Ms KING (5:11 PM) —I rise to speak about the urgent need for governments to stand up and show leadership on two issues that are affecting many in my electorate, as well as Victorians more generally. These issues are above party political lines and reach across state and federal boundaries. The first of my grievances relates to conditions for veterans who are inpatients at the veterans psychiatric unit at wards 17 and 18 of the Austin Hospital. I have been contacted by a number of veterans in my electorate who are extremely distressed about the conditions their mates were in and are still being placed in in wards 17 and 18. These are all DVA entitled veterans who, as they get older, are finding that mental health issues are a challenge for them. At no point have these veterans complained about the level of care from the nursing or medical staff in these facilities. In fact, you hear only words of praise about the staff in wards 17 and 18. However, the physical condition of the wards is a matter for considerable concern.

Although I have not yet visited the facilities—something I am planning to do in the near future—I have seen pictures and spoken to a number of my local veterans who have been inpatients. It is clear that the physical structure of ward 17 is simply not good enough for our veterans. It is an old and rundown facility. I have some photos of it. The outdoor smoking area has a makeshift cover to try and keep out the cold. There is old furniture and there is little landscaping around the facility. There is cracked glass, rotting timber and holes in the asbestos plasterboard.

Complaints are also being made about the meals. In one letter I received about the meals at ward 17, a veteran made the comment, ‘You don’t need a knife and fork, just a piece of garden hose to suck it up off the plate.’ I think all members of this place would agree that it is not acceptable for veterans to be cared for in such poor conditions. These veterans are often severely depressed, and their surroundings are doing little to aid their recovery. It is acknowledged by Austin Health and the Department of Veterans’ Affairs that the physical structure is poor. I understand—though I have not had it confirmed—that the Minister for Veterans’ Affairs was due to visit the facility last week. I look forward to her action on this issue.

There have been some changes. I am pleased that a new food service is to be introduced shortly and, whilst there are plans to redevelop the veterans psychiatric unit, it still has not even progressed to the more advanced planning stages because it has been caught up in the wider redevelopment of the Heidelberg Repatriation Hospital. Veterans first raised this issue over 12 months ago. Whilst progress has been made, something needs to be done to address the immediate concerns of veterans today as well as longer-term planning for a new veterans psychiatric unit.

Although the state government does have a level of responsibility in this matter, as does the Minister for Veterans’ Affairs, Commonwealth and state governments need to work together to resolve this issue today—as with my second grievance. Capital funding is needed to build a new veterans psychiatric unit at Austin Health. Until this is done, either veterans must see immediate action to repair their current facility or, if that proves too costly, they should be relocated immediately. Veterans who are using the veterans psychiatric unit at Austin Hospital should not have to wait and they should not have to tolerate the conditions they are currently in.

The second matter I wish to raise is that of young people in nursing homes—another issue that is getting caught between state and Commonwealth boundaries. I specifically want to highlight the case of Chris Nolan. Chris is 34 years of age and has been living in an aged care home because the community accommodation he needs does not exist. He is in need of high-care continuous nursing. Tragically, Chris suffered an acquired brain injury when working as a solicitor in Hanoi in 1995. By all accounts, Chris Nolan was bright, funny and had a passion for life. One of his friends described him as:

Chris was a St Patrick’s College boy. However, because of his brain injury, Chris can no longer use his limbs and can neither speak nor see. Chris once lived in a world where he could communicate through an array of mediums—sport, academia and his work. Now he is trapped in a world where his only communication comes from being able to blink—one blink meaning ‘yes’; two meaning ‘no’. Chris has spent the last eight years in an aged care facility with older people who are in need of high-care nursing. Chris wants to be part of a community with those of a similar age. Instead, he is like the 6,000 other people under the age of 65 across Australia who are trapped in nursing homes. Within this number there are 1,100 under the age of 50.

Aged care facilities are not designed to cater for the needs of younger people. They are not funded for it and they do not have the staff for it. They have always been meant to look after frail older Australians. After waiting eight years for appropriate accommodation, Chris and his family have recently been dealt another blow. Chris’s aged care facility, although inappropriate for his needs, is now about to close. Chris has been offered accommodation in another facility; however, it is another aged care facility. The location of this new facility will make visits even more difficult for his family and friends. Instead of Chris’s connection with the outside world being facilitated it is being even further limited.

What has happened to Chris is one of life’s tragic and unforeseen accidents. They strike indiscriminately and without warning. Chris should not be made to pay any more than he already has. He wants to live with people of his own age and he wants to be part of his local community again. In the case of Chris and the 600 or so other Victorians who are in similar positions, it is not a question of party politics but a moral question of the right thing to do. No government—whatever its political persuasion and whether state or federal—can stand by and continue to let young people live in these conditions. The issue has become caught between state and federal boundaries. The states argue that it is a federal issue because the federal government has responsibility for nursing homes; the federal government argues that it is a state issue because state governments look after disability services. It is not a new issue. Chris’s case has been extensively reported in the media. His family have been fighting for over eight years to get help for Chris and they will not stop until they get what he needs.

In this place I have previously raised the cases of two other young people in nursing homes. One of those is Vicki Smith, who has been in a nursing home since she was 17—again, someone who had a tragic car accident and suffered an acquired brain injury. She has described living in a nursing home as ‘living like a vegetable’. She finds that she cannot play the music that she wants to play; she cannot have friends over; she cannot do the sorts of things that a younger woman of 32 is able to do. Having been in a nursing home since the age of 17, she really has not had the opportunity to have a youth at all. As I said, it is not a new issue.

These young people are not asking for any great solution to be found; they are asking for a more suitable model of nursing home care to be developed for them. They are asking state and Commonwealth governments to actually have the courage to do something about this. It is time that we looked beyond the boundaries that are often put up between Commonwealth and state issues and got on with the job of getting these young people out of aged care facilities and into more appropriate accommodation.