Leah Blyth (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Stronger Families and Stronger Communities) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Many have been waiting over 15 months, and this figure doesn't include those still waiting to be assessed, which is about 120,000 older Australians. Together it is a staggering 200,000 Australians waiting for their approved package or for an assessment. This bill is proof that the government was not ready. It confirms what we heard in the Senate inquiry—that without this legislation critical elements of the Aged Care Act 2024 cannot be enacted. Department officials admitted that legislative change was needed as early as January, yet the government continued to promise readiness by 1 July, a promise they could not keep.

Despite this the coalition will not seek to delay the passage of this bill, because without it the aged-care rules cannot be registered and the reforms cannot proceed. Australians deserve better than another broken promise. Importantly this bill provides the framework for grandfathering arrangements, ensuring that those already in residential aged care on a home-care package or waiting for one will not see changes to their existing arrangements. This upholds the no-worse-off principle and protects the rights of older Australians. We also fought for fairer contribution caps. We advocated for a lower taker rate and the maintenance of a lifetime cap on care contributions. We oppose Labor's arbitrary caps on access to cleaning and gardening, caps that this bill now removes from the primary legislation. During a cost-of-living crisis these services are not luxuries; they are necessities.

Aged-care reform is not just about legislation; it is about people. It is about the grandmother who needs help to stay in her home, the veteran who deserves respect in his final years and the carer who is stretched to breaking point. This government has failed to deliver on its promises. The delay in home-care packages is a national crisis. The waitlist has tripled under Labor's watch. Minister Rae must urgently deliver the promised 83,000 packages and provide certainty to providers planning for workforce demands. The coalition supports this bill with amendments. We will continue to hold the government accountable, demand transparency and advocate for those who have been left behind. Older Australians deserve better than another broken promise, and we will not support a process that puts politics before people.

(Quorum formed)

Penny Allman-Payne (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 and the associated bill. These bills and the Aged Care Act 2024 should be about responding to the findings of the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety. The stories that emerged in the course of that inquiry were sickening. That governments let aged care in this country degrade to the point where human rights abuses were a feature of the system is a stain on this country. The way we treat and care for older people matters deeply, and while attempts at reform have been made I hold serious concerns, as I did last year, that we will soon be bearing witness to more mistreatment under a system that prioritises profit over people.

The aged-care royal commission's final report found that, for too long, legislation had focused on the funding requirements of aged-care providers rather than the genuine care needs of older people. The royal commission's final report recommended that a new aged-care act be developed to put the rights of older people at the very centre of their care. It is the view of the Greens that the government has chosen to pursue a new act without due regard for myriad other aspects of the royal commission report, specifically those that relate to the dangers of financialisation of care and the prioritisation of providers' interests over those of older people.

The Greens welcome aspects of the main bill that seek to address valid community concerns, including removing the ability for the rules to prescribe caps for cleaning and gardening services. Likewise, many aspects of the main bill make technical changes to the Aged Care Act 2024 that are necessary for the proper functioning of Australia's new aged-care system.

The Greens hold concerns with some aspects of the main bill that appear to be designed to optimise the abilities of providers to charge aged-care recipients fees rather than ensure that vulnerable older people are not facing unreasonable costs. As has been raised in several submissions, the amendment on how cancellation policies are enacted risks older people being charged no-show fees for circumstances that are unavoidable such as emergency admissions to hospital.

The shameful evidence we saw throughout the royal commission showed that the sector lacked serious regulation. We are concerned that, without enforceable rights, this regulation remains too relaxed to prevent another royal commission. There should also be far greater scrutiny over the proposed ability for the minister to make decisions under a Henry VIII rulemaking power. While the establishment of a new system holds risks, and it is arguable that the minister must be able to act to ensure the continuity of service, greater scrutiny is required to ensure that rules are made in the interests of older people.

The Greens appreciate and deeply value the input of First Nations groups to this inquiry. As stated by NATSIAC, the design of the new aged-care system has raised significant concerns regarding its cultural responsiveness, its equity protections and the inclusion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander governance, voice and data rights in both design and delivery. Stakeholders have also raised concerns that the bills do not act to ensure that payments received under redress schemes, including those related to stolen generations schemes or civil payments received through court cases for sexual abuse, are excluded under income and asset tests.

While the Greens support the wealthy paying their fair share, opening the door to an expanded user-pays model risks only serving to increase the profits of the private providers that are already robbing older Australians blind. If more emphasis on user-pays approaches is the answer, then we're asking the wrong question. The government needs to be responsible for funding an accessible system for all Australians who need it. The continuing rationing of care and a growing divide in financial incentives for providers to accept residents unable to afford a refundable accommodation deposit are cause for serious concern.

In their submission to this inquiry, Uniting NSW.ACT stated:

From 1 November, residents that meet the means testing thresholds will be required to contribute more toward their accommodation. However, this may incentivise providers (especially those under financial strain) to prioritise residents who can pay more, potentially disadvantaging those without means.

This lack of action on the broader crisis in aged care was noted during the passage of the Aged Care Act 2024, with these bills doing little to address the fundamental structures in place that led to the royal commission.

I'm also deeply concerned at the fact that this government has refused to release any further home-care packages despite the overwhelming evidence that this is harming older people. The government's decision to delay the commencement of the new Support at Home program until 1 November 2025 while also withholding the release of any additional home-care packages is unconscionable. The official waitlist of people already in receipt of a home-care package shows over 87,000 people are waiting for care for which they have been assessed. Last week department officials made available new data revealing that 121,596 people as at the end of July are awaiting an ACAT assessment. This suggests that the effective total number of people awaiting home care is already over 200,000 people long.

Officials also revealed that no new home-care packages have been released since 1 July. Under this system, you have to wait for someone else to die or move into residential aged care before you can get support at home. That is unconscionable. The Greens are calling on Labor to urgently release enough home-care packages for everyone who needs one, and they could do it this week. There is literally no reason why the government cannot release more packages aside from the stubbornness of a minister who is out of his depth and a Labor Party that can never admit when they are wrong.

Expect testimony shows the Commonwealth Home Support Program is unlikely to be able to meet increased demand for Support at Home prior to 1 November 2025. That's why I am steadfast in my call, along with my Greens colleagues, for the government to release more home-care packages as a matter of urgency and work toward a high-quality, affordable aged-care system that is universal and needs based, characterised by quality support, nursing and personal care, whether in your own home, residential care or hospital.

Older people are not commodities. They must be treated with respect, dignity and care. The Greens welcome small changes and technical improvements, but we do not expect the reforms made by this government to prevent or even meaningfully delay the onset of a state of rolling crisis in Australia's aged-care system. As aged-care expert Professor Kathy Eagar AM stated in her submission to the aged-care bill 2024 inquiry:

My overarching comment is that the new Aged Care Act simply entrenches the existing aged care system, albeit with minor wording and technical changes. To describe this as the biggest reform in decades is simply misguided. The changes being proposed are marginal improvements on the status quo. Any marginal improvement is welcome. But these changes do not address the fundamental problems underlying aged care. It is inevitable that aged care will be back in crisis within a few years.

With an ageing population, the scale of care delivery is not matching the growing demand. Delays to programs that support care at home as well as the rationing of residential aged care have very real effects on older people and their loved ones that care for them. Quality of life deteriorates, people not receiving care at home become more susceptible to illness and injury, and residential aged care becomes not a place of care and respect but a waiting room for those reaching the end of their lives. The key driver for aged-care reform should never be budget repair or provider profitability. It must be to improve care, quality and enforcement in the sector after the shocking revelations of the royal commission. The elderly are not commodities; they are human beings. It should be an obligation of any moral society for the government to ensure that older people can get the care they need at the time they need it.

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

I, too, would like to contribute to this debate on the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 and the Aged Care (Accommodation Payment Security) Levy Amendment Bill 2025. I rise today to speak on behalf of the millions of older Australians, particularly those in Tasmania, who are being left behind by a government that promised reform but continues to deliver confusion and delays.

The Aged Care Act 2024 was supposed to be the Albanese Labor government's signature reform. It was rushed through this place last year. What was delivered was a piece of legislation without the foresight or necessary consultation that long-term reforms demand. And now, less than 12 months later, we find ourselves debating a bill that amends 325 items to that very piece of rushed-through legislation. This isn't refinement; it's repair. It is precisely why we referred these bills to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee, so that they would receive the appropriate level of scrutiny these changes deserve.

We remain increasingly concerned about and disappointed by the lack of transparency this Labor government has shown to the Australian public through their entire process of attempted reform of the aged-care sector. Key stakeholders—including Ageing Australia, the largest aged-care peak body—were excluded from public hearings. Services Australia was barred from giving public evidence. And the Law Council of Australia described the consultation process as 'unreasonably and significantly limiting the ability for peak bodies to meaningfully consult with their membership'.

During the recent inquiry, it became clear that the government's legislative framework was not ready to support its own reform package. As Ms Amy Laffan from the department of health stated, without these amendments older Australians could not sign service agreements prior to 1 July 2025. This is not a minor oversight; it's a fundamental flaw that could have left thousands of older Australians in limbo. Yet, despite identifying these issues as early as January, no action was taken until after the federal election. The Deputy Secretary for Ageing and Aged Care, Ms Sonja Stewart, confirmed that it was always intended that there would be amending legislation as early as January this year. This lack of preparedness has been compounded by poor communication. There has been no meaningful public education campaign to inform older Australians and their families about these changes.

The bill before us today includes technical and transitional amendments to support the implementation of the Albanese government's Aged Care Act 2024. These include ensuring correct payment of aged-care subsidies; providing for interim services during high-demand periods; allowing access to unspent funds; clarifying information-sharing between the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing and Services Australia; introducing substantial penalties for misuse of personal information; and requiring five-yearly reviews of the Aged Care Quality Standards. These are all welcome changes, but they are just a further admission that the original act was not ready.

While the coalition did not co-design these reforms, we did fight tooth and nail to improve them. With the passage of the Aged Care Act in 2024 during the last parliament, the coalition upheld our commitment to rights based legislation to guarantee a world-class aged-care system into the future. Through our persistent negotiations, the coalition achieved significant improvements to the government's proposed reforms that will protect the interests of older Australians and future generations.

One of the most critical outcomes of our efforts was the introduction of grandfathering arrangements to protect those already receiving care. These arrangements guarantee that Australians who are already in residential aged care, on a home-care package or assessed as to be waiting for their allocated home-care package, will not see any changes to their existing arrangements, and this bill provides for the essential framework to ensure that the no-worse-off principle can be implemented.

It's no secret that we are the party for hardworking Australians, and that is why we also advocated for a lower taper rate towards care contributions, to ensure that those who've worked hard and saved for retirement aren't penalised under this government. We doubled down on a fairer deal for all Australians and held the government to account on their commitment to remain the majority funder of aged care. We fought for the maintenance of a lifetime cap on care contributions and we fought to remove the Labor government's introduction of arbitrary caps on access to cleaning and gardening, services that are not luxuries but lifelines for elderly Australians trying to stay independent. This bill removes the ridiculous caps imposed by this Labor government from the primary legislation.

We are here today because the Albanese government's original legislation was flawed. It's necessary because the government's promise to be ready by 1 July 2025 has proven, like many of its promises, to be nothing more than words. They promised that the department of health and ageing was ready, that Services Australia was ready, but this bill proves exactly the opposite. This legislation proves that the government's decision to vote down all amendments moved by the coalition in relation to transition timelines was nothing more than politics. Without this bill, critical information cannot be shared between government departments to ensure the reforms can be implemented. Without this bill, elements of the Aged Care Act 2024 cannot be constitutionally enacted.

How can the Albanese government claim readiness while it's scrambling to fix its own reforms? How can it promise transparency while withholding the very rules that providers need to prepare, and how can it celebrate while 87,000 older Australians wait—some for over a year—for the home-care packages they've already been assessed as needing? These are not just numbers, these are people. According to the government's own figures, in the last financial year alone, 3,383 older Australians died and 7,380 were forced into residential aged care while waiting for their approved home-care packages. These are people who wanted to stay in their homes, who applied for help, who were assessed as needing it and who never received it.

For Tasmania, getting these changes right couldn't be more important. We are home to Australia's fastest ageing population, with the number of Tasmanians aged over 85 expected to nearly double by 2033, from 13,000 to almost 25,000. Our median age is already 41.7, well above the national average, and our average incomes are lower than comparative states, meaning affordability is crucial. In regional Tasmania the challenge is even greater. The population of those aged over 85 is growing faster in the regions than in Hobart, with this cohort projected to increase by 88 per cent over the next decade.

I've had the opportunity to visit aged-care facilities in every corner of our state, from urban centres to remote communities. What I've seen is a sector that is deeply committed to caring for older Australians but one that is also under immense strain. Providers are grappling with workforce shortages, rising operational costs and a growing regulatory burden. Many are struggling to meet new compliance standards while continuing to deliver high-quality care. Even exemplary providers, like the community-led aged-care service Toosey Aged and Community Care service in Longford, Tasmania, are feeling the pressure. These organisations are models of innovation and compassion, yet they too face uncertainty as they prepare for new legislative requirements. We must ensure that the rollout of this new framework does not come at the expense of service continuity or workforce stability. The government must work closely with providers, communities and the broader sector to ensure readiness. That includes transparent communication, practical guidance and ongoing consultation.

The bill also introduces automated processes for classification, prioritisation and means testing. While efficiency is incredibly important, automation must be approached with caution. Technology should not replace human judgement, and trust in these systems is not built overnight. Older Australians, especially those with complex needs, deserve more than a digital check box; they deserve personalised and compassionate care. If this system is to work, it must be accessible. That means real people answering phones, real offices providing assistance and real support for those navigating a complex and, often, overwhelming system.

My colleague Senator Ruston has rightly said that aged-care reform must be about dignity and clarity. It must be about ensuring timely access to care, especially in regional and remote communities, and it must be about fixing the system at its source, not just patching it up after the fact. I want to acknowledge the work Senator Ruston as shadow minister for health and aged care has done to improve the original legislation and the advocacy she continues here to further improve upon these bills. The coalition supports these bills because they contain the safeguards we fought for last year, but we will not let the government escape scrutiny, because these reforms are too important for us as a parliament not to get right. You only have to stand in the shoes of the millions of Australians navigating the aged-care system for the first time—for their families and for the patients themselves—to feel the sense of bewilderment, confusion and loss of independence. It will never be an easy process, but the government can make it more bearable because every older Australian deserves dignity, respect and access to the care they need, not just in principle but in practice.

The coalition does not seek to delay the passage of these bills, but we will move amendments to ensure sector readiness, transparency and fairness. I also foreshadow a second reading amendment which has been circulated in the chamber in my name. We urge the government to immediately publish the Support at Home release plan and the final manual, and to register the aged-care rules upon royal assent. Older Australians deserve better, providers deserve clarity, and parliament deserves accountability.

David Pocock (ACT, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak on the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 and the related bill. Firstly, I want to recognise the government for their work in overhauling our aged-care system in line with recommendations from the royal commission. In particular, I want to recognise Minister Butler; the former Minister for Aged Care, Minister Wells; the hundreds of people at the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing; and all involved in the sector and at advocacy organisations for the delivery of these huge changes, the biggest in a generation.

It is mostly thankless work, but we should remember that the government, working with the Senate—and I'd like to acknowledge Senator Ruston and Senator Allman-Payne—delivered a rights based act and a fundamental rebalancing of the system to ensure people are given the ability to remain at home for as long as they would like. I supported the new Aged Care Act in the last parliament. I was grateful to work with both the government and the opposition at the time on a number of constructive amendments to the bill.

Change of this magnitude is obviously difficult. Clearly there were always going to be challenges in coordinating the delivery of care to hundreds of thousands of older Australians across a country as large as ours. However, when things do go wrong, I don't think it is too much to ask for our government to be upfront about what has happened and to work with the parliament, the sector and the community on solutions to those challenges. Clearly, something has gone wrong in the delivery of the new act—that's obvious because we're here today talking about an amendment that will switch on the act, after the act was supposed to be switched on on 1 July. I'm concerned that the government has not been honest about the reasons for this. I believe that older Australians have been left on the hook to pay for the mistakes that have been made.

I'd like to spend a little bit of time talking about my understanding of the purpose of this bill, home-care packages and, most importantly, why the Senate should take action now to get some desperately needed care to people sitting on the government's waiting list. Before I get to the details, I want to read some stories that have been shared with me by people in my community about their experiences waiting for home care. It's easy to throw out the numbers, but every single number represents an Australian.

This is from Kelly:

My mum is 92. She had a stroke last year and is on a Level 2 package now. We get two hours of care per week, but our GP says we need at least three hours of care, five days a week. I work full time at a hospital myself. I lost $20,000 last year in income. I am the only child left to look after her. Seven falls since last July and rapid memory loss and confusion. My heart breaks each time I leave her to go to work as she looks like a lost child but I need to work. I am super tired, stressed & worried. Mum is declining & I am terrified I will lose her before help comes.

This from Belinda:

My 77 year old mother moved to Canberra this year—just as she was diagnosed with Alzheimer's and vascular dementia. Since diagnosis, we have been waiting on a reassessment, which MyAgedCare said would take 2-4 weeks. It has now been over three months.

The answering machine of the aged care assessment service says "don't leave a message, we're too busy to listen and reassessments are taking over 6 months.

In the meantime, my mother's mental and physical health are declining rapidly and my sister and I are struggling to support her while also working.

This is from Hilary:

We have been waiting for a review assessment to increase care to a higher package for my 91 year old mother-in-law since it was requested in February 2024—

February last year—

She lives alone and is becoming increasingly frail and has worsening dementia. It's becoming unsafe and is causing increasing strain and stress on the family trying to support her.

This is from Jacqui:

For 14 years I've cared for Mum who is 94, blind and frail. I have now been diagnosed with cancer. We have been waiting for 10 months for a Level 3 package, medium priority. Nothing speeds it up—not my struggle with cancer, nor her three falls that led to hospitalisation.

This is from Kelly:

My father was granted a Level 3 home care package in November 2024.

We waited over 6 months for him to be assessed in the first place so after more than a year and a half, he is still waiting for assistance.

He has Alzheimers and has regular falls at home.

We have started looking at Nursing Homes in his area as I really don't know how much longer he can stay at home without assistance. This is incredibly frustrating and makes me really angry when these packages are meant to assist people to stay in their homes but they are not being provided.

Every single one of those numbers being thrown around is a person and a family that is affected, like the Canberrans who have written to me about their situation. They just don't square with some of the talking points we've heard from the minister about 2,000 packages being released every week. Those are recycled packages. Those are people who are either dying or going into aged care. They talk about everyone who's a high priority being seen very quickly. We know just how hard it is to actually be classified as high priority when you have people who are at medium priority and their primary caregiver has cancer themselves.

We know that 87,000 people are on the waitlist now. On Friday, officers at the department not once but twice said that they would tell the Senate yesterday how many people were waiting in June 2025. That hasn't happened. To our earlier debate about the way that the Labor government is treating the Senate, I have grave concerns about the level of secrecy and the withholding of information the Senate asks for and the Senate even demands and moves motions to compel the government to release.

The other thing we found out on Friday was that there are 120,000 people waiting for an assessment. That's 120,000 people on the waiting list to get on to the waitlist. Clearly, this is a huge challenge that we are facing. So in June I wrote to the government, alongside other crossbench senators and MPs, asking for the government to release 20,000 home-care packages. Everything that the minister has said about the reasons why the government can't do that have been debunked by experts; by the sector, who say they have more capacity than 20,000 right now; and by the department, who themselves said that there is nothing stopping the government from releasing 20,000 packages. They even told me that they have actually modelled what it would cost to release 20,000 packages now. This is a decision of government to delay the release of any additional home-care packages until 1 November, when they get rebranded as Support at Home.

I join my colleagues in the Senate in saying that I won't be delaying the bill. I'm glad we finally got to it. This clearly needs to pass for Support at Home to commence in November, but the Senate does have a right to make really sensible amendments. I foreshadow that I'll be moving an amendment that would see the release of 20,000 new home-care packages. We all know it can be done. The department has said as much. We know that they can be provided. Providers have said publicly that they have capacity, and we know that there is need. This is urgent. This is the opportunity for the government to change the lives of 20,000 older Australians and, in most cases, change the lives of their families. I urge the government: this is an opportunity to do the right thing, to do the thing that the evidence suggests we need to do leading up to 1 November and to do the thing that is in the best interests of older Australians. You'll have an opportunity when other senators and I move amendments to the main bill.

Kerrynne Liddle (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yet again, I rise in this place to support bills that have only come about through Labor mismanagement and delays. I rise to contribute to the debate on the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 and the associated bill. The main bill is essential to the delivery of aged care, the Aged Care Act 2024 and ultimately the implementation of recommendations from the aged-care royal commission, an inquiry instituted under the former coalition government. The coalition supports this legislation. Our support, however, comes with the recognition that it is yet another example of the Albanese government playing catch-up, fixing their own mistakes and trying to cover up their own lack of preparedness.

The Aged Care Act 2024 was Labor's package of reforms. It was not a co-designed act. This government rammed it through without regard to the sector, consumers, carers or the opposition—sounds pretty familiar for Labor. As a consequence, the government has been forced to introduce bills to amend more than 325 items in its own legislation. The coalition always knew that reform of this magnitude could not be implemented in a matter of months. It is why we moved amendments to ensure that the existing Home Care Packages Program could exist on a transitional basis without the need for amendment to the Aged Care Act or delay in its enactment. Our amendment created flexibility, protected older Australians and ensured the promised 83,000 new packages could commence on 1 July 2025. But what did Labor do? They voted it down. Now older Australians have been left worse off and still waiting to access reformed programs and services.

When the coalition was last in government, wait times dropped to under two months. Under the Albanese government's incompetence, they have blown out to nearly 16 weeks. This is the story of Labor's denial, delay and broken promises. The government's refusal to listen has had real, tangible consequences. Older Australians have been denied the care they were assessed as needing because Labor failed to provide the flexibility required for a safe and timely transition into improved care and service options.

Despite repeated assurances that all systems would be ready by 1 July 2025, the truth is that this government was nowhere near ready. This additional delay until 1 November 2025 is a direct result of the government trying to rush through another piece of poorly considered, revised legislation, and these bills prove it. A few months makes a big difference when you're living with the consequences of Labor's failure.

With this delay, departments cannot share critical information and key elements of the act cannot be enacted. Departmental officials admitted as much in the Senate inquiry. They confirmed that the government knew as early as January that legislative change would be required. Yet the government misled Australians through the election campaign, insisting everything was on track. Nothing could have been further from the truth, and now we see the result—an embarrassing backflip, a change of minister, a delayed reform start date and, worse, an attempt to shift blame onto providers and the workforce.

This government has difficulty with understanding that it has held government for three years. It is the Labor government that is accountable here. Minister Rae has said the deferral was about giving more time to providers to prepare, but the evidence was clear: the sector was ready and the Labor government was not.

Debate interrupted.

Helen Polley (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We shall now proceed to two-minute statements.