The new Australian National Aged Care Classification, AN-ACC, funding model will replace the outdated Aged Care Funding Instrument in October, offering more equitable funding that is better matched to providers' costs in delivering the care residents need. Aged-care providers shouldn't be expected to walk alone, and our government is committed to supporting them appropriately. The star rating system will see the Department of Health and Aged Care publish a comparison rating for all residential aged-care services. This will support older Australians, their loved ones and their representatives in being able to compare services and able to make more informed choices about their aged care, and that's important. Why should we think that, as you grow older, you have less choice and less ability to make decisions about the kind of care you want? We recognise that this is pivotal to the dignity and care not only of our elders but also to the families who look after them and the general carers who are part of that network.

Reforms will also see the extension of the Serious Incident Response Scheme to all in-home care providers, meaning increased protection for older Australians from preventable incidents, abuse and neglect. I, like many of you here, and certainly many Australians, was horrified by the heartbreaking stories of abuse and neglect coming out of aged-care settings. For too long there were no mandatory incident-reporting requirements for providers of home care or flexible care delivered in a home and community setting. This meant that there was no oversight of allegations of abuse and neglect of older Australians receiving care in their own homes. And how tragic is that: to be in your own home and to experience that neglect and abuse, and be able to do nothing about it? This change is absolutely overdue, and it's critical we denounce abuse and neglect and not simply leave it out of sight and out of mind.

I'm also pleased to see the introduction of a new code of conduct for approved providers, their workforce and governing persons, setting minimum standards of behaviour to ensure older Australians receive care in a safe, competent and respectful manner. New provider governance and reporting arrangements due to begin at the end of this year will improve transparency and mean greater accountability on providers to better focus on the needs of older Australians receiving care. First steps will also be taken towards harmonising regulation of care and to support providers across the aged-care, disability support and veterans' care sectors by improving information-sharing between the bodies that regulate these sectors.

I not only commend Minister Wells I also commend Minister Butler and the Prime Minister for their swift action to work on fixing this system. The status quo of neglect over the past decade simply has not been good enough. I also commend all of those elderly Australians, their carers and the workers who provided their stories, and conveyed the reality of aged care in this country to the royal commission. These changes, among many others, will build on our promise to deliver security, dignity, quality and humanity in care for every older Australian across the aged-care system.

In my portfolio area, as Assistant Minister for Indigenous Health, I'm also very conscious, as we talk about the aged-care sector—and I know that previous speakers have spoken about First Nations organisations and the Aboriginal health sector—to point out that one of the priority areas which I will focus on as well captures the aged-care sector: those patients who are on renal dialysis. We have a significant number of the First Nations population receiving dialysis, many of whom—but not all, some of them are quite young—are in the aged-care sector, with extra needs and requiring support.

I can speak from experience in the Northern Territory, where families leave their community to go to renal dialysis in Alice Springs, Tennant Creek, Katherine or Darwin. Some of them receive that care on country or at home, and that, combined with the need to have a reliable and supportive aged-care nursing home nearby is also absolutely essential for those clients in particular. That's because renal disease is one of the greatest diseases that impacts on First Nations people in our regional and remote areas of Australia in particular. Highlighted by those geographical distances is the need for access to a clean and reliable water supply for the dialysis machines and also the ability to have resources on country, should people want to stay there for their care.

These are questions that I ask as I travel around Australia, talking about health, First Nations health and access, as we look at this from the perspective of what kind of care our elders require. So I'm enormously pleased that our government has brought this bill forward. I will certainly be following very closely the significant policy announcements that we've made in relation to aged care and in the health sector generally. I commend the bill to the Senate.

David Van (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The coalition is committed to ensuring that the government stick to their election promises and their supposed commitment to aged care, because, so far, their performance towards aged care has been woeful. COVID is rampant in the aged-care community, and they don't have the slightest idea what to do about it. Almost 5,000 Australians have passed away from COVID-19 since 31 May 2022, and as of 22 July 2022 there were 9,537 active COVID-19 cases and 1,013 active outbreaks in residential aged-care facilities across Australia. Worse, there have been 2,187 reported deaths, in 2022, in aged-care facilities.

What is this government doing about it? Nothing. For the entirety of the pandemic, while this government was in opposition, they mischaracterised the coalition's performance on aged care. Now, when they have the opportunity—and, indeed, the duty—to act on their words, they're doing absolutely nothing. Senator Gallagher, on 8 February, said in this chamber:

There are problems in aged care, where the situation is so dire, with thousands infected with COVID, hundreds dying and staff not able to perform their jobs.

What is she saying now?

On that same day, Senator Watt—who was vocal, almost every day, in picking on our minister at the time—said that an aged-care facility was 'in complete meltdown', with deaths, from COVID, of 15 aged-care residents, and 182 residents and staff testing positive for COVID.

They're a lot lower than the numbers we're seeing right now in aged care. And what's this government doing? I could go on and pull many—probably hundreds, if not thousands—transcripts out of Hansard from the previous years and find pretty much any one of the Labor senators over there commenting on how bad the COVID outbreak was and how more needed to be done. However, the fact of the matter is, there are currently more cases, more deaths and more outbreaks in aged-care facilities than ever before.

The silence coming from the Labor Party is deafening. The Prime Minister is silent. The health minister is silent. The aged-care minister is silent. In fact, the whole Labor Party is silent—because they're embarrassed. Now that they actually have to try and solve the problem, all they can come up with is silence and hope that no-one notices. Instead of acting on their promises of registered nurses on site 24/7 hours a day, seven days a week, more carers with more time to care, a pay rise for aged-care workers, better food for residents and dollars going to aged care, they are delivering a revised version of the previous coalition government's legislation, the aged care and other legislation amendment royal commission response bill 2021, which, of course, as opposition, we support.

The health, safety and wellbeing of senior Australians is of the utmost importance to the coalition, and we are committed to ensuring that our generational changes of the aged-care system continue on from the 46th Parliament into the 47th Parliament. However, it is astounding that, after all their talk in opposition, the nine years that they had to work on legislation, and all the promises they made coming into the election, their first move is to introduce a bill developed by the coalition. Good on you, guys!

I don't blame them, because our record on aged care is excellent, and if they want good ideas they only have to look at what the coalition achieved and how we responded to the problems that were occurring in the aged-care sector at the time. When we were in government, our formal response to the royal commission's final report was to accept, or accept in principle, 126 of the 148 recommendations. This is because we listened to the experiences of the Australians who gave evidence to the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety, and took decisive action to implement the recommendations with the reforms to deliver vital services, improved quality of care and viability of the aged-care sector. In the 2022-23 budget, we delivered funding for aged-care reform of $522 million, and that built on the funding of $18.3 billion committed in the 2021-22 budget and the 2021-22 MYEFO. This brought the total investment by the coalition in response to the final report of the royal commission to more than $19.1 billion.

As I mentioned before, this legislation is a revised version of the previous coalition government's legislation: the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment (Royal Commission Response No. 2) Bill 2021. That makes you wonder why, if the government now supports this, they delayed the passage of this bill for six months while in opposition? I think you can pretty much guess the answer, because there is only one answer. The government, when in opposition, was willing to play politics at the expense of our elderly Australians, solely for political gain, which, personally, I find absolutely disgusting. When we were in government, we outlined clearly the importance of this legislation and the Labor Party clearly now agrees with us, since this bill is before us today. The government should be absolutely ashamed of themselves and of their conduct. By delaying the passage of this bill by six months and then backflipping on their position—which, as we know, they could do at Commonwealth or probably Olympic level these days—to introduce it as soon as they are in government shows that they are more concerned with political gain than with improving the lives of elderly Australians.

Collectively, this legislation forms the second step in the previous coalition government's five-year reform agenda through the five reform pillars: home care, residential aged-care services and sustainability; residential aged-care quality and safety; workforce; and governance. However, a key change from the original bill progressed in the 46th Parliament is removal of the worker screening regulations contained in schedule 2, which sought to establish nationally consistent pre-employment screening for aged-care workers. These were important new regulatory arrangements that responded in part to recommendation 77 of the royal commission. They prevented, and were designed to prevent, unsuitable workers from entering or remaining in the aged-care sector. So it is disappointing, to say the very least, that the government has now decided to remove these protections from the bill. Why would you remove those protections for our elderly?

The coalition is still committed to supporting Australians as they age, ensuring that they are afforded the dignity and the respect that they deserve in their later years of life, so we will support this bill. Unlike those opposite, we will not toy with the lives of elderly Australians simply for political gain. We will, however, continue to keep an eye on the government to ensure that they are acting in the best interests of elderly Australians and to ensure that they continue the coalition's work of delivering the reforms that are so needed, as outlined in the royal commission.

Tony Sheldon (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment (Royal Commission Response) Bill 2022. I'd like to begin by commending the new government on the important decisions that have been made in bringing forward this bill—particularly the Minister for Aged Care, Anika Wells—as a matter of urgency so early in the government's period of being newly elected.

The former government was handed the final report of the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety in February 2021. That's almost 18 months ago. In fact, it is almost three years since the royal commission's interim report was tabled. It doesn't sound like it was a matter of urgency for the former government, regardless of what Senator Van just put to the Senate and to the Australian people. The title of the report summed up the state of the industry in just one word, all those 18 months ago, which this previous government failed to act on—'neglect', neglect to expose. The royal commission concluded residents were left languishing with maggots crawling in infected wounds—it took the previous government 18 months to still not respond. Residents were left sitting or lying in their own faeces—that wasn't enough to get them to do anything in 18 months. Dreadful food, hydration and oral health, leading to widespread malnutrition and excruciating dental pain—they still did nothing for 18 months. Widespread use of physical restraints and sedatives on residents not for their safety but to make them easier to manage—and they did nothing in 18 months. There were 4,013 allegations of physical sexual assault of aged-care residents in just one year—and they could still do nothing for 18 months. The royal commission made 148 recommendations. The sheer volume and breadth of recommendations is reflective of how bad things were allowed to get. It demonstrates how urgently the reforms in this bill are required.

This bill will improve the health, safety and wellbeing of older Australians. Schedule 1 provides for the Australian National Aged Care Classification model for calculating aged-care subsidies. Schedule 2 facilitates the publication of star ratings, which will enable senior Australians, and their families, to make informed decisions about their aged care. Schedule 3 introduces the code of conduct for the aged-care sector. Schedule 4 extends the Serious Incident Response Scheme to approved providers of home care and flexible care. Schedule 5 strengthens the governance of approved providers. Schedule 6 facilitates increased information sharing between care and support sector regulators. Schedule 7 of the bill will increase financial and prudential oversight in respect of refundable accommodation deposits and bonds. Schedule 8 of this bill expands the functions of the renamed Independent Health and Aged Care Pricing Authority. And Schedule 9 enables an interim solution with respect to the requirement to obtain informed consent for the use of restrictive practices.

The content of this bill clearly demonstrates that, under this new government, aged care is finally an urgent priority. Of course there's another aged-care bill making its way through the House currently which legislates Labor's commitment to 24/7-hour nurses in aged-care homes—a royal commission recommendation that was ignored by the last government. That bill will also enable the government to cap the fees charged by home-care providers, among other important reforms that I look forward to debating next week. I commend the urgency with which this government and the minister have acted to bring forward critical reforms. After 18 months of inaction and delay we finally have decisive action for our older Australians.

Of course, there is also much more to be done. I'm speaking particularly about the conditions suffered by aged-care workers. The former government has allowed a situation where aged-care workers are second-class citizens—a situation where, I'm certain, they would never want a member of their family working in the conditions experienced by aged-care workers. Through the Select Committee on Job Security, I heard firsthand from aged-care workers across Australia about these very issues. There are inadequate time and resources for staff to adequately care for each resident. Anu Singh, an aged-care worker in Melbourne, said:

The worst thing that I've gone through is that, at the workplace where I used to work, we used to have two carers for 15 to 20 residents, and they just gave us a time frame of 20 minutes. In those 20 minutes, we used to wake up our residents, who were about 90 years old, and do showering, toileting, dressing and undressing; tidy up their rooms; make their beds; and then take them slowly to their dining. Can you imagine doing all this just for yourself in 20 minutes? Well, we did that with our residents. We had to push ourselves. We don't just push ourselves physically. We are mentally stressed and emotionally broken.

And for that physical, mental and emotional strain, what do aged-care workers get in return? They get insecure work, usually part-time contracts with few, if any, guaranteed hours. They are required to be available for a shift any day of the week at just a few hours' notice. They never know how much money they earn in a week. They don't know if they can pay the bills or their rent. They can't make any personal plans or financial commitments. And on top of all that, they are some of the lowest-paid workers in the country.

Tracy Colbert, another aged-care worker, told us during the inquiry:

I work permanent part-time hours. I would love to have permanent hours. I don't know from one week to the next how I'm going to afford to pay for all of my living expenses. There are workers that only get five hours a day. They can't live and support their families … I've had a lot of friends that have left the sector because they just can't afford to make a living, and some of them had two or three jobs.

She also said:

We only get $22 an hour, so I have to work weekends, for low money. I do 11-hour days on a weekend, away from my family, to be able to support them. I've had a lot of friends that have left the sector because they just can't afford to make a living, and some of them had two or three jobs.

The disgusting reality is that this has become the norm in aged care. The people we depend on to look after senior citizens are being treated in a way that borders on contempt. Sheree Clarke, a nurse from Queensland, said:

When my mother went through cancer, I couldn't tell her that I would support her to her cancer appointments, because, if you're not available to pick up a shift, they don't offer you that shift the next time.

How disgusting is that? She went on to say: 'The people we rely on to care for our parents and grandparents are put in a position where they can't care for their own families.' Under the former government, this became the norm for aged-care workers. Nine in 10 aged-care workers are on casual or part-time contracts. Those part-time contracts usually have so few guaranteed hours, they are just casual contracts without casual loading, and that is the reality for 90 per cent of aged-care workers.

Somehow, that isn't the worst of it. In aged care and the NDIS, there are bottom-feeding platforms—gig platforms, like Mable—which have a business model based on paying workers below the minimum wage. As the Health Services Union's Lauren Hutchins told the job security inquiry these platforms:

are a combination of Tinder and Uber. You put your profile out there and people with disabilities or their carers then make a decision based on the information that is provided.

Mable told the job security inquiry that their workers can earn hourly wages as low as $25. The Mable workers are engaged as contractors, which means $25 is without superannuation. It's without any paid leave or any loading in lieu of paid leave. It's without any penalty rates. It's without consideration of any costs incurred by Mable workers travelling to home-care appointments. The fact is, when you strip all those costs out, Mable workers are paid only a fraction of the national minimum wage, let alone earnings anywhere near the award minimum for workers. And, if you let Mable grow in aged care, as the previous government did, we'll have aged-care workers living in their cars. We'll have aged-care workers having to skip meals to make ends meet. We will see the quality of care provided to senior Australians go into freefall.

And what did the former government do in response to the threat posed by Mable? They gave them $7.2 million to provide surge workforce in aged-care homes during the early waves of the pandemic. The former government paid Mable, a company that pays workers below the minimum wage, $7.2 million. And how did they go? Well, Mable's service quality was so woeful that they were hauled before the aged-care royal commission. Anglicare, which owned a facility in Penrith where Mable provided workers, told the royal commission: 'It quickly became apparent the staff that Mable could provide did not have the skills and qualifications that were needed.' That is what the Australian taxpayer paid Mable $7.2 million for: a workforce that was underpaid, exploited and incapable of providing the service that was required. What an utter boondoggle! Unbelievable! For much of the last year, Mable was being spruiked on the NDIA's website as a preferred provider!

So how did they even get there? Perhaps we need to look at Mable's owners and board, courtesy of reporting by Crikey. We know that, to our great shock and surprise, this dodgy outfit that exploits workers and got millions from the former government—surprise, surprise!—is owned and operated by donors to and associates of the New South Wales Liberal Party, such as the prominent Liberal fundraiser Matthew Playfair, prominent Liberal donor Lucinda Aboud and Liberal Party Double Bay branch vice president Ray Whitten. Here we see how the disgusting sausage gets made: mates of the New South Wales Liberals pile money into an outfit that underpays aged-care workers and disability workers and doesn't provide a service. The Liberal government pays them $7.2 million to provide care that is so bad it earns them a spot in the aged-care royal commission. Yet Senator Hughes comes into this building regularly and sings Mable's praises at every given opportunity. And—surprise, surprise!—when the royal commission recommended that these shonks shouldn't be used in aged care, the former government did not accept the recommendation!

This whole Mable saga encapsulates everything wrong with the former government. I'm glad that at least the Productivity Commission is now reviewing that issue, because there is a broad consensus that gig platforms—not all gig platforms, but gig platforms like Mable—are not conducive to an acceptable quality of care in aged care and disability care. That is the position of unions involved in the industry. That is the position of sector employers like Anglicare. That is the position of the Australian Medical Association. That is the position of numerous academics who made submissions to the Productivity Commission and to the job security committee. And that is the position of the aged-care royal commission.

So I again commend this new government for moving so quickly to introduce these reforms, and I look forward to the report of the Productivity Commission, because we need to end the scam being perpetrated by Mable and others with the support of the Liberal Party.

Tim Ayres (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Trade) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Well, we've heard evidence from the royal commission; I just want to read out a section of it. One of the submissions told the aged-care royal commission:

My father told me that when the man entered his room, he told the man to leave his room. The man then hit my father over his head several times with a plastic doll, resulting in a small cut to my father's forehead, bruising across the bridge of his nose and defensive bruising on his forearms. There were no staff around at the time the incident occurred.

Another said:

My 71 year old husband is a resident in aged care because of advanced Parkinson's disease. On the night of December 31 2018 he was horrifically sexually abused by 2 night duty staff …

Yet another told the royal commission: 'What I do know for absolute sure now is that Mum, who three weeks ago waited in anticipation for family to arrive and spent every day talking, laughing, reminiscing and going on outings and being engaged with life, is now drugged to the eyeballs.'

I think of my own family's experience in aged care, which at best is variable. My wonderful father-in-law, a terrific bloke struck by the ravages of Alzheimer's disease, a former Telstra liney who could tell you a story about every little country town and every bit of Telstra infrastructure throughout the Hunter Valley, in his years in aged care, his wife—my wife's mother—spent every daytime hour with him, making sure that he got fed and making sure that he got cleaned. The staff in that centre were really good people, but they did not have the resources that they needed. They did not have the staff they needed. They could not fulfil their responsibility. I remember the effort that my wife's mother put into Peter's care.

These are snippets of stories from the royal commission itself, but they are elements of the lives of every Australian family who's had somebody in aged care. The bravery of families, friends, carers in the system, advocates, peak bodies, the unions and others who submitted to the royal commission meant that it laid bare just how broken the aged-care system is. 'Shocking', 'alarming', 'harrowing' and 'a source of national shame' are just some of the ways the final report into aged care described it.

In the face of this mounting evidence, you would have thought that the previous government would have acted urgently on the 148 recommendations contained in the report. Well, you would be wrong. Consistent with their track record on so many issues, the Morrison government sat on their hands. They turned their backs on aged-care reform and on older Australians. The COVID-19 pandemic, of course, made this so much worse. It exacerbated the pressure on the system, in which a largely female, underpaid aged-care workforce was already under incredible strain. Almost a year after the final report was handed down, in March 2021, former Prime Minister Morrison called in the ADF to fill worker shortages in the sector—a year of inactivity and then called in the ADF. There was a year of policy failure, trying to fill the skills shortages, and then they relied upon our men and women in uniform to try and fill the gap. You can't help but think how different the COVID crisis in aged care would have been if the Morrison government had acted with some sense of urgency. Some of the backbenchers on the other side still don't believe that the COVID crisis was real, so perhaps that played a role in the government's dysfunction. At the time, Lynelle Briggs, one of the commissioners, said that the government should have heeded the warnings about the sector's longstanding workforce challenges much sooner.

Putting dignity, respect and humanity front and centre underpins our approach, the new Albanese government's approach, to fixing a broken system. We've introduced in the Senate a key piece of aged-care legislation, delivering on our promise to ensure older Australians receive the higher quality care that every single one of them deserves. Older Australians deserve a government that cares. Older Australians deserve a government that will do what it says that it's going to do and delivers on the promises to have the standard of care that each of them deserve. Bandaid solutions won't work. We have to be honest about the scale of the problem and the kinds of steps that will be required to fix it.

Comprehensive legislative action, delivered with the urgency that Australians deserve, will make a difference. The bill that's been introduced will introduce a new Australian national aged-care classification funding model which will replace the outdated aged-care funding instrument in October 2022. More equitable funding, matched to providers' costs will make a big difference in delivering the care that residents need.

The star-rating system will see the Department of Health and Aged Care publish a comparison rating for all residential aged-care services by the end of 2022. The extension of the—

Catryna Bilyk (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Ayres, it's now 1.30, a hard marker. You'll be in continuation when we come back to this legislation.