Conference delegates weren’t impressed with content of minister’s speech, or her performance thus far.

The Minister for Ageing, Justine Elliot is too compliance focused, lacks decisive action and has placed even more stress on an already overburdened industry.

These are some of the comments canvassed by INsite’s survey of industry attendees at last week’s Aged Care Association of Australia (ACAA) conference in Melbourne.

When asked to appraise the minister’s performance since her appointment, respondents expressed strong disappointment in the minister’s lack of knowledge and passion for her portfolio.

The minister was described as lacking innovation and sensitivity to the needs of the industry.

59 per cent of industry respondents ranked the minister’s performance as either poor or very poor, 30 per cent said her performance was acceptable and a combined total of 11 per cent said she performed well or very well.

“She does not care about aged care. Her lack of passion is very obvious,” wrote one survey respondent.

Although not statistically valid, the 38 responses present a qualitative snapshot of industry sentiment.

A large majority of respondents said they been working in the industry for 10 or more years.

Industry reaction to the minister’s conference speech was described as predictable and lacking substance. “More of the same message, but little in the way of real action,” read one comment. A refusal to take questions after her speech was also criticised as a missed opportunity.

When asked to rate the performance of the government in addressing industry issues, attendees described the system as punitive, slow acting and ignorant of pressing concerns. Almost half of those surveyed ranked the performance of the government as poor.

Capital funding was criticised as lacking vision which remains at an historical low.

Asked to name the single most important change that is needed to accreditation, respondents nominated simplification, increased collaboration and consistency as critical.

The need for increased objectivity and a shift away from fault-finding were also raised as significant to the sector. “Unwanted visits are too often and waste tax payer’s money,” said one respondent. A culture of blame characterised the sector which was likened to a “witch hunt,” said another.

Similarly, when identifying the single most important change that is needed to the CIS, survey respondents overwhelmingly nominated a presumption of guilt and lack of balance.

“It needs to be more consultative. It currently feels like you are guilty until proven innocent.”

A burden of regulation created a huge degree of fear within the sector, said respondents when describing the threat of non-compliance.

Changing the culture to better prevent complaints is also necessary.

“The process deals with the end compliant. There is no vision to prevent these complaints from arising in the first place.”

Verifying the legitimacy of complaints and removing anonymity were also raised as important concerns.

“Investigators need to work first with the facility to get to the bottom of the compliant,” said one respondent.

Asked to rank the issues with the greatest impact on the industry, the funding regime topped the list followed by red tape and regulation and keeping on top of paperwork.