Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

I promised it would be short! These amendments specifically relate to the definition of key personnel. As I indicated in my speech in the second reading debate, there is a deal of concern in the not-for-profit aged-care sector about the amendments the government is making to the definition of key personnel. As I said earlier, we understand why those amendments are being made, but we do think that they will place an onerous burden on not-for-profits. When you consider that the not-for-profit organisations provide around 65 per cent of aged care, you are talking about impacting on a large number of our aged-care providers. What we have sought to do—and this is our second go at this amendment so that we can tie this down and hopefully still maintain the intent of the government’s amendments—is to more clearly define when a not-for-profit voluntary board member is counted as key personnel and when they are not.

As I said in my speech in the second reading debate, many of the not-for-profit organisations have voluntary boards, there are a large number of boards, and some of those people will not have any hands-on involvement in the running of the aged-care facility. So we are moving this amendment to give some more assurance to not-for-profit providers that the burden of administration on them will not be so wide as to become crippling. I urge the government to consider these amendments to provide greater certainty for not-for-profit organisations.