Aged Care Insite Australia's number one aged care news source
The Aged Care Bill 2024 (the bill) is one step closer to fruition as the Senate Inquiry Committee charged with its review has recommended the legislation be passed.
After months of negotiations, the bill was introduced to the House of Reps with bipartisan support on 12 September by Aged Care Minister Anika Wells.
On 16 September, the Senate referred the provisions of the bill to the Community Affairs Legislation Committee (the committee) for inquiry and report.
The committee conducted nine public hearings throughout October and received 189 submissions for consideration, before releasing their final verdict on Monday.
"The committee is of the view that the bill meaningfully responds to the findings of the Aged Care Royal Commission, and acknowledges that the majority of witnesses, including advocates, providers and aged care experts, strongly support the bill’s passage."
The Opposition were formidable opponents during bill negotiations, pushing for the full grandfathering of fees for those already in the aged care system and the removal of both criminal penalties for breaches of standards and a sector 'Voice to Parliament'.
Coalition senators have said the party remains "committed to the passage of a new Aged Care Act that embeds a rights-based framework to ensure a world-class aged care system," and have recommended it's passage through Parliament with amendments.
The final inquiry report contains over 100 comments and recommendations made by Coalition senators Maria Kovacic, Hollie Hughes and the Hon Anne Ruston, aimed at remedying what they have deemed the "several shortcomings" of the bill.
Notable Coalition recommendations include:
- A requirement for the System Governor to report both the current waitlist and wait times from application to service commencement of Commonwealth funded aged care on a quarterly basis
- The timeframe for the commencement of the Support at Home Programme be revised and extended to allow sufficient time for implementation
- The establishment of an education and information campaign aimed at older Australians, their families, and the wider aged care sector to address gaps in knowledge and understanding, as observed throughout the inquiry
- Clearer definitions of terms and the metrics by which they will be measured, e.g. 'severe wrongdoing'
- Allowing providers greater flexibility with the delivery of mandated care minutes, to aid in the provision of quality, person-centred care, according to individual limitations
- Bringing forward the review of the Accommodation Supplement to 1 July 2026.
Related stories: Aged care reform deal has been reached | The government has a new plan for residential aged care. Here’s what’s changing | Sector reacts positively to new Aged Care bill
Independent senator for the ACT and Participating Member of the committee David Pocock made additional comments relating to his Canberran constituents.
"The feedback I have received [on the bill] has been generally positive," Senator Pocock said.
"In a survey I ran at the COTA ACT Seniors Expo, 78 per cent agreed that people should contribute more to aged care if they could afford it.
"This was reflected at a community Town Hall I held at the Hughes Community Centre last week, where an overwhelming majority of senior Canberrans told me they were comfortable with contributing more if it improved services and ensured that seniors could receive the care they needed.
"I look forward to working with the Government, Opposition and crossbench on this bill in the weeks ahead and ensure sensible amendments are adopted by the Senate."
Senator Pocock said the Government's response to Recommendation 72 of the Aged Care Royal Commission has been insufficien. That recommendation is:
[B]y 1 July 2024, every person receiving aged care who is living with disability, regardless of when acquired, should receive through the aged care program daily living supports and outcomes (including assistive technologies, aids and equipment) equivalent to those that would be available under the National Disability Insurance Scheme to a person under the age of 65 years with the same or substantially similar conditions.
"Many Australians may not realise that if you acquire a spinal cord injury after the age of 65, you will be eligible for less support than if you had acquired that injury before the age of 65," he said.
The ACT senator went on to advocate for stronger protections for older Australians who have lower financial means, or those who in the future may no longer be able to afford their aged care services, increased supports to maintain connections between older people and their pets, as well as the need for explicit legislation on the enforceability of the Statement of Rights and how increased accommodation revenue can be spent by providers.
The Australian Greens contributed a dissenting report highlighting widespread frustration among consumers and within the aged care sector relating not only to the intricacy of new legislation but also the speed at which these changes are being introduced.
"Feedback throughout the inquiry has highlighted the complex task for participants and advocates in coming to terms with the changes. Further, the delegation of many key details to the rules makes it difficult to appraise fully the implications for participants."
The Greens' report urged the Government to remember what set the nation's aged care reform in motion.
"The key driver for aged care reform was never meant to be ‘budget repair’ or provider profitability, it was the urgent need to improve care, quality and enforcement in the sector after the shocking revelations of the Royal Commission."
Representing the Australian Greens, committee Deputy Chair Senator Penny Allman-Payne made only one recommendation:
"That the Government address many of the serious concerns raised throughout the inquiry, as well as provide the outstanding rules to enable a clearer assessment of the impact of the legislation in its totality."
With the committee acknowledging that the legislation must be passed by the end of this year to ensure a timely transition, the bill will now return to the Senate for debate.
Read more:
Email [email protected]
Get the news delivered straight to your inbox
Receive the top stories in our weekly newsletter Sign up now
It is good that further changes are being considered before the new Aged Care Act is passed, however, there is still no mention of a mandatory requirement for all care workers to have a Cert 3 qualification to work in the industry. I fear if this is pushed aside as it has been for many years now, then quality of care will not improve. We will continue to see abuse and neglect of our older people in care. Providers need to be brave, step up and implement mandatory Cert 3 level of training for all care workers. Funding for training could be shared between providers and government.
I agree with the previous comment. If a minimum qualification is not required at this stage there will be no foundation upon which to build a professional workforce. Even with a Certificate 3 care workers lack essential foundational knowledge about for example the ageing process, the human body, medication administration etc)
Additional to those comments I urge the government to consider forming a taskforce (which worked very well for rescare) to deal with the question of sustainability for the Home Care section of the sector, which, if not arrested will see it continue to achieve diminishing returns.
I / we beg the government to rethink on this. Cutting elderly domestic / personal care from unlimited to 1 hour a week is just not doable also yard/ home maintenance only 18 hours a year. I guarantee the politicians parents won’t have to put up with this new act.. unbelievable
The concept that this amount of time will be adequate for those severley disabled or chronically slow with illness and diseases makes us into literally abusers of the ill and disabled. So much in contrast to the time allowed in NDIS. Why is this seen as being remotely even part reasonable is not explained or justified .It cannot be sustainable unless society agrees that the aged are essentially useless/worthless and not the needing protection and care we gave to our children in the days when super was not available so many of us could save . I do not have the money to fall back on to pay for anything like what they want me to, or I need into the future given my diagnoses. I will become my mother who died lacking so much care 45 years ago
The extraordinary unfairness and lack of compassion astounds me. I did not think this nation would ever sink this low and approve the proposed Bill. Why is this not being noted and remarked upon publicly I have no idea. Where are our news services on this issue.? The Prime Minister reminds us that he is the product of Public Housing. That in and of itself and how it can be “grandfathered” is worthy of interest. Labour will never, after 60 years of Party work and voting receive my vote again. All involved need public shaming ….especially Minister Wells. She is normalizing the lack of care for aged.
To quote ….from”Atkinsbookshelf.wordpress” ……”it was American writer and novelist Pearl Buck (1892-1973), best known for her novel, The Good Earth (winner of the Pulitzer Prize in 1932), and recipient of the Nobel Prize for literature that wrote: “Our society must make it right and possible for old people not to fear the young or be deserted by them, for the test of a civilization is the way that it cares for its helpless members.”
We have started to care for the disabled in a way that is, IMO, fairly generous and nothing like I experienced when trying to help bring up a child with a disability when they and I received essentially nothing….like my concurrently slowly dying mother. Why do we see this Bill as being something that will work for the slowly dying at home which is the outcome for most of us still.
It is NOT OK in its current format with limits on hours and pensioners required to pay. I paid years ago in the public hospital system with the thn essential overtimehours unpaid, in volunteer work
Our society is stunning me with its lack of interest and care for the last of the generations who had inadequate/no super to try and support themselves. I am terrified that I, with multiple diagnoses, including the one my mother had, will die like her.
Shame Albo….shame. Absolute shame.
Totally agree ,defies any logic in enabling us to stay in our own homes
I am fortunate to have access to the Internet and all forms of modern communication (I am 78). I fortunately use and have an understanding. Older Australians don’t have access to the internet in Aged care facilities for email via IPAD. Then there are the aged who have been left behind – Illiterate in the modern age but can read and write and are very intelligent. I recently contacted the Minister and was told there were webinars available. You could not make up the complete lack of understanding from that statement
Agreed