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

It is a second reading amendment. I move the opposition's second reading amendment:

At the end of the motion, add:

  but the Senate notes that the Government has failed to:

(a) provide alternative assistance in meeting the demands of the aged care workforce;

(b) ensure repurposed funds be utilised for workforce pay, conditions and development;

(c) consult with or inform the aged care sector of:

  (i) Budget cuts including the axing of the $653 million Aged Care Payroll Tax Supplement; and

  (ii) the axing of the Dementia and Severe Behaviours Supplement until after the 2014 Budget; and

(e) oversee the management of aged care funding as evidenced by the over-subscription of the Dementia and Severe Behaviours Supplement and under-subscription of the Dementia and Cognition and Veterans' Supplements.

Labor will not be opposing the common sense amendments contained in the Health and Other Services (Compensation) Care Charges (Amendment) Bill 2014. We are entirely supportive of the measures which will remove impediments to recovering past care costs for home care. This adjustment simply brings home care into line with arrangements that have dictated residential care. It is a sensible change that Labor will of course not be standing in the way of.

We will also not be opposing the amendments to the Health Care Identifiers Act, which supports the implementation of stage 2 of the aged-care gateway. This stage is vital. It provides a centralised online information portal called My Aged Care. It is just another reform that resulted from Labor's Living Longer, Living Better reforms. The My Aged Care website is an integral component of the gateway and will change the way Australians access the aged-care system. This amendment will allow for the collection, use and disclosure of data for the purposes of this site and I would encourage everyone to use these services and learn about what is available, both for themselves and their loved ones. The My Aged Care website is up and running and, from next year, will be expanded to include a host of self-service functions for older Australians and service providers. The information about aged-care service availability promises to be a tremendous asset to the sector. It is just another example of how Labor's Living Longer, Living Better reforms were such a game changer for aged care in Australia. Labor was responsible for introducing a comprehensive reform package which ensures that our aged-care system is equipped for the 21st century, a century that will feature the ageing of the baby boomer generation.

Living Longer, Living Better did not just create a fairer and more equitable aged-care system; it created a more sustainable one that will be there for all of us when we reach the latter stages of our lives. I am supportive of our move towards consumer directed care because I think that everyone should be able to choose the care and support options that suit them. My Gateway is a key component of this.

I would like to, once again, congratulate the hard work undertaken by the member for Port Adelaide, Mark Butler, and Senator Collins, who both served as Minister for Mental Health and Ageing during Labor's period in office. We did the heavy lifting when it came to aged-care policy.

The most controversial aspect of the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment Bill is that it amends the Aged Care Act to reflect the scrapping of Labor's workforce supplement, a supplement which Labor introduced as part of the Living Longer, Living Better package. It was our objective to dedicate a total of $1.2 billion to improving the pay and conditions of aged-care staff—staff who work tirelessly every day, often in trying circumstances, to care for older Australians who can no longer care for themselves. In this year's budget the axing of this supplement was badged as a 'reprioritisation'. That effectively means that money was handed to providers in the general pool of aged-care funds.

Those opposite will no doubt contend that their scrapping of the workforce supplement was a clear pre-election commitment. Although this is accurate, what they will not tell you is that they have not come up with any alternatives or solutions to address the aged-care workforce crisis that this country faces. When it comes to boosting staff levels, attracting new workers to the sector and improving the conditions of those staff members charged with such immense responsibilities, there is nothing on offer.

We now have a policy-free zone. During Senate estimates in June this year I asked Assistant Minister for Social Services, Senator Fifield, to spell out how his government would address these challenges. As I advised this chamber shortly after, his response was glib and uninspiring. He said, and I quote directly:

The main workforce pressure facing the workforce is bodies, and creating many, many more.

That was it. Let us give the minister a slow clap, maybe a 'Good effort' sticker or something similar. That was his answer as to how the government would solve the pressures faced by a sector under enormous burden to provide care and support for older Australians.

I think it is important that we pause and consider just how serious the situation is. Half of the aged-care workforce will retire in the next 10 years from this sector, a sector which, I would like to remind those opposite, has a high turnover of staff resulting, at least in part, from low pay and trying conditions. It may shock many people to learn that nurses working in aged care are paid far less than those nurses working in hospitals.

The Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation has actually reported that there is a difference of $210 per week nationally. I remind you that these are the nurses who are responsible for caring for some of the nation's most vulnerable people. They are older Australians who require extra help and support, including people with severe symptoms of dementia and who are at risk of harming themselves and those around them. We simply cannot put these people, who rely on aged-care workers, in the too-hard basket.

Shayne Neumann and I took the opportunity to meet with aged-care workers across the nation. Indeed, I have been fortunate enough to visit residential facilities in my home state of Tasmania in Launceston, Hobart and Smithton and have travelled to Melbourne, Brisbane, Sydney and Adelaide to meet with residents and staff and to learn from their experiences. I have been thoroughly impressed by their dedication, hard work and compassion and I shake my head in wonderment at how they perform so much exhausting work without complaint. I think it goes without saying that they do not enter this line of work to be handsomely remunerated. But that certainly does not mean that they do not deserve a welcome boost in pay and conditions. They are currently being penalised and we on this side of the chamber think they deserve better.

The workforce as a whole is under tremendous pressure and this pressure will only grow as the nation's population ages. Aged care will become more and more complex as those in the sector deal with an ageing population suffering from dementia and age-related chronic diseases.

As the shadow minister for ageing noted in his remarks on this bill, 'Australia will need a 300 per cent increase in workers to care for our ageing population by the middle of this century.' So we clearly need a plan, we need leadership and we need direction, but those opposite have been completely derelict in their duty. Just 18 days after assuming power, the Abbott government axed the workforce supplement sneakily by legislative instrument. When we tried to disallow this instrument late last year, they actually suspended standing orders to push through an allowance motion. This motion, in effect, prevented any payments of the workforce supplement. What is even more galling is that they gagged debate so that no-one could speak about aged-care workforce pressures in their home states and territories—and, just like that, some $1.1 billion was taken away from the aged-care workers. These are workers who hoped that Labor would deliver them some relief. I want to be clear: the Abbott government has acted with unmitigated malice in overturning the workforce supplement, which would have given 350,000 aged-care workers much-needed enhancements to their pay and conditions.

The government will also be quick to mention that this 'reprioritisation' did result in the remaining workforce supplement funds—a total of $1.1 billion—being handed to providers. Whilst it is the case that the supplement funds were diverted back to providers to spend at their discretion, in practice what this means is that many aged-care workers will see no improvements in their pay or conditions. There are two reasons for this. First of all, the reprioritised workforce supplement was handed back to providers in the form of a topped-up subsidy. However—and this is crucial—there was no conditionality tied to these funds. There was no expectation or requirement that any percentage of these funds would be used to improve wages, conditions or career development. As the member for Blair said during his speech on this bill:

… with no conditionality there is nothing to ensure that that money is available and will go towards the challenge of making sure the lowest paid workers in the country get the necessary wages and conditions they deserve.

Second of all, this budget measure—the 'reprioritisation' of the workforce supplement—was accompanied by a host of other cruel cuts which this sector has had to endure. The axing of the aged-care payroll tax supplement meant that for-profit providers, many of whom already exist on slim profit margins, have had to recalculate how they would run their businesses. The axing of this supplement, valued at $653 million over four years, may yet send many providers, particularly those in remote and regional areas, to the wall. But there was more. Joe Hockey also made changes to the indexation of pensions. This affects the bottom line of providers since they calculate their fees according to a percentage of this very pension.

The budget was not just a cruel one for senior Australians; it impacted on the entire aged-care sector. The cuts were never raised with the sector or aged-care bodies prior to the election or, indeed, in the lead-up to the budget. Rather, the Abbott government shocked many with these changes, even though it promised to be a no-excuses, no-surprises government. Therefore, when you actually examine the situation in its entirety, there is little prospect of providers using the 'reprioritised' funds to boost the pay and conditions of staff when they have had to make up for other cuts imposed by this year's budget.

But, of course, there was more to come post-budget—another nasty surprise from team Abbott. I have spoken on numerous occasions in this chamber about the axing of the dementia and severe behaviours supplement, a supplement designed by Labor that provided an extra $16 dollars a day to providers caring for people with severe psychological and behavioural problems associated with dementia. The sector was absolutely stunned when, on 26 June this year, Senator Fifield stood up in question time and announced that the supplement would be scrapped—just like that. Aged-care providers and representative bodies had been kept completely in the dark and then the rug was pulled out from under them. It really is a sad state of affairs. Documents we have obtained under freedom of information reveal just how inattentive the minister was in monitoring this supplement, which had only been operating for one month prior to the coalition taking power. We now know that no-one was monitoring the supplement until it was too late. In fact, it was a question on notice that I put to the department that in part sparked any sort of action.

Do not let the government tell you otherwise; this was a supplement that needed careful attention from a competent administration. Unfortunately, that was not what happened because the minister was asleep at the wheel. It had been estimated that the supplement would apply to approximately one per cent of all residents—in other words, a very small percentage of residents who exhibit severe psychological and behavioural problems associated with dementia, roughly 2,000 nationwide. But the number of people who qualified under the supplement had actually ballooned under the government's watch to some 22,000.

When the information obtained via freedom of information is analysed carefully, it becomes clear that some important questions need to be asked. One that I am intent to get to the bottom of is this: would the situation have been different if the minister and his office were properly prepared to manage aged-care administration? As the member for Blair said in that other place:

They have an assistant minister whose major responsibility is the NDIS. They have an assistant minister who did not even have an departmental aged-care adviser in his office until March this year. Seven months after the election he finally gets an adviser in his office, and the government finally realises, after we ask questions, that there is a problem.

Would the management and monitoring of this supplement have gone differently if the office was structured properly to handle such responsibilities in the first place? I guess we will never know, but, once again, this entire issue has reinforced why it is so important to have a minister focused on aged-care responsibilities and an office set up to accommodate this. But that is not what we have; we have a minister with his mind elsewhere who is shrugging his shoulders and unable or unwilling to act.

I would like to echo the sentiments expressed by the member for Blair: when it comes to the dementia supplement, the government did not realise there were issues with this implementation because of its own incompetence and inattention to monitoring. What is worse is that, even when it was clear that there were problems, the minister panicked and ripped away the supplement without warning and without any sort of replacement scheme ready. That was 150 days ago and we are still waiting.

In a minute of 4 February 2014, the department said it would write to the peak bodies and consult with the sector—but this did not happen. There was no real consultation; the supplement was axed without warning. In fact, not one peak body or major provider can recall receiving any correspondence or speaking with the assistant minister, his office or the department about the dementia supplement. I am informed that they learnt about this issue at the same time the rest of us did: at Senate estimates on 5 June 2014, when the assistant minister made his statement before the committee.

Even if we were to excuse this lack of consultation—which, of course, we should not—you would think that the minister would have had a plan B in place. But he did not. The supplement was scrapped on 26 June and we still do not have a replacement scheme in place. The department actually recommended that the minister fund interim projects while a new payment was being developed, and these could be pursued with the aged-care sector committee. In May, the minister wrote to the secretary of the department confirming he had agreed to terminate the supplement and agreed to develop both 'an interim and an ongoing measure'. But what happened? Aged-care providers caring for vulnerable people with severe symptoms of dementia are still waiting. Those people suffering from this insidious disease in the most traumatic way are still waiting. Indeed, the entire sector is still waiting. They want leadership, they want answers and they want proper support to care for people who can no longer care for themselves. By Sunday it will be 150 days since the supplement was axed without warning. That is 150 days of neglect and 150 days of uncertainty for people with severe psychological and behavioural problems associated with dementia and those who care for them—150 days that demonstrate just how incompetent and inattentive this government has been.

What can the people of Australia think when a minister axes this supplement without any plans, without any vision and without any ideas about how the government will address the need for extra funding of staff and extra programs to help deal with those people with severe behavioural problems associated with dementia? Do you know what they are saying to me? They are saying that the minister has gone to sleep at the wheel. This is a minister who is not interested in the aged-care sector. This is a minister who failed to even go to Tasmania on Friday to open a new facility after the invitations were sent out. So the people of Tasmania are saying, 'This minister certainly does not care about aged care.'

We on this side are asking for the government to prioritise aged-care funding in this country. Shayne Neumann from the other place and I believe that there ought to be a minister for ageing, a minister who is focused on this enormous, confronting issue of the ageing population. But we have also heard time and time again from the aged care sector that they want a minister. They want a government who is going to give the priority to aged care that it deserves. We all know—and I have spoken about it today—about the challenges for the aged care sector in finding competent, good, caring staff. What has this government done? It has done nothing but take away the supplement that was going to remunerate those staff so that they would at least be given extra reinforcement, not only in terms of money but in knowing that this government cared about the very important job they are doing within the sector. But we have heard nothing. I do not know how many times I have come into this chamber and challenged the assistant minister for ageing to come in and explain to us what his government is going to do.

I am very happy with and very proud of what Labor did when we were in office. Living Longer, Living Better set the framework for aged care and for ageing Australians going into the next decade. But we cannot sit back and just allow this government to ride the coat-tails of the former Labor government. I am passionate, as Shayne Neumann is, about aged care. I have yet to see any display of that whatsoever from this government. We need to build on Living Longer, Living Better. There are enormous challenges there and I call on the minister who is here in the chamber to enter this debate today, to put on the public record what he is going to do. What programs and what assistance is there going to be for those people suffering with dementia or severe psychological and behavioural issues? What is his government going to be doing to ensure going forward that we have the people available to work in this sector, to look after some of Australia's most vulnerable people?

I recently visited an aged-care facility that deals with people who have been living on the streets, who have been homeless. They are confronted daily with issues around dementia and severe behaviour problems. Those people, just like all other Australians, deserve a better outcome from this government. They deserve compassion. They deserve the best qualified staff supporting them. The people working in this sector deserve the opportunity to have a real career path. If you are working in an acute-care hospital as a nurse, you should have the opportunity to go and work in aged care and get paid the same amount of money. Since when do we as Australians consider ageing and older Australians less valuable than the rest of the community? I say that we on this side do not. I call on the minister to enter the debate and answer some of these questions that have been outstanding and to resolve the issue about dementia funding.