Aged care changes up in air after Coalition flags unnamed concerns


The federal opposition has fresh concerns with parts of proposed widespread reform to the aged care sector, leaving the immediate future of the promised new Aged Care Act up in the air.

After months of high-level discussions between the major parties, which have both expressed a desire for bipartisanship, the Coalition now says it has concerns about details in the legislation it received last week.

However, it remains tight-lipped about what those specific concerns are.

The Coalition’s aged care spokesperson, Anne Ruston, said she remained “in good-faith discussions” but was worried about “surprise new provisions” in the 550-page bill, and also about details not included in the bill because they would be finalised in regulations.

“We are seeking clarification from the government on the details,” she said.

“This is the kind of detail that older Australians and their families deserve to know.”

As both aged care providers and advocates remain on edge awaiting the new act, the government had hoped it could introduce the legislation this week, but was awaiting an official sign-off from the opposition to ensure bipartisan support, given the heft of the reform.

Negotiations are still active, but Senator Ruston says she wants Labor to introduce the legislation to parliament so it can be publicly scrutinised, even if that is before the Coalition signs onto the plan.

“We believe older Australians and their families must be brought along this journey of reform,” Senator Ruston said.

“They have been excluded from this conversation for too long.”

The government appears hopeful it will still get the Coalition’s agreement, with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese as recently as this morning saying all of the issues had been resolved to ensure financial security for providers.

It comes as the sector remains concerned that unless the reforms are urgently introduced to parliament, there will not be sufficient time to pass the legislation before the next election.

Minister confident penalties will be strong enough to protect residents

While most details remain under wraps, the government has confirmed some changes, including a decision to drop promised criminal penalties for providers that do not meet quality standards, following demands from the opposition.

Aged Care Minister Anika Wells last week said the government had “fought long and hard” for that promise, but it was “a real red line” for the opposition which it had to forgo as part of the discussions.

However, she remained confident that regulatory provisions as part of the new act would be strong enough to protect those in aged care.

20231130001871778123-original

Anika Wells said the government compromised on criminal penalties for poor-quality providers because the Coalition considered them a “red line”. (AAP: Mick Tsikas)

Nationals frontbencher Barnaby Joyce said removing the prospect of criminal penalties was particularly important in regional communities where keeping facilities open was already a challenge and harsh penalties could see volunteers further disincentivised.

“You don’t solve one problem by creating 50 more,” he said.

Chief executive of the Older Persons Advocacy Network, Craig Gear, said while he was disappointed criminal penalties had been dropped, he hoped there would be other penalties, such as fines, that were severe enough to deter bad behaviour.

Payment changes to only apply to new participants

While the government has been clear it plans to make older Australians who can afford it pay more — a principle the Coalition broadly supports — Ms Wells is yet to announce the specifics of the new fee structure she proposes.

But Mr Albanese confirmed the reforms would be “grandfathered” so they would only affect people coming into the system, rather than those already in aged care.

“Any changes won’t have an impact on anyone who’s currently an aged care resident,” he told the ABC on Tuesday.

“These are modest but important reforms going forward and we hope to see a positive response because that’s what’s required.

“We have a responsibility to make the system sustainable.”



Source link

spot_imgspot_img

Subscribe

Related articles

spot_imgspot_img

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

2 × one =